3 ms·

Lame analysis. The iPhone wasn't great because it had a good touchscreen, battery and the web. I had "smart phones" before that with those. The real innovation

by gregw2 8y ago

Lame analysis. The iPhone wasn't great because it had a good touchscreen, battery and the web. I had "smart phones" before that with those. The real innovation was the software UI, pinch zoom and wall of all icons with high resolution pixels.

rando444 8y ago
The article doesn't argue that the iphone was great because any of those things. The article is arguing that technology is iterative, and that great inventions are often built on many other great inventions. The article is focusing on the iphone as an example of breakthrough technology.. but the question implied by the article is whether or not it's great because of the inventors ability to build on a larger than average amount of previous work.. and ends with the conclusion that greater freedom of information allows for breakthroughs, not "genius" lone-wolf inventors.
- Cobord 8y ago
  But the fact remains that the iPhone is used as the example, and so the myth of Jobs as a lone-wolf who did it remains. Had to have that hook to focus the article, but still feeds into that narrative for all the people who read the title but not the article.
- davidcollantes 8y ago
  Still, the article is weak. Based on the same argument, very few people invented anything. The article missed electricity, cables, wires, electronic components... see? The article is rubbish.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
jri93jf72 8y ago
So, Hollywood then Since I’m pretty sure those things were on display in movie UIs before 2007. Star Trek invented tablet computers. Apple built the first good all-in-one version
monocasa 8y ago
It wasn't that high resolution. The iPhone 1.0 had a 320x240 screen. Pinch zoom was Fingerworks around 1999 (albeit Fingerworks was then acquired by Apple in 2005).
- tlb 8y ago
  It was 320x480.
  - monocasa 8y ago
    Ok, my bad. Half of the resolution I had while running Windows 3.1, instead of a quarter.
    - joshtynjala 8y ago
      You're ignoring the pixel density, though. Half the resolution, but a screen many times smaller in physical dimensions than the monitor that you are comparing it to.
      - monocasa 8y ago
        Plenty of Windows Mobile devices had full on 640x480 screens years before the release of the iPhone. Nothing about the iPhone's resolution was revolutionary at the time. Hell, for a long time the apple cult was touting how their low resolution was really a benefit, saying that because it was easier on the GPU it led to better graphics albeit at a lower resolution.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

by gregw2 8y ago

rando444 8y ago

The article doesn't argue that the iphone was great because any of those things. The article is arguing that technology is iterative, and that great inventions are often built on many other great inventions. The article is focusing on the iphone as an example of breakthrough technology.. but the question implied by the article is whether or not it's great because of the inventors ability to build on a larger than average amount of previous work.. and ends with the conclusion that greater freedom of information allows for breakthroughs, not "genius" lone-wolf inventors.

Cobord 8y ago
But the fact remains that the iPhone is used as the example, and so the myth of Jobs as a lone-wolf who did it remains. Had to have that hook to focus the article, but still feeds into that narrative for all the people who read the title but not the article.
davidcollantes 8y ago
Still, the article is weak. Based on the same argument, very few people invented anything. The article missed electricity, cables, wires, electronic components... see? The article is rubbish.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

jri93jf72 8y ago

So, Hollywood then Since I’m pretty sure those things were on display in movie UIs before 2007. Star Trek invented tablet computers. Apple built the first good all-in-one version

monocasa 8y ago

It wasn't that high resolution. The iPhone 1.0 had a 320x240 screen. Pinch zoom was Fingerworks around 1999 (albeit Fingerworks was then acquired by Apple in 2005).

tlb 8y ago
It was 320x480.
- monocasa 8y ago
  Ok, my bad. Half of the resolution I had while running Windows 3.1, instead of a quarter.
  - joshtynjala 8y ago
    You're ignoring the pixel density, though. Half the resolution, but a screen many times smaller in physical dimensions than the monitor that you are comparing it to.
    - monocasa 8y ago
      Plenty of Windows Mobile devices had full on 640x480 screens years before the release of the iPhone. Nothing about the iPhone's resolution was revolutionary at the time. Hell, for a long time the apple cult was touting how their low resolution was really a benefit, saying that because it was easier on the GPU it led to better graphics albeit at a lower resolution.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]