"innovations"?
Take an ALREADY EXISTING product, give it some slight improvement or some slight upgrade, and, VOILA!, it's "innovation", just because, it's from Apple.
Do the same with some other manufacturer's products or some other development company's products/services, and it becomes, the "same old tired crap", because, it's not from Apple.
People need to start using the word "innovation" more accurately, and without a predefined bias for certain companies.
The correct word for what the author describes above is "improvement", or "enhancement", not "innovation".
Look up the words.
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
Have to agree with that.. The iPhone and iPad were innovations because they took EXISTING classes of devices and improved on them allowing more users to comfortably enjoy the technology. Apple will have to come up with something new, not just improve the devices already in their line-up to claim any 'innovation' in the future.
I'd recommend Apple create a new cellular/wireless infrastructure company to get the current ones on the ball and improve the UX in that area. Now THAT would be an Apple worthy 'Innovation'.
I'd recommend Apple create a new cellular/wireless infrastructure company to get the current ones on the ball and improve the UX in that area. Now THAT would be an Apple worthy 'Innovation'.
Innovation was discovering the wheel, or fire, or electricity.
Saying that Apple is not innovating because they improved something is not accurate.
What you are saying is that, just because a guy discovered the wheel a million years ago, and then someone discovered the combustion engine 100 years ago, the Ferrari 458 Italia is not an innovative car.
The point is Ferrari did it best! Everyone wants one, so it???s innovating. If Skoda had done it first, since the technology was available, then they would innovate.
This is a moo discussion. Resistance is futile. You shall be Apple???d
Saying that Apple is not innovating because they improved something is not accurate.
What you are saying is that, just because a guy discovered the wheel a million years ago, and then someone discovered the combustion engine 100 years ago, the Ferrari 458 Italia is not an innovative car.
The point is Ferrari did it best! Everyone wants one, so it???s innovating. If Skoda had done it first, since the technology was available, then they would innovate.
This is a moo discussion. Resistance is futile. You shall be Apple???d
and are "innovative" in nature, because, before they came to be used, they didn't exist in the realm of usable things by humans.
Improving on ways to create fire, does not innovate on the fire itself. Improving on the wheel, does not innovate on the invention of the wheel.
Creating a vehicle which takes advantage of the various inventions and innovations and discoveries, is innovation itself, even if the underlying components are not "new" or "innovative". A new type of engine would be innovation, but, once it's been innovated, it can be improved on, but not "innovated" on.
Get the diff?
Improving on ways to create fire, does not innovate on the fire itself. Improving on the wheel, does not innovate on the invention of the wheel.
Creating a vehicle which takes advantage of the various inventions and innovations and discoveries, is innovation itself, even if the underlying components are not "new" or "innovative". A new type of engine would be innovation, but, once it's been innovated, it can be improved on, but not "innovated" on.
Get the diff?
The discussion is always the same, with the same results. I cannot convince anyone because everyone is a fan of their own gadgets. Just take a look at phones before the iphone, tablets before the ipad, and you will see how apple re-invented and re-innovated on these devices.
Everyone is accusing each other of copying their technologies, but you cannot argue that after apple created their phone and tablet, everyone copied them. In hardware form, and operating system usage.
My only concern is that Apple is to blame for thousands of people losing their jobs in RIM, Nokia and who knows how many other companies, because these companies could not keep up with the evolution of technology that Apple sparked.
600 dollars a share? 4 million iphones in a weekend? 84 percent of tablet share?700000 apps available? 100 billion in cash flow?
Oh they innovated!
Everyone is accusing each other of copying their technologies, but you cannot argue that after apple created their phone and tablet, everyone copied them. In hardware form, and operating system usage.
My only concern is that Apple is to blame for thousands of people losing their jobs in RIM, Nokia and who knows how many other companies, because these companies could not keep up with the evolution of technology that Apple sparked.
600 dollars a share? 4 million iphones in a weekend? 84 percent of tablet share?700000 apps available? 100 billion in cash flow?
Oh they innovated!
they just improved and enhanced, which is still a pretty good thing to do, especially if it can make you lots of dough.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
