In >my< opinion, it sounds kinda like you didn't read the Letter from the Carnation Company, or at least didn't quite grasp the point prior to rushing out your

In >my< opinion, it sounds kinda like you didn't read the Letter from the Carnation Company, or at least didn't quite grasp the point prior to rushing out your simplistic take and weird analogy about horses. Apple has surely never engaged in change-for-change's-sake as you are asserting. If you step back and consider all the factors in the changes they make - developing high quality materials, reducing size and weight, optimizing yields, durability, integration of technical advances like bus speeds, resolution and energy density, thermal characteristics... on and on, there are probably a thousands more factors that inform the changes they make to any given product. Not whatever hand-wavey dismissal you are asserting here. Sometimes their industrial design misses the mark, such as with the hockey puck mouse, or the charge port on the current mouse, but these are fairly rare when contrasted against the full spectrum of their ever evolving products. And that's the whole point of that letter from Carnation. There is a lot more going on behind the scenes that drive these engineering decisions. Simply writing them off with a simple take totally misses the mark.