theabsinthehare
Distinguished
[citation][nom]filmman03[/nom]+1 absinthe im trying to understand your point; but i cannot sit here and believe that Apple has actually "innovated" anything. if you are correct in what you say; then it would mean all of us who mod our cars or computers are technically innovating that stuff. Apple takes something that was successful or not; changes stuff... and what I mean by that is adding parts from other manufacturers paired w/ the iOS, again Unix, and call it "innovation" just doesn't add up. It especially doesn't add up when other companies like Samsung, Google, Motorolla, etc take Apple's base, the iPhone, and change everything to "innovate" it.... but then Apple calls them out and says that isn't allowed b/c of some bogus patents. o and not to mention the name "iphone" was taken from another company, but did apple get permission to use it? no.[/citation]
Okay. The first person to create a radial tachometer invented the tachometer. The first person to put it in their car is an innovator, even though they didn't invent it. They took something that existed, and did something with it that was better than what came before.
Now, if you see that guy that put the radial tachometer in his car and you also put a radial tachometer in your car, but you choose a blue one, you are neither an inventor or innovator. You simply copied. If you see the guy that put the radial tachometer in his car and you put a digital tachometer in your car, and mount it flush with the other readouts, you are an innovator. You didn't invent the tachometer, but you did something with the idea that was different and better than before.
Now let's look at the iPad as an example. Not the first tablet computer. However, the first tablet computers were heavy, had short battery life, were single touch and used desktop operating systems that made them difficult to use.
Apple took the idea of the tablet computer (did not invent it) made it thinner/lighter, added multi-touch capabilities, gave it longer battery life and developed an operating system specifically for a multi-touch screen mobile device.
They took something that was not well engineered and they added things that made it user friendly. They vastly improved on a previous idea so much that it was an instant success. That is innovation.
Now, Samsung comes along, and they take the idea of a tablet that is very iPad like, except they don't add anything innovative to it. It has the same features as an iPad. It has differences. Different operating system, different look, etc, but there's nothing *new.* They did not add anything of value. That is not innovation, that is copying.
Pre iPad tablets -> iPad (Huge jump in added features and usability)
iPad -> Samsung tablet (No jump in added features or usability)
Okay. The first person to create a radial tachometer invented the tachometer. The first person to put it in their car is an innovator, even though they didn't invent it. They took something that existed, and did something with it that was better than what came before.
Now, if you see that guy that put the radial tachometer in his car and you also put a radial tachometer in your car, but you choose a blue one, you are neither an inventor or innovator. You simply copied. If you see the guy that put the radial tachometer in his car and you put a digital tachometer in your car, and mount it flush with the other readouts, you are an innovator. You didn't invent the tachometer, but you did something with the idea that was different and better than before.
Now let's look at the iPad as an example. Not the first tablet computer. However, the first tablet computers were heavy, had short battery life, were single touch and used desktop operating systems that made them difficult to use.
Apple took the idea of the tablet computer (did not invent it) made it thinner/lighter, added multi-touch capabilities, gave it longer battery life and developed an operating system specifically for a multi-touch screen mobile device.
They took something that was not well engineered and they added things that made it user friendly. They vastly improved on a previous idea so much that it was an instant success. That is innovation.
Now, Samsung comes along, and they take the idea of a tablet that is very iPad like, except they don't add anything innovative to it. It has the same features as an iPad. It has differences. Different operating system, different look, etc, but there's nothing *new.* They did not add anything of value. That is not innovation, that is copying.
Pre iPad tablets -> iPad (Huge jump in added features and usability)
iPad -> Samsung tablet (No jump in added features or usability)