That’s not how innovation works, which is what the op started with.Eh?
The product is a smartphone, there is absolutely nothing disruptive about it whatsoever. The things you listed are just features of the phone. Facial recognition (regardless of how it was implemented) isn't new either.
[doublepost=1514480839][/doublepost]
Ok we fundamentally disagree on basic definitions.Disruptive means that it creates a completely new kind of business - disrupting existing business.
Like Apple II, iPod, iPhone, Newton did. FaceID while great technology is only replacing TouchID without functional enhancement (as of yet) - so it wouldn't be my example of disruptive.
A better example woud be a TouchMac: combining and cannibalizing current Mac and iPad. That would require real courage - which the Board clearly considers a step too far.
So it leaves the innovation opportunity to Microsoft with SurfacePro and will respond as soon as that becomes successful. Same with Samsung and inductive charging