3 ms·
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
by 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 agoBut 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 agoStill, 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.