3 ms·
You missed the point and should have kept reading. The author is arguing that even though there's prior art for most of those things, and some of those are jus
by glassx 15y ago
You missed the point and should have kept reading.
The author is arguing that even though there's prior art for most of those things, and some of those are just too archetipal today, the SII would be radically different without the iPhone, given that the chances of this likeness being by pure chance are astronomically small. Whether you believe this is true or not is up to you.
- msg 15y agoThe article contains a false choice between random chance and copying. There are many other ways it could have happened, such as multiple simultaneous invention, aesthetic choices that are in fact constricted by physical analogs, conventions, and prior customer experience. If you believe that the iPhone has hit a local maximum for design, why not believe that other manufacturers are hillclimbing toward them with the same algorithm?