So, waiting until a lull in the press cycle and then making a big announcement is a hostile PR move? What would a polite PR move look like?
Google staged a major Android conference and made a major release. Of course there is more Android news this week than iPad news.
Google timed their conference and their release to avoid Apple's big April and May releases, and to avoid WWDC and Apple's (presumably forthcoming) big June release. This isn't particularly hostile or non-hostile; it's a basic law of PR physics. The influential tech reporters are human beings that can only be in one place at one time.
(It may be an even more fundamental law of physics: There is only one Moscone Center.)
Finally, since I'm not trying to sell page views I'm free to point out, once again, that selling smartphones is not a zero-sum game. I doubt that Google's efforts to mention Apple and Apple's products in every other sentence is particularly bad for Apple. By elevating Apple to the level of "the industry standard which we all must compare ourselves to", Google buys attention for themselves, but they also ensure that even more people will pay attention to Apple's next move. It's really kind of a win-win. The ones who aren't winning here are Microsoft, RIM, and HP/Palm: The unmentioned ones.
Interesting, the reason of dis-agreeing with something might be influenced by what is the state of mind at that moment. I wonder how many comments and articles are down voted because of this reason.
To avoid such things from happening as part of my business decisions, I usually delay the decision making by a day so that I can "think clearly" before taking any decision.
Google staged a major Android conference and made a major release. Of course there is more Android news this week than iPad news.
Google timed their conference and their release to avoid Apple's big April and May releases, and to avoid WWDC and Apple's (presumably forthcoming) big June release. This isn't particularly hostile or non-hostile; it's a basic law of PR physics. The influential tech reporters are human beings that can only be in one place at one time.
(It may be an even more fundamental law of physics: There is only one Moscone Center.)
Finally, since I'm not trying to sell page views I'm free to point out, once again, that selling smartphones is not a zero-sum game. I doubt that Google's efforts to mention Apple and Apple's products in every other sentence is particularly bad for Apple. By elevating Apple to the level of "the industry standard which we all must compare ourselves to", Google buys attention for themselves, but they also ensure that even more people will pay attention to Apple's next move. It's really kind of a win-win. The ones who aren't winning here are Microsoft, RIM, and HP/Palm: The unmentioned ones.