Last week I went off on Google. This week I am going to admit that of the big companies Google is one of the few whose products I use. The reason for this is that Google is one of the first who focus on and advance the “apps in the cloud” mantra, which is why their net neutrality stance is even more frustrating.

Here’s the complete list of big company apps:

• Apple: laptop, iPhone, iPad, iWork (Pages, Keynote), iLife, MobileMe
• Google: GMail, Reader, Docs (as little as possible), search, blogger, YouTube
• Microsoft: Excel
• Intuit: QuickBooks
• Adobe: Photoshop Elements

(And I would love to replace Adobe and Intuit — especially Intuit. And Excel can’t be replaced even though their Mac version stinks.) All other software — and a lot of it — is from smaller, independent developers.

But it is Google and Google alone who really understands this concept of access everywhere. Take Google Reader for example. I access Google Reader from every computer I have (including using an app called Reeder on iPhone and iPad) and they all stay in sync perfectly because of its connection to the cloud.

This is where the future resides for most software products and anyone who doesn’t understand that will be left behind. I am already convinced that this is a clear deliniation on smartphones and tablets: if you don’t have a web connection, don’t bother developing it.

It always amazes me the image that corporations craft for themselves. Some companies fully embrace that image. For example, HP has a very strong reputation that is reinforced by everyone at the company, in the end forcing out a very highly successful CEO over a few thousand dollars in expense report inaccuracies. Impressive in the least that ethics trumped “shareholder value” at least at this company.

But some companies don’t really stand up to their reputations. Google I am afraid, is one of them. Google has a two part reputation: one is for innovation and the other is for ethics made famous by their “do no evil” mantra. But both, in recent days, have proven to show the king for what he really is: naked.

The first is more cut and dry, the great innovation machine of Google. But is the company really that innovative? First let us define innovation. When I say innovation I mean a highly successful new idea that influences the markets. I could argue that Google has had only one major innovations in its history; no more, no less. Remember, that is a single breakthrough from a company that encourages democracy of innovation to the tune of 20% of their paid time.

This innovation? It wasn’t AdWords itself as they got the idea from somewhere else but rather how to incorporate ads in such a way that people would actually click on them. Everything else the company did was buying or ripping off others’ ideas. Email, documents, web site creation, operating systems are all just bought products and/or rip-offs of other people’s ideas.

The second, Google’s “do no evil” approach to business, is quickly being proven a farce. This is exemplified by the behind-the-scenes ranglings with Verizon over net neutrality. Net neutrality, if you aren’t paying attention, is the belief that all companies should be treated equally when it comes to speed and bandwidth use of the network infrastructure. In other words a company like Microsoft or Google or Apple can’t use their market power to buy favoritism with carriers and other internet service providers. In other words, a company like Infinity Softworks can develop a web service and get the same treatment as Nike when it comes to access to customers.

Google, destroying the last vestiges of their reputation, threw net neutrality under the bus by trying to cut a back room deal with Verizon. Net neutrality, they agreed before being outed by the New York Times, is fine for DSL and cable companies but wouldn’t have to be upheld by cell phone carriers. Now Google has to be treated as hostile to net neutrality rules, breaking them away from the rest of the technology industry, siding with their most critical US partner Verizon.

I think it was more than net neutrality thrown under the bus this day.

I, for one, am disappointed in Gizmodo. Not only do I think they did the wrong thing in not returning the iPhone 4G to Apple before reporting on it, but they also ruined Christmas morning for me.

First things first. I work hard to teach my kids that stealing is wrong. I hope they have learned that if you do it, you are wrong. And if you stand by while someone else does it, that is wrong too. It is not yours and does not belong to you.

The same thing is true for objects that are found. Before they keep it, it is my children’s responsibility to try and return it to their rightful owner. Sure, you may get nothing in return for it, but I believe in good mojo, karma, what-goes-around-comes-around, etc.

Gizmodo failed on both accounts. They enabled the theft of something that belongs to someone else and didn’t even think to return it until after they published their story on the 4G. Anything for a story, huh, including integrity.

Given that, it is their integrity. I might be more disappointed in what Gizmodo ruined for me. I find that Apple’s product launches are one of the most exciting on the planet. All the weeks of speculation followed by the big reveal. It is true show business and makes me feel like it is Christmas morning. What’s Apple going to pull out of their hat this time? Will all the speculation be right? What did the press miss from their sources and parts suppliers? Gizmodo ruined that for me. All in the name of scooping a story that no one will remember in a few months.

Given these events, I decided that I will no longer go to Gizmodo’s website, link to their stories, or follow their RSS feeds. I can’t, in good conscience, support an organization with such a low-integrity threshold. Not if I want to look my daughters in the face, anyway.

Apple doesn’t always win markets and they don’t always invent them, but when Apple enters a market it is almost always the tipping point to mainstream adoption.

Proof:

• The Apple II series was the first main stream computer. They eventually lost ground to the more business-friendly IBM PCs, but it introduced computing to the masses in a way no one before was able to. (And for us students, it is what we grew up using with the Apple IIe seeming to be in every school.)

• Next came the Macintosh. It was the first truly mass consumed computer with a Window-based user interface. Of course, it lost out to Microsoft and Intel once Windows 3.1 and 95 were introduced.

• We have to wait a while — 16 years actually — for the next major wave of computing. And this market Apple won: portable music players. While the iPod wasn’t the first (just like the Apple II series wasn’t the first) it quickly came to dominate the market and maintain its dominance through this day.

• Next came the iPhone. Again, not the first smartphone but its introduction completely changed the landscape for cell phones, instantly raising the bar and inspiring competitors. The jury is out on this one. There is a long way to go when it comes to defining a winner as only about 2% of the cell phones sold worldwide are smartphones today.

• And now we have the iPad. Unfortunately many media pundits are exclaiming stupidly that Apple is inventing the market. That’s far from the truth. Microsoft really pioneered the market 10 years ago with the Tablet PC operating system. For many reasons it was a flop. Apple is re-inventing it and from first take, doing it the right way with the right price.

So while Apple has not always invented the market or even been the eventual winner, the company (Steve Jobs?) has an uncanny knack for understanding exactly when a market is ready to go mainstream and is consistently a major player in the outcome.

Lets hope Apple’s 5 for 5 with the introduction of the iPad. I believe it is.

Disclaimer: I have a vested interest in Apple’s mobile success as powerOne calculator is available right now for iPhone, iPad and iPod touch.

From 1977 to the mid-80s, Apple was the king of technology. Visicalc, Apple IIe’s in every school and the release of the Macintosh were all defining moments of the computer market. Then Microsoft released Windows, Excel and Word. Apple tried to sue and famously lost and the next decade was Microsoft’s as the company road Dell, HP/Compaq, Exchange and Office to the top.

By the late 90’s, Microsoft was reeling, attacked in the marketplace by Palm, Sony and Nintendo, Linux, and the Department of Justice. Microsoft seemed to have lost its way at the same time that Steve Jobs was returning to Apple. The iMac captured imaginations, the iPod and iTunes transformed a market, and then the iPhone and iPod Touch changed the way everyone thinks about smartphones.

The difference this time is we have a new behemoth in town, Google, and as Google plays more and more in Apple’s and Microsoft’s turf (with Android and Chrome), we start seeing a potential redux of late 1980’s Apple-Microsoft battles. This stupid patent lawsuit against HTC (really Google?) may be the first salvo but it won’t be the last.

I’m gravely concerned about Apple. The control issues with developers and content providers have been well documented. We have continued to develop powerOne calculators for iPhone and iPod Touch (and soon iPad) simply because they offer the best hope for a developer like us right now. But every misstep makes me worried about Apple, every lawsuit and kicked out app makes me wonder whether Apple can handle its new found success, its market position. It makes me wonder whether the company can keep from repeating the past, dooming itself to this boom/bust cycle it has had for 30 years.

And it leaves me worried that the biggest innovator in the tech industry will drag us all down with them… again.