Google vs. Apple

Although its a bit tongue-in-cheek, it really shows why Apple investors pay so much attention to Jobs' health. Apple is a very centralized and secretive organization with the appearance that all important decisions, from strategic to design decisions, going through Jobs. No wonder people wonder if Apple can keep being great if he leaves.

'Think different' isn't a motto, it's a slogan. One's for people inside the company, the other's for people outside.

Date Founded (1998 vs 1976) is listed as a difference, but really, it's more of a similarity. The "new" Apple, with Steve Jobs at the helm, was founded at about the same time as Google.

I don't know what experience the author of this matrix has in programming, but Infinite Loop's API's have a noticeably higher degree of engineering than any other API / toolchain I've used.

Although Google uses data-driven decisions to optimize existing products like the search UI, it's a misconception that strategic decisions of new products and services would be done in a same way.<p>Of course not. They are made in a similar way that every other human organization does it: based on the intuition and knowledge of the decision makers.

With so many markets they commonly target, and with such a great success one of them has in each market, I cant help but wonder what the implications of a merger would be. Search &#38; hardware, design &#38; algos, high-end &#38; low-end, who could compete with them if they join forces?

Did they pull the "Mercedes SL55" reference out of their asses, or are people at Apple (or Steve?) really known for driving those?

Apple is a fruit, Google is a number?