6 ms·

Honestly, people complain about the impact of FANG on the crushing effect on the market. The counter balance has always been the consumer good and innovation

Honestly, people complain about the impact of FANG on the crushing effect on the market. The counter balance has always been the consumer good and innovation they provide -- but it's been a LONG time since we've since anything that isn't just incremental from Apple (others too - but not relevant here). Good on Epic and Tim S sticking hard to it. I hope they prevail.

metafunctor 6y ago
Why are you expecting something other than incremental from Apple (or others)? We are all standing on the shoulders of giants. Everything is synthesis. Nothing is original. Everything is incremental. Iteration is everything.
- luckylion 6y ago
  There's a difference in innovative quality between releasing the first iphone and the next iteration of the iphone. There's a similar difference between building the first PC and building an improved version of the first PC.
- hans1729 6y ago
  Thats just straight up reductionism. You can describe every progress as an iteration, but obviously some steps are much bigger than others, the prime example being the iPhone. Some company-cultures enable or incentivize innovation, others don't. Apples entire branding is about "revolutionizing [area]", therefore one expects them to do more than the stuff everyone else gets done
  - shawnz 6y ago
    It's normal for huge innovations like that to only come around once in a blue moon even in companies that foster it. That's nothing new.
    - hans1729 6y ago
      Sure, yet still we're right to expect more from a company fostering innovation than from one that doesn't, no? Because that was the original question
      - shawnz 6y ago
        I don't think so. There was no claim that other companies are out-innovating Apple, only that Apple is not innovating fast enough for their opinion of how fast Apple should be innovating.
- ineedasername 6y ago
  People expect more from Apple because Appled used to do more than small incremental changes. For a while Apple was coming out with products on a regular basis that redefined the industry, changing or increasing both consumers and the entire industry's focus. I don't consider things like the "camera notch" to be in that class of product development. Sure, everyone stands on the shoulders of giants, but not everyone is a giant. For a little while though, Apple was. Now I look at things like the Oculus Quest, which has gone a long way towards democratizing VR, and wonder "Where is Apple? Why aren't they here?" Their prior track record had them revolutionizing such things with an uncanny ability to understand UX at the same time that they dumped a ton of upgrades on their products compared to competitors. Sure, I guess if you break down each individual thing they did, then each one is incremental. But what we came to expect from Apple was that they'd release products with so many of those things that they changed the entire industry. Now we get a bezel that's 0.3mm smaller, the addition of an "ultra wide" camera lens, and a sprinkling of OS changes.
  - pwinnski 6y ago
    > For a while Apple was coming out with products on a regular basis that redefined the industry That sentence is carrying quite a heavy load! Can you list some Apple products you consider redefining, and what year they were released? It seems like the strongest cases are for "they are still doing that," or "they've done that literally four times ever, in 30+ years," so I'm curious how your list differs from either of mine.
    - labcomputer 6y ago
      Here's mine: 1. The original Macintosh, 1984 (desktop metaphor GUI for the masses) 2. Newton, 1993 (the original PDA, but not commercially successful--so "redefined the industry" is arguable) 3. The iMac, 1997 (industrial design matters for computers. You could argue SGI got there first, but PCs didn't notice until the iMac) 4. iPod/iTunes, 2001/2003 (capacitive-touch interfaces, buying music online) 5. iPhone, 2007 (too many things to list) 6. Apple Watch, 2015 (the Right Stuff to make smart watches popular) 7. FaceID, 2017 (depth-sensitive facial recognition that is actually secure)
dijit 6y ago
You’ve positioned this argument to make everyone who could counter you sound like an Apple fanboy. But let’s be clear here: Apples “innovation” is usually around usability and accessibility. Even with that said: the Apple Watch does not have an equal. It is the absolute king of smart watches. Or we could mention that their CPUs (on mobile) are usually 2 generations ahead of other mobile devices. You can fault them for many things, but they are innovating even if they oversell the little innovation they make.
- sbr464 6y ago
  I prefer the Garmin Fenix Sapphire to the Apple watch. I absolutely can't stand the 18 hour battery life. I actually laughed out loud during the Apple event when they mentioned you could monitor your blood oxygen levels while you were sleeping. How is a dead watch the next day usable?
  - dpkonofa 6y ago
    I have an Apple Watch that I have been using for sleep tracking for the last 2 years. I use Sleep Cycle and charge my watch for 1 hour while I shower and get ready for work. I have never, in that 2 years, had a dead watch the next day. Since installing iOS 14, nothing has changed in that regard.
    - sbr464 6y ago
      Yeah, it's doable if you try or have a daily ritual. Camping trips or simply being away from home for a day, business travel and leaving the charger in a hotel etc, that constant upkeep is what keeps mine in the drawer. It would be much easier if it used the same lightning connector.
    - lukeschlather 6y ago
      I charge my Garmin once a week. Also it has full offline navigation (though using it constantly will bring the battery life to only 2-3x the Apple watch battery life.)
- 6y ago
drivingmenuts 6y ago
If Epic prevails, it pretty much wrecks the idea behind contract law. This case is about Epic agreeing to a thing and then reneging on the agreement, then crying “look what the evil mean company did!” Apple is no saint, but in this case, they aren’t in the wrong. From reading the filings, Apple has gone to some extraordinary lengths to support Fortnite, behind the scenes, only to have Epic shred the hand that’s helping them.
- mschuster91 6y ago
  > If Epic prevails, it pretty much wrecks the idea behind contract law. This case is about Epic agreeing to a thing and then reneging on the agreement, then crying “look what the evil mean company did!” Courts have invalidated parts of or entire contracts for ages, extortionary practices by a dominant entity being one of the chief reasons. We are just unused to this sort of legal battles.
- lostcolony 6y ago
  Not at all. Questions of unconscionability, undue influence, whether the contract formed a meeting of the minds, etc, are all up for discussion in court. As with any contract. Without undermining the validity of the idea of contracts as a whole. Maybe you mean the specifics of this case, but until a court decides that, it hardly seems something one is qualified to weigh in on (even if you have a law background or similar).
  - drivingmenuts 6y ago
    I’m definitely an outsider on this. However, Epic surely didn’t enter into this contract blindly; they had to have lawyered this thing backwards and forwards and accountancied it up and down. They’re not some small developer doing a gut-check before rolling over and taking one for the team. From where I sit, it’s looking like they planned to do this for a long time, which leads to the possibility that they entered into the contract in bad faith. As for undue influence, etc. - those are immeasurable terms. Ultimately, if you can’t trust what’s on the paper, what’s the point? I have yet to see a filing where Epic shows that Apple didn’t deliver what they said they would. I have seen the filing where Apple lays out what they did do for Epic.
NationalPark 6y ago
Apple Watch is a good example of a recent "blue ocean" innovation. FaceID is a recent usability innovation of the kind Apple has historically been known for. I think they're still doing good work.
- Aeolos 6y ago
  Microsoft release Windows Hello (Passport) with Windows 10 on July 2015.[1] Apple copied it as "FaceID" into their smartphone devices on November 2017.[2] A marketing innovation certainly, but calling this a usability innovation is quite a stretch. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10#System_security https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10#System_security [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_ID https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_ID
  - efraim 6y ago
    Android had trusted face unlock since 2014
    - omnimus 6y ago
      Worth noting is Apples face id is not just face recognition but depth scan for security. Many devices dont have the depth scan making it all pretty unsecure when you can unlock with someones photo. So Apples inmplementation is probably top.
      - sudosysgen 6y ago
        Android actually did depth from movement for a while. Or at least many Android vendors.
    - bzb5 6y ago
      Android’s face unlock was so terrible that they removed it afterwards.
      - efraim 6y ago

metafunctor 6y ago

Why are you expecting something other than incremental from Apple (or others)? We are all standing on the shoulders of giants. Everything is synthesis. Nothing is original. Everything is incremental. Iteration is everything.

luckylion 6y ago
There's a difference in innovative quality between releasing the first iphone and the next iteration of the iphone. There's a similar difference between building the first PC and building an improved version of the first PC.
hans1729 6y ago
Thats just straight up reductionism. You can describe every progress as an iteration, but obviously some steps are much bigger than others, the prime example being the iPhone. Some company-cultures enable or incentivize innovation, others don't. Apples entire branding is about "revolutionizing [area]", therefore one expects them to do more than the stuff everyone else gets done
- shawnz 6y ago
  It's normal for huge innovations like that to only come around once in a blue moon even in companies that foster it. That's nothing new.
  - hans1729 6y ago
    Sure, yet still we're right to expect more from a company fostering innovation than from one that doesn't, no? Because that was the original question
    - shawnz 6y ago
      I don't think so. There was no claim that other companies are out-innovating Apple, only that Apple is not innovating fast enough for their opinion of how fast Apple should be innovating.
ineedasername 6y ago
People expect more from Apple because Appled used to do more than small incremental changes. For a while Apple was coming out with products on a regular basis that redefined the industry, changing or increasing both consumers and the entire industry's focus. I don't consider things like the "camera notch" to be in that class of product development. Sure, everyone stands on the shoulders of giants, but not everyone is a giant. For a little while though, Apple was. Now I look at things like the Oculus Quest, which has gone a long way towards democratizing VR, and wonder "Where is Apple? Why aren't they here?" Their prior track record had them revolutionizing such things with an uncanny ability to understand UX at the same time that they dumped a ton of upgrades on their products compared to competitors. Sure, I guess if you break down each individual thing they did, then each one is incremental. But what we came to expect from Apple was that they'd release products with so many of those things that they changed the entire industry. Now we get a bezel that's 0.3mm smaller, the addition of an "ultra wide" camera lens, and a sprinkling of OS changes.
- pwinnski 6y ago
  > For a while Apple was coming out with products on a regular basis that redefined the industry That sentence is carrying quite a heavy load! Can you list some Apple products you consider redefining, and what year they were released? It seems like the strongest cases are for "they are still doing that," or "they've done that literally four times ever, in 30+ years," so I'm curious how your list differs from either of mine.
  - labcomputer 6y ago
    Here's mine: 1. The original Macintosh, 1984 (desktop metaphor GUI for the masses) 2. Newton, 1993 (the original PDA, but not commercially successful--so "redefined the industry" is arguable) 3. The iMac, 1997 (industrial design matters for computers. You could argue SGI got there first, but PCs didn't notice until the iMac) 4. iPod/iTunes, 2001/2003 (capacitive-touch interfaces, buying music online) 5. iPhone, 2007 (too many things to list) 6. Apple Watch, 2015 (the Right Stuff to make smart watches popular) 7. FaceID, 2017 (depth-sensitive facial recognition that is actually secure)

dijit 6y ago

You’ve positioned this argument to make everyone who could counter you sound like an Apple fanboy. But let’s be clear here: Apples “innovation” is usually around usability and accessibility. Even with that said: the Apple Watch does not have an equal. It is the absolute king of smart watches. Or we could mention that their CPUs (on mobile) are usually 2 generations ahead of other mobile devices. You can fault them for many things, but they are innovating even if they oversell the little innovation they make.

sbr464 6y ago
I prefer the Garmin Fenix Sapphire to the Apple watch. I absolutely can't stand the 18 hour battery life. I actually laughed out loud during the Apple event when they mentioned you could monitor your blood oxygen levels while you were sleeping. How is a dead watch the next day usable?
- dpkonofa 6y ago
  I have an Apple Watch that I have been using for sleep tracking for the last 2 years. I use Sleep Cycle and charge my watch for 1 hour while I shower and get ready for work. I have never, in that 2 years, had a dead watch the next day. Since installing iOS 14, nothing has changed in that regard.
  - sbr464 6y ago
    Yeah, it's doable if you try or have a daily ritual. Camping trips or simply being away from home for a day, business travel and leaving the charger in a hotel etc, that constant upkeep is what keeps mine in the drawer. It would be much easier if it used the same lightning connector.
  - lukeschlather 6y ago
    I charge my Garmin once a week. Also it has full offline navigation (though using it constantly will bring the battery life to only 2-3x the Apple watch battery life.)
6y ago

drivingmenuts 6y ago

If Epic prevails, it pretty much wrecks the idea behind contract law. This case is about Epic agreeing to a thing and then reneging on the agreement, then crying “look what the evil mean company did!” Apple is no saint, but in this case, they aren’t in the wrong. From reading the filings, Apple has gone to some extraordinary lengths to support Fortnite, behind the scenes, only to have Epic shred the hand that’s helping them.

mschuster91 6y ago
> If Epic prevails, it pretty much wrecks the idea behind contract law. This case is about Epic agreeing to a thing and then reneging on the agreement, then crying “look what the evil mean company did!” Courts have invalidated parts of or entire contracts for ages, extortionary practices by a dominant entity being one of the chief reasons. We are just unused to this sort of legal battles.
lostcolony 6y ago
Not at all. Questions of unconscionability, undue influence, whether the contract formed a meeting of the minds, etc, are all up for discussion in court. As with any contract. Without undermining the validity of the idea of contracts as a whole. Maybe you mean the specifics of this case, but until a court decides that, it hardly seems something one is qualified to weigh in on (even if you have a law background or similar).
- drivingmenuts 6y ago
  I’m definitely an outsider on this. However, Epic surely didn’t enter into this contract blindly; they had to have lawyered this thing backwards and forwards and accountancied it up and down. They’re not some small developer doing a gut-check before rolling over and taking one for the team. From where I sit, it’s looking like they planned to do this for a long time, which leads to the possibility that they entered into the contract in bad faith. As for undue influence, etc. - those are immeasurable terms. Ultimately, if you can’t trust what’s on the paper, what’s the point? I have yet to see a filing where Epic shows that Apple didn’t deliver what they said they would. I have seen the filing where Apple lays out what they did do for Epic.

NationalPark 6y ago

Apple Watch is a good example of a recent "blue ocean" innovation. FaceID is a recent usability innovation of the kind Apple has historically been known for. I think they're still doing good work.

Aeolos 6y ago
Microsoft release Windows Hello (Passport) with Windows 10 on July 2015.[1] Apple copied it as "FaceID" into their smartphone devices on November 2017.[2] A marketing innovation certainly, but calling this a usability innovation is quite a stretch. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10#System_security https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10#System_security [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_ID https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_ID
- efraim 6y ago
  Android had trusted face unlock since 2014
  - omnimus 6y ago
    Worth noting is Apples face id is not just face recognition but depth scan for security. Many devices dont have the depth scan making it all pretty unsecure when you can unlock with someones photo. So Apples inmplementation is probably top.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      Android actually did depth from movement for a while. Or at least many Android vendors.
  - bzb5 6y ago
    Android’s face unlock was so terrible that they removed it afterwards.
    - efraim 6y ago