Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Never Invented Anything

mondaynote.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 217 posts

Re: Apple Never Invented Anything

#51

Post by jlgreco »

gnaffle wrote: post #16
drats wrote: post #5

I made this case last week. "Apple products are like a good classy restaurant or hotel chain. They take ingredients everyone has and put a lot of work into fit and finish, they make the customer feel special for a slightly higher price."[1] And I stand by it. I'll go even further actually, I think Apple is one of the least innovative big companies. Look at all the big research labs at Microsoft, Yahoo, IBM or Google.…

I think it's better to compare Apple to a high-end restaurant. You don't get three Michelin stars just by making the customer feel special and having lots of fit and finish, the food also has to be something special. Yet still, of course there are lots of people that will claim that those restaurants can't possibly be worth the price, and _has_ to be mostly about making the customers feel special, after all they use…

"the food also has to be something special"

"those restaurants can't possibly be worth the price"

First off, there is more to a dinning experience than the quality of the food, so even if the food is the same a price increase can be justified. You could serve me a McDonald's hamburger for 20USD and leave me satisfied with the transaction provided the burger was not all that I was getting... That burger would not be worth 20USD, but that would not necessarily say anything about the worth of the establishment itself.

Regardless, the question is not if the expensive food at high quality restaurants is particularly good, but rather "What is the relationship between quality and price?"

In the case of high class establishments, the food is certainly good and the price is certainly high. Is that a linear relationship though? The 50USD burger is undoubtedly better than many 5USD burgers, but is it 10x better?

Furthermore, does higher quality food always cause the same sort of price inflation? Or is it possible that similarly superb food sold at undoubtedly higher prices at a restaurant without the other things that high class establishments offer would likely be cheaper?

I would even dare state that, to some extent, high price can actually be one of the desirable services that a restaurant can offer. If you happen to be more concerned with appearances than (in the grand scheme of things) a small amount of money, then being expensive for expense's sake can be a feature.

Re: Apple Never Invented Anything

#52

Post by 001sky »

eckyptang wrote: post #40
gnaffle wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I guess with your insight Apple could have saved lots of money by not buying FingerWorks, PA Semi etc and just launching a Newton with a color display and make it look pretty. Right? If you don't see any software innovations in iOS, you're either blinded by Apple hate or unable to see further than checkboxes on feature lists.

I don't see how you managed to draw that conclusion. I didn't mention anything about money etc. I see it more like...well: Sony have been doing this sort of shit for years. Someone invents something, Sony adds turd polish and a decent supply chain and manufacturing capacity, then takes the market share. Apple just got better at it than Sony. There is no more story. For ref, I neither hate nor like iOS devices - I've…

Not to argue with your counter example, but another example re; integration. The Richochet from the 1990s was a 28.8 version of a 3/4G usb modem.

But that's not a tethered iPhone, in terms of is overall ambition and functionality. Similarly, the acorn with 8MB RAM, was not an integrated multi-media device (ipod, phone, etc), limited as it was. Let us not forget the power of the sw (youtube app, for example).[1]

Lastly, the innovation (in part on the business side) of the Ap store and ecosystem should not be completely overlooked. There is seamless delivery/monetization etc (not just collections, but outbound to devlepers).

In short, there is alot of originality in how the puzle is put together. Some of it is like the swiss army example. Some of it is in the conceptualiztion of the user experience. Some of it, quite frankly is execution of the physical product (manufacturing details, etc), as I have argued before. (e.g http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4435490)

I look at an acorn and a blackberry+phone on the desk. And I look at the iPhone. The latter looks like the victorinox, the other items like tools on the table.

EDIT: [1] The internet-integration of the acorn aps, i'm not familiar with; e.g. is not full-time connected online unless it had a built-in richochet or whatever. clearly iOS is meant to fully integrate with live information without compromising its mobility.

Re: Apple Never Invented Anything

#53

Post by upinsmoke »

cliang wrote: post #43
potatolicious wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "take other people's innovations and monetize them by polishing things up" The devil is in the polishing up, evidently. Your post is almost scarily indicative of the industry attitude that has allowed Apple to take over to the degree they have. Only hard, technical inventions are given any respect, and when we talk about UX we call it "polishing up", almost spitting those words out of our mouths in condescension. A…

> "Are you seriously going to hold up a clickwheel and say it wasn't innovative?" No one's saying that. All that is said is it's not entirely Apple's doing. In this case it was Synaptics.

They helped with the touch wheel, not the mechanical wheel from 1st gen iPod.

Re: Apple Never Invented Anything

#55

Post by kybernetikos »

arrrg wrote: post #24
drats wrote: post #5

I made this case last week. "Apple products are like a good classy restaurant or hotel chain. They take ingredients everyone has and put a lot of work into fit and finish, they make the customer feel special for a slightly higher price."[1] And I stand by it. I'll go even further actually, I think Apple is one of the least innovative big companies. Look at all the big research labs at Microsoft, Yahoo, IBM or Google.…

In the first two paragraphs you seem to say that they innovate while you deny that in the last paragraph. Perfecting fit and finish is quite obviously innovation.

The way I use the word, I usually intend it to mean covering a completely new idea. For me, execution, no matter how superior can never be innovative. It can of course be important, world changing, profitable, etc.

If I say that the ipad is not innovative, I mean precisely that there was no element of it that was an implementation of a completely new idea, but I don't mean to suggest that what Apple did with it is not amazing and transformative.

So yes, for me, innovative is usually a very high bar.

Jobs saw the mouse at Xerox and knew it was an idea whose time had come. The first mouse was innovative. The first optical mouse was innovative. The first mouse that reduced the number of buttons to one or reduced the cost to $30 was pragmatic and clever but not innovative.

Re: Apple Never Invented Anything

#56

Post by mbell »

cromwellian wrote: post #42

One interesting point is he brought up Einstein's invention of relativity. Notice that in the scientific community, humanity has been building upon previous work for centuries with no copyright or patent protection, and nothing more than honor, citation, and shame against plagiarists. The fundamental defense made by many is that without patent protection for software, people would not put much effort into innovating.…

> One interesting point is he brought up Einstein's invention of relativity.

He didn't invent, he discovered. I'm not just being pedantic, I think the approaches signified by these two words goes to the root of the differences your describing.

Re: Apple Never Invented Anything

#57

Post by mdonahoe »

5teev wrote: post #22
VengefulCynic wrote: post #2

Whenever I'm using "enterprise" software or some equally-awful tool that's sold using a feature checklist, I can't help but think about Steve Jobs's line about how innovation is saying no to 1000 things. edit: Well, a feature checklist and $50,000 worth of sales dinners, games of golf and "gifts that do not violate the professional ethics rules of the company buying said tool."

I suspect the worst software is the kind where the person buying it is not the person using it. This might also explain Apple's recent successes.

Can you clarify the point you are making?

Are you saying that Apple is succeeding because their customers are their users?

Or are you claiming Apple software sucks, and every ipad sold was a gift?

Re: Apple Never Invented Anything

#58

Post by Peaker »

mbell wrote: post #56
cromwellian wrote: post #42

One interesting point is he brought up Einstein's invention of relativity. Notice that in the scientific community, humanity has been building upon previous work for centuries with no copyright or patent protection, and nothing more than honor, citation, and shame against plagiarists. The fundamental defense made by many is that without patent protection for software, people would not put much effort into innovating.…

> One interesting point is he brought up Einstein's invention of relativity. He didn't invent, he discovered. I'm not just being pedantic, I think the approaches signified by these two words goes to the root of the differences your describing.

I believe patents apply to discoveries in the same way as inventions.

Re: Apple Never Invented Anything

#59

Post by ghshephard »

cromwellian wrote: post #42

One interesting point is he brought up Einstein's invention of relativity. Notice that in the scientific community, humanity has been building upon previous work for centuries with no copyright or patent protection, and nothing more than honor, citation, and shame against plagiarists. The fundamental defense made by many is that without patent protection for software, people would not put much effort into innovating.…

Just to keep things fact based, the recent court case against samsung did not cite the "Pinch-to-zoo-after-finger-contact-has-been-broken-and-restarted patent of 7,812,826.

You can read that patent here: http://www.google.com/patents/US7812826

And, even thought that patent was _not_ referenced in the case, you will see it's a particular multi-touch behavior _associated with pinch-to-zoom_ that apple is claiming a process invention against, not pinch to zoom. It's actually quite clever.

See: http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/30/3279628/apple-pinch-to-zoo... for good details on this myth.

Note - others have patented Pinch-to-Zoom far before Apple came to the stage.

Re: Apple Never Invented Anything

#60

Post by mtgx »

mbell wrote: post #56
cromwellian wrote: post #42

One interesting point is he brought up Einstein's invention of relativity. Notice that in the scientific community, humanity has been building upon previous work for centuries with no copyright or patent protection, and nothing more than honor, citation, and shame against plagiarists. The fundamental defense made by many is that without patent protection for software, people would not put much effort into innovating.…

> One interesting point is he brought up Einstein's invention of relativity. He didn't invent, he discovered. I'm not just being pedantic, I think the approaches signified by these two words goes to the root of the differences your describing.

Apple could say they "discovered" how to do pinch to zoom well or something.
Post reply on HN