Earlier quoted context omitted.
You have to be careful with that list. You need to look not just at the direct products produced (which may not be disruptive in the classical sense), but also at the positive externalities that they effect. Apple made the computer personal when it was founded (or at least that is my impression). That didn't disrupt too many people, but think of all the secondary effects. People could learn to program, people could a…
I don't see your point. Your reference to "positive externalities" is the same as what I meant by "new value".
It should be Fair to say that the popularization of software, hardware and search has disrupted quite a few industries via secondary effects - which is what companies on the second list have done (the ones you list as non-disruptive).
Google has destroyed the newspaper advertising model. Oracle has destroyed the big corporate/government back offices (not all). Apple destroyed a great many jobs (via popularization of PCs -> Lotus Notes/App development).
My point is that they are disruptive companies :).