So what?
Microsoft hired David Cutler and his crew from DEC, to come wrirte NT for Microsoft. That doesn't in the least change the fact that NT is, and remains a Microsoft product.
Not to mention, there have been plenty of mobile Linux OS’s out there, yet none of them took off till Android came along. Android has been on the market for just 2 years, and they have already clobbered Apple's market share worldwide, and taken out both Apple and RIM in US market share. Like I said before, its virtually unheard of in the anals of operating system history, desktop or smatrtphone.
In close to 4 years of business, the iPhone is yet to even get close to RIM in market share, let alone overtake RIM. Android did it just 2 years.
When Applebots abuse
The continued abuse here is yours.
That doesn't in the least change the fact that NT is, and remains a Microsoft product.
Google did even one better than MS did with Cutler. Google bought the whole company, existing OS development and all. No amount of your weaseling can erase the fact that Google had plenty of mobile OS experience on board for Android. What Google didn't have internally, it bought.
In close to 4 years of business, the iPhone is yet to even get close to RIM in market share, let alone overtake RIM. Android did it just 2 years.
An honest way of stating the iPhone's span of availability would be just over three years, given that it was released in the middle of 2007, and it is now the middle of 2010.
Guess what, the Android OS has been in development for about seven years, since 2003. The iPhone as we know it has been in development for four or five years, starting sometime during the Moto ROKR fiasco. Both design teams of course leveraged prior experience (Google from Orange, Danger and WebTV, and Apple from Apple).
of the Newton platform started in 1987 and officially ended on February 27, 1998
Notice your selective quoting. The Newton Project (as opposed to any actual Newton device) started over 20 years ago as a PARC-like think tank exercise to replace the Macintosh with a tablet. The project languished in Dilbert world for several years, until the the point men left Apple in disgust to found Be. The design of the Newton as the device we know, and as more than a think-tank exercise at Apple, began in 1990. Even then the target was much higher-end than the actual Newton released, and was based on different software and hardware. The software development of the Newton as we know it actually occurred in 1992-1993.
No amount of your weaseling can make your incorrect statement about the Newton correct.
You kinda like how Apple got the entire iPod idea (the precursor to the iPhone), from a guy named Tony Fadell, who was the real father of the iPod, by employing Tony Fadell?
Not quite. Fadell was an outside contractor responsible for part of the iPod project, and Apple later licensed software from PortalPlayer. Google BOUGHT the whole company to quickly get into the mobile phone business. Everything became the property of Google.
A direct comparison is Apple. Apple had little or no in-house expertise in the low-power chip design business anymore (the iPod and iPhone chips were simply sourced), so they bought the low-power chip design firm P.A. Semi two years ago. Thus it is no surprise to see the latest Apple mobile products ship with a very powerful Apple-designed chip. Apple also recently bought Intrinsity, which specialized in high-performance, low-power ARM designs. Should I be surprised when the results of this buy up the performance and lengthen the battery life of upcoming Apple devices?
Google having bought a smart phone systems software company five years ago, it is no surprise to see Google produce Android. Get it? It's not some underdog miracle of development on Google's part. It's the reality of the high-tech industry.
If you are claimg that Google employed people with OS exoreince from other firms so therefore Anroid was not really developed by Google, what do you call Apple employing others to develop the OS for their iPod then?
You can't have it both ways. You claimed Google didn't have the OS expertise. I destroyed that false claim by showing you where Google got years of OS expertise. Android was partially developed before the Google purchase, and finished within Google after the purchase by those very same people who started development (plus extra Google engineers, of course).
[silence]
I take it by this silence that, unlike your continued defense of other false claims, you choose not to defend your false claim that Google doesn't design and make servers, instead buying them from the likes of HP and Dell.