Share this Story

Android is Google’s Weapon in the Ecosystem War [Opinion]

The battle to dominate the mobile market has never been about smartphones. Android, iOS, and Windows Phone are attempts to use the most personal computers ever made to lock users into one ecosystem. Google is using Android, an open ecosystem, to lock users into Google apps and services.

Google recognized the future of computing was moving towards mobile after the release of the iPhone. Before the iPhone no one envisioned mobile as being anything more than Windows laptops with rotating, resistive touchscreens and Blackberry-like phones. The iPhone and iPad revolutionized the way we interact with mobile devices, for better or worse. Ever since then Apple, Google, and Microsoft have been waging a war over ecosystems. Microsoft decidedly won the desktop battle, but Apple made a huge comeback in mobile with the iPhone and the iPad.

All three companies are using phones and tablets as the next battle in the war to win users over to ther ecosystem. Each company provides services and products to try to meet every need of their users. Below are some of the services and products that Apple, Google, and Microsoft offer:

Search: Google Search, Bing, Siri
Social: Google Plus, Face­book (Microsoft has heav­i­ly invest­ed in FB), Twit­ter (iOS and OS X Mountain Lion have deep Twitter integra­tion)
Email: iCloud, Gmail/Google Apps, Hotmail/Office 365
Brows­er: Chrome, Inter­net Explor­er, Safari
Desk­top: Chrome OS, OS X, Win­dows
Books: Google eBooks, Nook (Microsoft just invest­ed heav­i­ly in Nook), iBooks
Enter­tain­ment: Google Play, iTunes, Zune
TV: Apple TV, Google TV, Xbox 360
Pro­duc­tiv­i­ty: Microsoft Office, Google Drive, iWork
Stor­age: Google Drive, iCloud, Sky­Drive
Mobile: Android, iOS, Win­dows Phone

Each company has products in nearly every category that consumers and professionals use. From music to productivity to search to books, each company has a solution that they believe is the best for consumers and professionals. Many of these services and products are available on each company’s platforms, but they usually only work best on each company’s own platform. Android, iOS, and Windows Phone are nothing more than attempts to increase market share in each company’s ecosystem.

Apple has often been accused of misunderstanding the Internet, but I think what was perceived as misunderstanding was really simply a vastly different vision of what the Internet should look like. Apple thinks that the Internet should be divided into apps instead of tabs. Apple believes that users should let Apple make decisions about how they see and process information. Apple has severely limited Safari on iOS for this reason – they want users to access data and information through apps, not a browser. Apple believes that this way of accessing the Internet makes it cleaner, safer, and more profitable.

Microsoft is the wealthy incumbent. Having won the first battle, Microsoft slowed its innovation, giving companies like Apple and Google the opportunity to define and then dominate the next battle. Microsoft has a history of making products that are cheap, but good enough for most people to use. Windows and Office are classic example of this strategy, and it has worked on the desktop. In mobile, however, cheap and decent isn’t good enough.

Phones have becomes the most personal computers we have ever seen. They are with us all the time and store some of the most personal information we have. Windows Mobile was a failure because Microsoft failed to realize how important mobile would be. In the last five years we’ve seen a massive shift towards mobile computing becoming the dominant platform. For many things desktops and laptops are still superior, but mobile devices are becomin better adapted to the traditional tasks demanded of desktop computers.

As a result of this shift, Microsoft is getting crushed in mobile with Google and Apple controlling a space that Microsoft should have dominated. Bill Gates was raving about tablet computers far before anyone else saw the vision, but Microsoft continued to miss the mark by simply trying to recreate Windows on a smaller screen. Windows Phone and Windows 8 are massive jumps in a totally new direction and Microsoft is betting a lot with its latest vision of mobile computing. It has the services that people need, but it needs to have the consumer facing products that people want. Mixrosoft’s vision is similar to Apple’s in that they want to control the experience, but Microsoft is risking loosing enterprise, its bread as butter, by changing the way that Windows works so dramatically. Microsoft is trapped between consumer demands for something new and enterprise demands for a consistent product with legacy support.

Finally, Google believes that for better or worse, computing should be a totally open platform that is “free” for anyone to use. For the cost of targetted ads, Google wants to provide every service possible. Sure, there are some things that ads can’t buy, like apps or media, but Google wants to provide the services for freemium. Google’s vision of computing is essentially a cross between Microsoft’s and Apple’s. Google has a closed ecosystem in terms of the Play Store and Google apps, but in terms of what you can do there are no limits. Android on phones is similar to iOS in its app-centric approach, but apps like the browser don’t suffer from limitations like a lack of Flash support or the inability to download files. Android on tablets, on the other hand, follows Microsoft’s approach in that it feels and acts more like a desktop computer than a mobile one.

Choosing Google, in short, means that you support an open web and an open ecosystem. Unlike Apple, Google has no desire to control how you use their services. Unlike Microsoft, Google doesn’t make good-enough products and services in terms of usability. While Google still struggles with design for some of its products (Gmail still looks like it was made in 1997), its products just work. Office 365 may compare in terms of the products it offers, but they don’t work as well as Google’s services. Apple offers iCloud to store data, but unlike Google, Apple limits what apps can use that data. Supporting Google means supporting computing that lets you do whatever you want with your data on services that work well.

Sometimes people get emotional in the comments about Google and Android. Often I think this is just an emotional reaction to someone criticizing a product that people like, but I think there is something more to it than that. Apple, Google, and Microsoft have extremely different views of the future. Choosing between Apple, Google, and Microsoft is going to become increasingly difficult for users as each company tries to lock users into their services. The phone you choose, and therefore the ecosystem you support, may have a bearing on what the future of computing looks like.

  • socalrailroader

    Sadly, I bet most on here don’t even know who the REAL men in that picture are. 🙁

  • Christopher Riner

    And once again, Ron has opened my eyes to a concept that I probably would’ve never even considered.

    It’s so true; we think that we are choosing a platform because of its visual appeal, ease of use, and utility. These seem like the main reasons we get the phone that we get, or choose the platform that we do, and that as long as we are satisfied in these areas, then we like our phones and we’re good to go.

    I, for one, never really considered which ecosystem I was jumping into. When I first got my droid x, I did so simply because I had been on feature phones my whole life. The droid x blew me away with its capabilities, and so before apple ever had a chance with me I was falling in love with android. My best friend had been an iphone fanboy since day 1, and when I showed him how I had overclocked my android and saw the jealousy in his face, I knew I had chosen the right platform for me. But I never considered the fact that I was jumping into google’s ecosystem. I never considered how many google products I would eventually wind up relying on. And I can only imagine how different those products would be for me if I had chosen apple.

    I’m glad I went with google. It’s open attitude really does seem fitting for me. Sure, all 3 of the above mentioned companies are nazi’s in their own way, and google is no saint, but hell they’re companies; they have to make money. All I know is, I would be one sad mofo if everything google up and vanished tomorrow.

    • Looking at these companies as competing over ecosystems really changed the way I understood each of them and helped me understand more of their decisions and products. It’s crazy to think how reliant many have becomes on one ecosystem. I’m not sure if it’s good or bad, but we’re definitely headed in that direction.

      • noyfb

        Apple wants to change the internet and limit people because apple wants to control everything so they can charge everybody for everything. The main reason they hated flash was because people would be able to get videos and movies else where and for free, instead of purchasing it through the istore. I’m not a huge fan of flash, but it is the widely most used player on the net. Apple is solely concerned about charging its users for everything imaginable. Apple should change its logo to a nickel and a dime. And that’s why i will never use apple. They don’t care about the good of the customer only about how much money they can ring out of them.

  • grellanl

    “Before the iPhone no one envisioned mobile as being anything more than Windows laptops with rotating, resistive touchscreens and Blackberry-like phones.”

    Uh sorry, that’s just not true. This pernicious myth has really taken on a life of its own. There were *plenty* of useful handheld devices in 2002/3 that laid the foundation for the stuff we use now, all touchscreen, capable of running sophisticated apps, decent browser (for the time), wifi connectivity… I know, I was using them. It was super handy to have such a device in your pocket when you hit the airport, and it was obvious that this was the way things were going. But perhaps we didn’t have “magic” back then.

    I also had a Compaq TC1000 for a while, and while the rotating screen meant you were carrying the weight of a whole laptop, you automatically thought, “wait til the next gen when it detaches” and likewise, it was abundantly clear that this would be a successful form factor once the software was ready.

    There was no revolution in 2007.

    • The problem is, the next generation of Windows laptops that are actually designed for touch won’t be appearing until Windows 8 drops (hopefully) later this year, a full two years after Apple released the iPad. Did tablet computers exist before the iPad? Absolutely. I set several up for clients, but they were nothing like the iPad. They were running a desktop OS designed for a keyboard and mouse, not touch.

      Also, you’re right that there were PDAs and other handheld devices before the iPhone. The problem, again, is that they were not good. They did not run sophisticated apps (in comparison to what we see today), the browsers were clunky, and the devices were an eyesore.

      To say that Apple didn’t revolutionize mobile in 2007 is insane. Apple did not invent the category of smartphone or tablet, but they did revolutionize it. Having an idea is great, but being able to actually do it matters. As I said in the article, Bill Gates had been droning on and on about tablet computers far before Jobs understood the vision, but Gates and co. were never able to properly implement that vision.

      • grellanl

        The next generation of Windows interface that would *properly* enable touch took a decade longer than we were promised, that is certainly true. And if you look at how they planned to solve it then – with a separate interface that would “layer” over the desktop, and dedicated apps that would run within that interface, so that if you were a touch-focused user you would never see the desktop… well, that sounds an awful lot like Windows 8, to be honest.

        I don’t agree that sophistication of apps wasn’t there at that stage, seriously. In some ways, the apps we use on mobile devices have become simpler, more basic, as the intelligence moves from the device into the cloud. You could run pocket quake back then! And full paint programs, office editors, etc. And as far as the browser being clunky – well, desktop browsers were still pretty clunky at that stage too, if you remember.

        I’m not saying there wasn’t a qualitative difference in the way Apple exposed a touch interface in 2007 – there was, partly because traditions like the grab-hand gesture to pan around a document, which were second-nature in the Apple ecosystem, made touch-to-scroll an obvious idea (you rarely saw this in Windows, it was always scroll bars or scroll wheel). But also because technology like capacitive touchscreens had finally come of age, allowing for a more finger-friendly interface (those of us who’d been using our fingernails as a stylus for years welcomed this). But the other stuff had already been done, and much of it quite some time before. I think the phrase “revolutionary” has been co-opted by Apple marketing on this, and it’s been repeated so often the whole world has started to buy in to the legend.

  • 4g63mark

    If Verizon had a better selection of Windows phones, I would switch right now.

    • Wait, you mean the one phone they released last year isn’t enough? 😉 I own the Trophy and it’s a decent phone. There honestly isn’t very much better out there in terms of Windows Phone devices. The Lumia has nicer design, but the specs aren’t very different and they have the same software.

  • More false information for people to think is fact. Someone apparently ever heard of Palm and what they tried to do that started this whole craze. Apple is not some major innovator they are just a better advertiser.

    • Palm made smartphones and had somewhat of an app store, but their devices and software were nothing like what Apple introduced and Google and MS eventually released after. Apple is a major innovator.

  • richar

    this new disqus system sucks i just posted a lengthy (although not necessarily good) rant about windows being a decent desktop os nothing posted that i can see

    • Richard

      just showed up……..ignore this comment

  • bakdroid

    Typical Ron trying to use something he knows nothing about. How is this picture even relevant to a so called war? Britain, US, and USSR were all on the same side during this picture. So what is WP, iOS, and Android “Allied” against? Our money? And you saying it is a cold war reference….you are a moron Ron. Britain and the US were together against the USSR. Hell, you could at least watch a James Bond movie and know this. As for the purpose of the article, do you like stating the obvious? I mean seriously, what was the point of this? This was just a waste of server space and bandwidth publishing this. Last week you had a pretty decent article but I see you are back to your usual crap.

    • It’s a reference to the Cold War that followed. At times the USSR, Britain, and the US were allied, at other times they were not, just like MS, Google, and Microsoft. For example, Google and Apple were allied against Microsoft in the early days.

      The point was that mobile is a battle, not the war. Most people see mobile as the war, but the war is really over ecosystems, not control of mobile.

      • bakdroid

        *facepalm* They were never allied during the cold war! The cold war starts after WWII. They were only allied during WWII due to the Nazi and Jap alliance that no one liked. You need to read a history book.

        Again, we all know that there is a mobile war. When have they all been on the same side together (if that is the point you are going for)?? Apple and Google were always after each other in the mobile world and MS was just trying to latch on to whomever they could profit from.

        • The picture took place during WWII, but many saw it as a precursor to the Cold War, hence it covers both eras. All I’m saying is that there were times in history when the Allies and the USSR were allied and times when they were not.

          I am not saying they have all been on the same side. Apple and Google used to be allied in mobile until iOS and Android were released. Since then they’ve seen slowly moving away from each other.

          • bakdroid

            They saw it as a precursor….after the cold war. There is no way they could say it was a precursor before the cold war.

            How was “Apple and Google allied in mobile” before iOS or Android? Because they didn’t have anything? You seriously need to think before you speak.

          • iOS has always had deep integration with Google services. Google search has always been the default (and was originally the only option) in iOS, Maps is powered by Google, YouTube was a built in app before the App Store launched, etc.

          • bakdroid

            Yes, but that was after iOS released. Your comment before stated they were allied before iOS. Which is impossible because neither had a mobile system.

          • socalrailroader

            The Cold War with Russia is back on.

        • Christopher Riner

          Wow. The more you rant and rave about that stupid picture the more sense it makes why he chose it, lol.

          Whoever said trolls are good for nothing?

  • Look, I love Android, but I have a hard time agreeing this line:

    >> its products just work

    This line is so vague. What does it mean by “just work”? Take Android Beam as an example, yes, it just works. You put 2 phones together back-to-back, and it transfers data, right? Except that it only transfer very limited types of data. When a friend of mine got his Galaxy Nexus, he was impressed by how easy it was to transfer a contact from my GNex to his. 2 days later, he called me and asked why Android Beam failed to work — it turned out that he tried to transfer a ringtone to his wife (she also got a GNex.) Now, fast forward to the launch of the Galaxy S3. When S Beam was announced, I was shocked — not how smart Samsung is, but how dumb Google WAS. How could they not integrate Wifi-Direct with NFC to make Android Beam more useful than transferring tiny bit of data? So, may be Google’s products just work, but some times, they just don’t seem to understand what the customers want.

  • bionicchimp

    Open is the future Google ftw

  • Richard

    This article seems to have a really low opinion of windows in the desktop environmental as far as I’m concerned (and i do computer repair and maintenance professionally) windows is a fantastic operating system with more features for maintenance and management then you would likely ever need. Most people just cant work there comp for sh!t
    sorry about the engrish i’m good with electronics not language

    • I actually work in IT too. I use OS X and Windows personally. I don’t think Windows is bad, but I do think MS is risking a lot with Windows 8. It’s a lot like the move from MS-DOS to Windows.

      • Richard

        yeah I’m still pretty mixed on windows 8 but my point is people treat windows terribly like its a shoddier product when most of my coworkers and fellow tech friends prefer it for security and functionality but I’m not eloquent enough to make a more coherent statement/argument

        • Yeah, more people are definitely still using Windows. In my opinion OS X and Windows are about in parity when it comes to security and functionality, but for some Windows or OS X may be immensely better. It all depends on what you want to do with your computer.

          • mobilemann

            are you actually being downvoted just for saying you like OS X? Is this community that super pathetic?

  • danofiveo

    I’ve adopted a hybrid approach:
    Mobile – Google
    Desktop, Notebook & Servers – Microsoft
    Free music from Starbucks – iTunes (although this it’s getting less & less because you can’t download free music on Android mobile devices)

    • I think most people have a hybrid approach, but it’s becoming more difficult to do so as each ecosystem becomes closed. I’d rather not be locked in, but I think each company is moving towards closed ecosystems.

      • Christopher Riner

        yeah, you’re exactly right. We can still mix things up, like with an android phone, a mac computer, and a microsoft netbook, but our days of picking and choosing services are getting numbered.

        In ways its great, seeing how everything in one ecosystem works together. But at the same time, more and more I’m starting to see services that I might like, but simply can’t use because I’d have to have an iphone. It’s like when you buy a phone, and you have to re-set up the home screen and personalize it and everything. Well nowadays, if you switch from google to apple–hell, it could almost take weeks before you get all of your old services transferred to new apps/programs with similar functionality in the new ecosystem.

        • Yep. I have a Palm Pre 2, an HTC Trophy, an iPhone, and a Droid Incredible. I’m able to move between ecosystems for the most part (webOS and Windows Phone are more difficult), but it’s difficult to really move between ecosystems and stay in sync. There are times when I find a closed ecosystem gorgeous, but when something doesn’t work the way it should it becomes incredibly frustrating. That’s why I’ve tried to stay in the middle, but it’s becoming more and more difficult to do so.

  • This opinion article is a pretty good read and I can definitely see the point you’re making with it and I agree.

  • shawnpwhelan

    I know the logos were placed randomly, but each company has very close parallels to these countries. Microsoft is very much like the UK, Google is very much like the USA, and apple is very much like the USSR. This is the actual reason I support Google. What happened to these countries will be the same thing that happens to these companies in the future. Someone should write about this.

  • AlexKCMO

    Ron, I have to say. I normally agree with your articles, but this one is really off the mark and grabbing at strings.

    Your biggest problem is that you’re thinking of Google as a traditional software company, which they aren’t. The best example is this tidbit:
    Many of these services and products are available on each company’s platforms, but they usually only work best on each company’s own platform. Android, iOS, and Windows Phone are nothing more than attempts to increase market share in each company’s ecosystem.

    While this may apply to Crapple and Microsoft, Google operates completely differently based on everything I’ve read. Why isn’t Chrome the default Android browser from the get go, or on ICS moving forward if it was true?

    Android doesn’t even work with ChromeOS, which was really more of an experiment than anything else.

    Some of the products you listed are seriously grabbing at straws.

    Even so, this has to be the biggest stating the obvious post you’ve made. So Android is Google’s weapon in the Ecosystem war…. so what? What’s your opinion? You explained why you think this, but did not explain what it’s about.

    • The articles are different because this one was more Android focused.

      The main point of this article was that choosing an ecosystem actually matters. I probably could have added more context that this was sort of a response to the allegation that the phone or OS you choose is really just a matter of preference and of no other significance. I think what we choose will have a direct impact on the future of computing. Most people see the struggle for dominance in mobile as a war, but but it’s really just another battle in the war over ecosystems. Shifting focus from a battle to a war can make a big difference in how we understand each companies positions.

      I’m not sure what you mean about Chrome OS and Android. Of course Chrome OS and Android don’t work together. Neither does iOS and OS X or Windows Phone and Windows. They’re different platforms. The backend services, however, like Google Drive/SkyDrive/iCloud do work between each platform.

      Hopefully that clear some of that up. 🙂

      • AlexKCMO

        What I meant was that you had originally said:
        Many of these services and products are available on each company’s
        platforms, but they usually only work best on each company’s own

        What I was saying is that those products DON’T work well together, if at all. iOS integrates with OSX (so I’ve been told) and Windows Phone works pretty well with Windows (assuming you install the Zune Player). One example is connecting your phone and getting a “reverse tethering”, which on Sprint’s network, is a Godsend.

        It also works seamlessly with Exchange, much better than Android does (although it looks like iOS actually has some features MS should look at in regards to exchange integration).

        The point is, that not all of these products and services integrate seamlessly with Google because they don’t operate for that purpose. They are a pretty “fragmented” company in that the Android division has no idea what the Chrome division is doing. If you want to look at it, Android is really just Google’s version of Linux, like Ubuntu is Canonical version of Linux (yes, this can be heavily disputed and picked apart; I’m severely oversimplifying it). The integration from Google comes from Products (Chromebooks, GoogleTV, etc), to Google’s services (search, email, music, etc.).

        Microsoft is a bit better about integrating products AND services, but they still don’t have full integration. I can’t speak much about Apple, but I do think being able to take a video on your iPad and immediately and seamlessly switch it to your AppleTV is pretty awesome.
        Also, it’s a bit unfair to call Windows Mobile a failure. It was an OS aimed at competing with BlackBerry’s hold on Enterprise, and it did a very good job for what it was for. HTC’s Sense was amazing for Windows Mobile. For the time, I LOVED my Touch Pro 2; if it had a capacitive touch screen, it may have been a perfect phone.
        Also yes, that cleared it up, I just don’t think there was a lot of opinion, and more fact stating. Thanks for the reply :-).

        • Right, I think we’re on the same page. What I was saying is that Google services integrate well with Google products, but not with other products (etc.). Also, I loved my TP2. 🙂 I still pull it out of its box from time to time to play with its keyboard.

        • Christopher Riner

          Yeah, that’s basically exactly what ron was saying.

          And as far as windows mobile failing… I don’t know if I would use that word exactly, but think about it– the point he’s making is that the mobile platform we choose is simply each companies doorway to more of their products/services. If you get an iphone, you are going to (sooner or later, unless you’re like my friend mike and you’re just a bum) buy apple apps, or look at ads through apple services…somehow, some way–even waaay after the phone has been purchased– you’re going to wind up spending more money in a place that will benefit apple. Same with google, and same with windows.

          So if buying a phone leads you into all of these other services, then think of how far behind microsoft is. Sure, microsoft has tons of services in their ecosystem, but how many people have grown to rely heavily on these services, due to their use with their windows mobile phone. Not many. It is all of microsoft’s desktop magic (not mobile) that have lead people into their ecosystem of services. They definitely have some catching up to do, if they want people to wake up every morning, and feel like they NEED to carry around microsoft’s services. For them to have a mobile system that people can’t live without, like what google is for me. Microsoft could never fill those shoes, not yet anyways.

    • calculatorwatch

      I think you’re right about this being obvioius, but it’s still pretty interesting to think about the different approaches all three companies take (though I think the section about Microsoft was a bit superficial).

      Also, while you’re right that Google isn’t a traditional software company, they are an advertising company, and in a practical sense it doesn’t make much of a difference. Google might not sell software but all they make is software, and people using Google’s software are people seeing Google’s ads. They want those users just as much as Apple or Microsoft do.

      I guess that’s really only half the story for Google though, while they are competing with Apple and Microsoft in the software space they are also strongly competing (and really losing) with Facebook in the internet and user data space. It would be nice to see a story on this conflict as well and what Google should do to gain some ground on FB, especially since that is more of their traditional market space anyways.

  • In other words they are all the same and just a choice for the consumer. Simple enough

    • They aren’t the same. They represent very different visions of how computing should work both now and in the future.

    • Jeff

      Did you even READ the article? The whole point is that they are NOT the same.

  • whenjasonattks

    Why you no post my tip yet =(

  • androidfan

    The apple logo should have been on Joseph Stalin

    • Ben Kafka

      HAH I was just gonna say the same thing

    • speraider430

      Agree 100%,

      Small oversight by the author

    • as Norman responded I’m alarmed that a mother able to earn $6446 in 1 month on the computer. have you read this page LázÿCásh5.Çom

  • Before someone else leaves another comment about who should have which logo, they were chosen at random. The individuals behind each logo have zero intended connection to the company logos on top of their faces. I’m just using that image to associate the ecosystem war with the Cold War that followed WWII, nothing more.

    • Anthony Armando

      dude chill, dont take it so personally.

      • Not taking it personally, just trying to make sure the comments are about the article, not the picture. 🙂

        • Anthony Armando

          ha, good luck with that. people are going to say their opinion regardless, just like your post is an opinion.

        • AlexKCMO

          Good luck on that. This site is plagued with off-topic comments that usually revolve around the Galaxy Nexus.

          SCREW READING… THE PICTURE WAS WRONG OMFG I AM NOT READING THISSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111111oneone!!!!!111223211

      • cizzlen

        I lol’d

  • MrSteve920

    It’s amazing how many people will post on here saying “what’s up with the Nazi guy being Chrome?” Yeah, Joseph Stalin was not a Nazi.

  • Left to right: Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin…No Nazi’s…

    • jp

      No, but he slaughtered more people than the Nazi’s

  • Joshua and Bristol Kantor

    probably should have stalin with the apple, not FDR?

  • skant153

    TV: Apple TV, Google TV, Xbox 360

    and why is the chrome guy in nazi garb? shouldn’t that be the crapple guy?

    • Surely you’re not referring to Joseph Stalin? Not Nazi garb.

      • How is Stalin a better choice or even a choice to represent Google?

        Hint: No one likes genocide.

    • Anthony Armando

      lol, “nazi garb”

      the guy in the middle is count dracula. fo shizzle.
      the guy one the left is actually a chick. see the purse?

    • They were placed at random, and Stalin was a Communist, not a Nazi.

    • The comparison is relevant. Apple TV, Google TV, and Xbox 360 offer similar services in different manners, Xbox 360 isn’t just a gaming console. It has never been, It has always been a multimedia content delivery system. Apple TV offers the ability to play games and watch movies and listen to music just the same way Google TV does.

    • Liderc

      There are no Nazi’s in this picture genius.