5 ms·

This comment is a bit dismissive. Can you really claim that for iPod, iPhone and iPad? Sure, every invention is based on work of others, but Apple has still ma

by annnnd 13y ago

This comment is a bit dismissive. Can you really claim that for iPod, iPhone and iPad? Sure, every invention is based on work of others, but Apple has still made huge improvements on multiple areas.

collyw 13y ago
Marketing and gaining widespread adoption seem to be the areas that Apple excels at. In most cases where something is heralded as "revolutionary" by Apple, it has been done before. Maybe not as well or as polished, but usually it has been done before.
- interpol_p 13y ago
  It's pretty hard to see the iPhone and iPad as anything other than a revolution. Similar to how Windows was a revolution in desktop computing (whether you liked it or not). "Gaining widespread adoption" was never an area Apple was very good at. They were always good at creating consumer-focused PCs. The initial line of MacBooks and iMacs are good examples of this — minuscule user base compared to Windows, but built to Apple's standards of what a computer should be. Their initial aim for the iPhone was to capture 1% of the market, they hardly expected the success they received.
  - LunaSea 13y ago
    The Ipad definitely wasn't a revolution.
    - collyw 13y ago
      It was marketed as one though. And to be fair it was the first tablet to gain widespread adoption.
    - interpol_p 13y ago
      What is your criteria for "revolution" in the tech industry?
- annnnd 13y ago
  I agree 100% with the first two sentences - but their strong point is exactly that they finish their products too. It is important to execute projects well (enough) and to add polish too - and Apple excels at that. (to be fair, their UX is far from perfect IMHO... but it is apparently good enough)
- archagon 13y ago
  Saying that Apple is good at "gaining widespread adoption" is kind of like saying that J. K. Rowling is good at "being read".
  - belorn 13y ago
    If J. K. Rowling had only copied other books and stories, then yes, that would have been a good description.
    - gress 13y ago
      You can't expect this to be taken seriously.
- JohnBooty 13y ago
  Even if all they do is do things better and more polished than others, that's something any company would do well to emulate. And sometimes doing things simply in a "more polished" way is revolutionary. The early, pre-iPod mp3 players were an absolute mess when it came to navigating your music. That doesn't show up on a spec sheet, but "creating the first mp3 player that lets you actually navigate your music in a simple and enjoyable manner" is pretty freaking revolutionary in my book.
  - collyw 13y ago
    Yes and no. I mean you cad hardly say the iPod shuffle was a revolution in music navigation. They just marketed it right.
    - JohnBooty 13y ago
      It was a pretty good product for a lot of people! A lot of people, like me, just want to shuffle some music while we exercise and we're willing to trade fine-grained control for the fact that the device is as light as a feather. It also has really respectable sound quality and volume, which is not always the case (to put it gently) for teeny tiny electronics.
josteink 13y ago
This comment is a bit dismissive. Can you really claim that for iPod, iPhone and iPad? MP3 players were already pretty mainstream when the iPod came around and it didn't really add much. And the iPad was merely an iteration on the iPhone. But every rule has an exception. I'll grant that Apple definitely redefined what a smartphone was with the iPhone.
- SeanLuke 13y ago
  > MP3 players were already pretty mainstream when the iPod came around and it didn't really add much. That's like saying that cell phones with color screens were already pretty mainstream when the iPhone came around and it didn't really add much. I think you have forgotten just how different the iPod was. Let's add the Mac to this party. Do you think that the Mac was just reinventing earlier standards on the market?
  - hahainternet 13y ago
    > That's like saying that cell phones with color screens were already pretty mainstream when the iPhone came around and it didn't really add much. > I think you have forgotten just how different the iPod was. It wasn't very different. Jesus Apple fans talk a lot of shit. The first iPhone couldn't even install apps, stop this ridiculous rose tinted view.
    - SeanLuke 13y ago
      I don't know who this Jesus Apple guy is, but I don't own an iPod, iPhone, or iPad.
- ceejayoz 13y ago
  > MP3 players were already pretty mainstream when the iPod came around and it didn't really add much. In the world of techies, perhaps, but it hadn't made much of a dent per-iPad in the mainstream consumer market. http://www.clickz.com/clickz/news/1695501/ipod-mp3-player-adoption-at-tipping-point http://www.clickz.com/clickz/news/1695501/ipod-mp3-player-ad...
- 13y ago
wizzard 13y ago
Well... yeah. Remember FairPlay? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

by annnnd 13y ago

This comment is a bit dismissive. Can you really claim that for iPod, iPhone and iPad? Sure, every invention is based on work of others, but Apple has still made huge improvements on multiple areas.

collyw 13y ago

Marketing and gaining widespread adoption seem to be the areas that Apple excels at. In most cases where something is heralded as "revolutionary" by Apple, it has been done before. Maybe not as well or as polished, but usually it has been done before.

interpol_p 13y ago
It's pretty hard to see the iPhone and iPad as anything other than a revolution. Similar to how Windows was a revolution in desktop computing (whether you liked it or not). "Gaining widespread adoption" was never an area Apple was very good at. They were always good at creating consumer-focused PCs. The initial line of MacBooks and iMacs are good examples of this — minuscule user base compared to Windows, but built to Apple's standards of what a computer should be. Their initial aim for the iPhone was to capture 1% of the market, they hardly expected the success they received.
- LunaSea 13y ago
  The Ipad definitely wasn't a revolution.
  - collyw 13y ago
    It was marketed as one though. And to be fair it was the first tablet to gain widespread adoption.
  - interpol_p 13y ago
    What is your criteria for "revolution" in the tech industry?
annnnd 13y ago
I agree 100% with the first two sentences - but their strong point is exactly that they finish their products too. It is important to execute projects well (enough) and to add polish too - and Apple excels at that. (to be fair, their UX is far from perfect IMHO... but it is apparently good enough)
archagon 13y ago
Saying that Apple is good at "gaining widespread adoption" is kind of like saying that J. K. Rowling is good at "being read".
- belorn 13y ago
  If J. K. Rowling had only copied other books and stories, then yes, that would have been a good description.
  - gress 13y ago
    You can't expect this to be taken seriously.
JohnBooty 13y ago
Even if all they do is do things better and more polished than others, that's something any company would do well to emulate. And sometimes doing things simply in a "more polished" way is revolutionary. The early, pre-iPod mp3 players were an absolute mess when it came to navigating your music. That doesn't show up on a spec sheet, but "creating the first mp3 player that lets you actually navigate your music in a simple and enjoyable manner" is pretty freaking revolutionary in my book.
- collyw 13y ago
  Yes and no. I mean you cad hardly say the iPod shuffle was a revolution in music navigation. They just marketed it right.
  - JohnBooty 13y ago
    It was a pretty good product for a lot of people! A lot of people, like me, just want to shuffle some music while we exercise and we're willing to trade fine-grained control for the fact that the device is as light as a feather. It also has really respectable sound quality and volume, which is not always the case (to put it gently) for teeny tiny electronics.

josteink 13y ago

This comment is a bit dismissive. Can you really claim that for iPod, iPhone and iPad? MP3 players were already pretty mainstream when the iPod came around and it didn't really add much. And the iPad was merely an iteration on the iPhone. But every rule has an exception. I'll grant that Apple definitely redefined what a smartphone was with the iPhone.

SeanLuke 13y ago
> MP3 players were already pretty mainstream when the iPod came around and it didn't really add much. That's like saying that cell phones with color screens were already pretty mainstream when the iPhone came around and it didn't really add much. I think you have forgotten just how different the iPod was. Let's add the Mac to this party. Do you think that the Mac was just reinventing earlier standards on the market?
- hahainternet 13y ago
  > That's like saying that cell phones with color screens were already pretty mainstream when the iPhone came around and it didn't really add much. > I think you have forgotten just how different the iPod was. It wasn't very different. Jesus Apple fans talk a lot of shit. The first iPhone couldn't even install apps, stop this ridiculous rose tinted view.
  - SeanLuke 13y ago
    I don't know who this Jesus Apple guy is, but I don't own an iPod, iPhone, or iPad.
ceejayoz 13y ago
> MP3 players were already pretty mainstream when the iPod came around and it didn't really add much. In the world of techies, perhaps, but it hadn't made much of a dent per-iPad in the mainstream consumer market. http://www.clickz.com/clickz/news/1695501/ipod-mp3-player-adoption-at-tipping-point http://www.clickz.com/clickz/news/1695501/ipod-mp3-player-ad...
13y ago

wizzard 13y ago

Well... yeah. Remember FairPlay? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]