guardianangel42
Distinguished
[citation][nom]balister[/nom]People need to learn, Steve Jobs was not an innovator over the last 10 years, he's been an iterator. What Jobs did was take ideas for other people that were seperated across multiple products and instead combined all those ideas into a single product.[/citation]
I don't like him either, but combining a slew of unrelated technologies and creating a single product is, in fact, called inovating.
It's not invention and, barring the multiple releases based on previous versions of the same product, not iteration.
iPod and iTunes: inovative. Why? Because while MP3 players existed before, they never had a true ecosystem to depend on. People had P2P software and ripped CDs, but iTunes allowed for a whole different way to buy media.
Both are crap today, with iTunes being one of the first things I uninstall when I am tweaking a client's computer, but the effect of the $1 song and the portable media player cannot be ignored.
The iPhone took a huge list of technologies that were invented by other people and put them together to create a single, fluid device that was fun and intuitive to use (compared to the competition of the time). It revolutionized the industry by changing the entire landscape.
The iPad, while not a new idea by any means, did things better because of the the multitouch screen and the UI designed for touch.
Personally I hate Apple. Partly because they succeed based on their excellent marketing, partly because they practice their little patent wars with their competitors, and partly because I think their products are horribly overpriced.
But I don't kid myself and say they haven't influenced anything. The original iPod, iPhone, and iPad are good devices; good enough that Apple's marketing only has to convince people they are slightly better than they are and worth a fair bit more than they are.
I'd probably own one if not for iTunes and Windows Phone 7.
I don't like him either, but combining a slew of unrelated technologies and creating a single product is, in fact, called inovating.
It's not invention and, barring the multiple releases based on previous versions of the same product, not iteration.
iPod and iTunes: inovative. Why? Because while MP3 players existed before, they never had a true ecosystem to depend on. People had P2P software and ripped CDs, but iTunes allowed for a whole different way to buy media.
Both are crap today, with iTunes being one of the first things I uninstall when I am tweaking a client's computer, but the effect of the $1 song and the portable media player cannot be ignored.
The iPhone took a huge list of technologies that were invented by other people and put them together to create a single, fluid device that was fun and intuitive to use (compared to the competition of the time). It revolutionized the industry by changing the entire landscape.
The iPad, while not a new idea by any means, did things better because of the the multitouch screen and the UI designed for touch.
Personally I hate Apple. Partly because they succeed based on their excellent marketing, partly because they practice their little patent wars with their competitors, and partly because I think their products are horribly overpriced.
But I don't kid myself and say they haven't influenced anything. The original iPod, iPhone, and iPad are good devices; good enough that Apple's marketing only has to convince people they are slightly better than they are and worth a fair bit more than they are.
I'd probably own one if not for iTunes and Windows Phone 7.