Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Feb 2012 17:53 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "Jobs called Android a 'stolen product', but theft can be a tricky concept when talking about innovation. The iPhone didn't emerge fully formed from Jobs's head. Rather, it represented the culmination of incremental innovation over decades - much of which occurred outside of Cupertino." Nothing particularly new in there for regular OSNews readers, but still handy to have it in one place.
Thread beginning with comment 508298
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I'mma just come out and say it
by earksiinni on Fri 24th Feb 2012 01:54 UTC
Member since:

I really don't understand why people don't understand the argument that Apple is innovative. Yes, they took most of their paradigms and design cues from others; yes, their design process is more iterative and evolutionary than they want consumers to think. But there is really no comparison whatsoever between the predecessor products and what Apple puts out. I don't even mean in terms of quality, and I *definitely* don't mean in terms of features, but Apple's products are almost always far more polished than those of their competitors.

It's precisely for that reason that I don't buy Apple, leaving aside their crummy corporate tactics and walled garden approach. I don't like that much polish in my software. I actually like like Sony's products in their entirety: the crappy software only emphasizes the brilliance of their hardware (some products, anyhow, and I don't buy Sony anymore either because they're an even worse company than Apple!)

That polish is called innovation, my friends.

Reply Score: 1

Yagami Member since:

Polish is Polish ! And Inovation is Inovation !

Apple just cannot rewrite the dictionary just to sell more !

So... if i copy Iphone, but make it a little bit more polished ... i just inovated a little ;)


But i do understand you, i know that Apple fanboys think that way ( and some non fanboys also ).


Its like saying : there were no linux before Ubuntu !

Your friends ;)

Edited 2012-02-24 02:40 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

earksiinni Member since:

So... if i copy Iphone, but make it a little bit more polished ... i just inovated a little ;)

Yes, precisely. That's exactly what I'm saying. Geeks don't seem to understand this.

You mentioned something about a dictionary. Unfortunately, that's the attitude about Apple that most geeks have: "this is the 'definition' of innovation and Apple is not conforming to that definition!" I think it's a very narrow (and arrogantly self-serving) way of thinking about innovation.

Its like saying : there were no linux before Ubuntu !'s like saying that desktop Linux was not so polished before Ubuntu. But I would never say that (how easily people forget about Knoppix and MEPIS). I specifically acknowledged that Apple is taking a lot of its paradigms from preexisting products (and research).

I should reiterate that I use the most unpolished software on earth and have never bought an Apple product.

Reply Parent Score: 1

leos Member since:

Polish is Polish ! And Inovation is Inovation !

Apple just cannot rewrite the dictionary just to sell more !

They're not rewriting the dictionary. You just didn't read the dictionary.

Here's what Wikipedia says about innovation:

Innovation is the creation of better or more effective products, processes, services, technologies, or ideas that are accepted by markets, governments, and society. Innovation differs from invention in that innovation refers to the use of a new idea or method, whereas invention refers more directly to the creation of the idea or method itself.

Almost everyone in this thread confused invention with innovation. Apple did not invent the smart phone. However they certainly innovated by creating the iPhone.

Reply Parent Score: 2

flypig Member since:

But I don't think the article is trying to claim Apple doesn't innovate. It's saying that by Apple's own definition of theft, the iPhone is a stolen product. It's got nothing to do with how others define innovation or theft; it's trying to hold Apple to their own definition.

In other words, if Android is a 'stolen product', then by the same definition, so is the iPhone. Both have borrowed heavily from those that came before it.

Personally, I think the article makes a good point, and I think it's a good thing. Apple builds on others' ideas. Others build on Apple's ideas. This is sometimes referred to as progress.

Reply Parent Score: 5

earksiinni Member since:

Oh absolutely. It's definitely a "stolen product" by the standards that Jobs laid out. I have always maintained that Apple is an evolutionary and, in many cases, creatively reactionary company. There is very little in terms of features or functionality or even design paradigms that come out of Cupertino that are revolutionary; the level of polish is, however, revolutionary, time and time again.

I'm just trying to be objective--at least, by my own principles, which I think most people here would disagree with. Few on OSNews would agree, I believe, that "level of polish" is something that can be defined as "revolutionary", which is perfectly fine. But when people start bashing Apple left and right for not being innovative because they took this and that design paradigm from somewhere else, they totally miss the point of why other people call the company innovative.

My comments was more directed at above commenters who decided to turn this into a tribunal judging Apple's innovativeness, a fracas stemming from a misunderstanding of the word "innovative" which I gladly joined in :-)

P.S.: To be clear, I agree with everything the article says; but as evidence of my point, take a look at what it has to say about the slide to unlock feature. Click on the YouTube link and watch the feature in action on that older phone. There is really no comparison whatsoever in terms of how polished the feature is on that phone and on the iPhone. Is Apple's feature stolen? Of course. Is Apple's implementation revolutionary and innovative because of how polished it is? Yes.

Edited 2012-02-26 17:30 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

Soulbender Member since:

but Apple's products are almost always far more polished than those of their competitors.

Or maybe it's because Apple has a huge PR machine that the small competitors and innovators can't match.

Reply Parent Score: 2

earksiinni Member since:

What does having a PR machine have to do with how polished your retail products are? Are you suggesting that the only reason why Apple's consumers think that their products are polished is because they are fooled into thinking so by Apple PR?

Reply Parent Score: 2