Google axed Android multitouch at Apple's request

[moooseman]

Ya' know, all this fuss about multi-touch is a little puzzling to me. All of this can't possibly come from everyone's burning desire to be able to zoom in on photos with a pinch, can it? (BTW, Apple does not own that one) I really don't think, as has been said on this thread, that if multi-touch never makes it to Android (and lemme tell ya', that is a very unlikely conclusion to all of this), it'll be the end of the platform, or that there's nowhere to go from there. That is simply untenable, not to mention ridiculous.

There is so much more to the Android platform than this. There's more to the Android platform than anything that Apple can muster with the iPhone and their self-imposed regulations on cross-platforming. Android is a platform for connectivity and application development and execution. It has potential far beyond the G1 or even mobile phones for that matter. In the very near future we will see Android on MIDs and netbooks. We will see Android in many embedded systems. Before long, Android will be in our living rooms, kitchens, cars, restaurants, hotel rooms, "you are here" terminals at the mall; the horizons for this platform are enormous. Oh, and we will see a bevy of smartphones based on Android this summer from multiple handset makers and cell carriers. Do we think for a moment that the inability to zoom in on pictures with a pinch (without making poor Apple vewy vewy angwy anyway) is going to hold back this platform? Can we really imagine multi-touch not becoming a part of this platform as time goes on?

Also, there are applications of multi-touch beyond what Apple has patented that many developers can and will take advantage of in the very likely event that Google allows developers to begin to take advantage of the capacitive touch capabilities (again, with time. Let things surrounding the multi-touch controversy cool down a little and little by little multi-touch capabilities will creep into Android; likely from third party developers first as Google begins to allow it).

Anyway, just my thoughts. We are not chasing Apple, people. Google is a company of innovators and Android is the ultimate platform for innovation; both by Google and, most especially, for third-party devs.

you sir are a very very optimistic person when it comes to android. almost too optimistic.

[mark925]

my G1 isnt rooted, so i dont have multi-touch and won't until i decide to root. But I wll say this, I'd rather the G1 focus on getting the damn flashplayer than multi-touch capability. If denying us OTA update peepz multi-touch means quicker flash then go for it google and android!!

Flash is up to Adobe -- not Google.

[Logic]

Interestingly enough I was just reading about this on an article I Found on Hacker News, http://daringfireball.net/2009/02/apple_google_palm

To sum it up the source that claims the same thing from a source over at Apple, they also say they didn't include a 3.5mm headphone jack because Apple asked them not to do to another patent they have on that .

I found the 2nd part hard to believe, but no official multitouch didn't surprise me, this OS is still in beta, a very stable and well built beta but beta nonetheless. They'll give us multitouch eventually i presume, if not no worries.

As for Apples patents, well let's see how they hold up when they go against Palm who have some very interesting patents of their own that the iPhone is in clear violation of .( read an article about it once, you can probably find it somewhere on digg if you're interested )

I also agree with everyone else saying that punishing Apple over the multitouch patent is just a bad business move, especially considering who Apple and Google are really against, the guys over at Microsoft.

[qmuser]

I saw the same thing about the 3.5mm jack over at Engadget. http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/10/f...ng-multitouch/

I can almost believe the first part of the rumor. But one has to wonder about the validity when you look at the larger picture. First the fact that Apple would supposedly ask HTC and/or Google to leave a 3.5mm headphone jack off of the phone brings everything about the rumor into question. And, it's doubtful that Apple really has a patent on a 3.5mm jack on phones. I've owned phones before the iPhone came out that had 3.5mm jacks.

Then when you take into account that the new iPhone and Windows Mobile sync offered by Google is Microsoft's Exchanged licensed by Google. So trying to say that Google would leave it off of the G1 because of warm fuzzy feelins for Apple, and hatred of MS doesn't hold up. If Google really hated MS they wouldn't license Exchange to offer it to the general public for free.

I'm not saying that Apple maybe didn't ask Google to leave multitouch out of Android, but it seems less likely when you consider addtional information.

[ickyfehmleh]

Interestingly enough I was just reading about this on an article I Found on Hacker News, http://daringfireball.net/2009/02/apple_google_palm

To sum it up the source that claims the same thing from a source over at Apple, they also say they didn't include a 3.5mm headphone jack because Apple asked them not to do to another patent they have on that .

I found the 2nd part hard to believe...

The notion that any company could ask another company not to include something standard like a 3.5mm jack is laughable.

The fact that someone actually believes Apple did this takes the laughable notion to a much, much higher level of lol -- possibly over 9,000 lolmeters per millisecond.

If only one could find a way to harness the stupidity of the internet and convert it into clean energy, humanity would be set for a lifetime.

[moooseman]

The notion that any company could ask another company not to include something standard like a 3.5mm jack is laughable.

The fact that someone actually believes Apple did this takes the laughable notion to a much, much higher level of lol -- possibly over 9,000 lolmeters per millisecond.

If only one could find a way to harness the stupidity of the internet and convert it into clean energy, humanity would be set for a lifetime.

roflmoa at this quote and the people who believe this article as well.

[davidj2k]

Just remember there was a patent on the mouse as well

http://inventors.about.com/library/i...use_patent.htm