How Apple sabotaged copycat Google and made them ‘late’ to tablets

“There’s a good reason why Android tablets were so far behind the iPad,” Killian Bell reports for Cult of Mac.

“When Apple announced the original iPhone back in 2007, Google’s first Android handset wasn’t too far behind. The search giant got a compelling iOS alternative out of the gate before anyone else, and it’s been a head-to-head battle between the two platforms ever since. But how was Android able to follow the iPhone so quickly?” Bell asks. “Well, that’s fairly obvious to most. You see, Google chairman Eric Schmidt was an Apple board member when the Cupertino company was developing the iPhone, and so he got an inside look at the device before anyone else. Little did Apple know that Schmidt would use what he saw inside Apple’s headquarters to create the iPhone’s biggest competitor.”

Bell reports, “With the iPad, however, it was a different story. That was years ahead of everything else, and not even Google had a slate ready to do battle when the iPad launched in 2010. Why? Because Steve Jobs made sure Schmidt knew nothing about the iPad before its debut.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Hidden from Eric T. Mole. Too bad the iPhone wasn’t.


  1. ““There’s a good reason why Android tablets were so far behind the iPad,”

    One correction – that should read “There’s a good reason why Android tablets ARE so far behind the iPad”.

    They are still way behind, and I don’t foresee them ever catching up unless Cook and company get complacent.

    1. The other interesting point is the Pad was actually going to be the first product, but then Steve saw phone potential and pushed that out first…
      Meaning that Mr. Schmidt’s inside info came via the boardroom and not via Apple engineers… a little more reassuring in some ways

  2. Umm …. Not sharing trade secrets with a mole isn’t exactly “sabotage.”

    I was hoping this article was going to bring to light Apple’s efforts to feed Schmidt bogus info.

  3. Uh, but I thought the iPad was designed, at least on paper, before the iPhone. They put a hold on it, realizing that the iPhone had to come first (market was hotter for that), and so they produced the iPhone first and the iPad came after.

    1. Many people thought the UI for Apple’s tablet OS would be closer to the Mac OS than the iPhone. Till Apple showed the iPad, others didn’t know what they would be competing against.

  4. I thought the iPad was designed first and then they decided to come out with the iPhone instead. So Schmiddy, would have seen it as well. They just can’t copy fast enough.

  5. I think it was put on a shelf and far away from the board – because development began, then stopped so the iPhone could come out first. The board doesn’t see every thing Steve and Jonny work(ed) on.

  6. Interesting for history.

    For the future, nothing beats innovation faster than your competition along with the breadth of your entire ecosystem and control of as much of the technbology as possible.

    That is Apple’s true advantage once the products are “live.”

  7. The real reason: Android phones are subsidized, marketed and pushed at retail by a mobile phone industry worried that Apple has too much power. Tablets? Not so much.

      1. Yeah…too hard to prove; however, Schmidt’s behavior while a board member at Apple was the most egregious breach of behavior by a board member that I’ve ever read about. Regardless of what you think of Android, he’s scum.

  8. the OTHER reason is android phones are pushed by the phone carriers.

    over and over again carrier execs (during financial reports, conferences) have said that they don’t want Apple to dominate the space (like it does iPods) and it’s healtier to have ‘multi suppliers’ i.e they will get their sales guys to PUSH androids, WP etc. The CEO of AT&T carries a windows phone and talks about it in video interviews (right after execs said they would love a third platform after Apple and Android).

    Carriers get their sales guys to push non iPhones, advertise non iPhone heavily and give better discounts. Even with these tactics iPhone is more than 50% of sales in places like AT&T, without those tactics Apple would be calling all the shots.

    IPad sales don’t depend so much on carriers.

  9. Let’s inform ourselves with some actual HISTORY:

    Google did NOT invent Android. Android, Inc. was founded in 2003 by a consortium of coders and designers. Google bought the company in 2005. Founders Andy Rubin, Rich Miner and Chris White continued on with Google.

    Google’s Android is based on the Linux kernel. In 2007 Google filed its first mobile telephony patent applications. Later that year the ‘Open Handset Alliance’ was formed with Google, Broadcom, HTC, Intel, LG, Marvell, Motorola, Nvidia, Qualcomm, Samsung, Sprint, T-Mobile and Texas Instruments. In 2008 they were joined by ARM Holdings, Atheros, Asustek, Garmin, Huawei, PacketVideo, Sony Ericsson, Toshiba and Vodafone. The result was the so-called ‘Android Open Source Project’ along with the so-called ‘Android Compatibility Program.’ Obviously, the ‘compatibility program’ was optional for members. COUGH *FRAGMENTATION* COUGH

    Android v1.0 ‘Astro’, from September 2008, looked like DOS based GUI crap. Android v1.5 ‘Cupcake’ from April 2009 blatantly looks like an Apple OS with hardware buttons ripped off from Palm’s design. Android 2.0 ‘Eclair’ solidified the full Apple GUI ripoff in October 2009. Android 3.0 ‘Honeycomb’ from February 2011 was the first attempt to put Android onto a tablet. Android 4.0, from October 2011, added additional ripoffs of Apple’s Multitouch technology. Android 4.1 ‘Jellybean’ from June 2012 completes the ripoff of iOS while beginning to add a few unique bells and whistles. And here we are today.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.