Yeah, im way out of line. There are no people here that give Apple credit for anything and everything around here. What makes me "extremely defensive" is not "innovate" and "Apple" but "stupid" and "Apple-zealot".
This goes back to what I said in my earlier reply. If you're going to call me out, call me out for something I did, not for something you think I did. There are absolutely idiot Apple zealots here, and there are absolutely people who have some common sense here. Don't confuse the two.
You may find that ridiculous, i dont. Then again, i study tech for a living and on top of that find it fascinating to follow the origin of things. Clearly, i cannot expect everyone else to have the same background.
It's not ridiculous that you think it would have happened anyway, it's ridiculous that you act as if it was imminent and Apple wasn't doing something revolutionary. You downplay what Apple did by saying capacitive screens were getting cheaper...as if that's the only reason Apple was able to do what they did as far as the iPhone's success. If that's not what you're implying then what are you? That eventually sometime in the 21st century someone would have done it? Ok...I guess...doesn't make the fact that Apple did it when they did any less revolutionary.
It was, from a business point of view - not from a technological innovation perspective however, at least not in my book.
I wouldn't know much about your book, since you refuse to provide a link to an article you've written, all the while saying you've written many and that this is "what you do for a living"...where's the proof? You just sound like a fraud when you say those things.
I helped Apple invent the iPhone that's why I believe it was revolutionary. I will provide zero proof of such.
And yet again i ask, which parts? No one ever really gave me an answer on this. I wonder why.
I think the only answer you'd be satisfied with is someone proving that Android is a shot for shot 100% clone of iOS. Multiple people have said in this very thread what they think was copied. You're ignoring what they're saying. If you want a specific answer and will discount any other answer, tell us exactly what you wanna hear. Maybe someone will oblige.
And, i have qualified that statement more than once by now. You, on the other hand, have never said anything other than "Apple did it, therefore no one else did". Why are you so unable to even begin at giving the rest of us an argument for your position? WHY wouldnt it have happened? What is it that Apple saw that no one else would ever see, despite all the trends pointing in that direction. Riddle me that.
See above. "It didnt" is not a valid argument.
"It would have" is not a valid argument either. Again like I mentioned above, you seem to think that I am saying that Apple created iOS and then Google gained the source code for it, cloned it and called it Android. Take off the glasses. That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying, and what you've yet to disprove, is that it wasn't "just gonna happen anyway". If you want to qualify it by adding 70 years to the timeline then yeah you'd be right, it probably would have happened. But Apple did not usurp some lowly company who was working hard to release their OS. The truth is, unless you have evidence to back it up, there was no one who was working on a device that incorporated the tech that apple did at the time, so it wasn't gonna "happen anyway"
And when did i deny any of this? Other than the aforementioned reservation that is.
The aforementioned reservation is what I was talking about.
Have i ever contested that?
No, and if you'll notice I didn't say "in the next breath, you divinox, contested that"...kind of like what you do when you call me out for things I never said. It was simply a statement that I was using to bolster my opinion that what Apple did was revolutionary
But they were. Had they launched earlier they wouldve most likely failed. Had they launched much earlier, well... lets put it this way, it would have been harder to create such a bang.
Yes...they were, my point is that no other company was going to do it. Apple did it at the right time at the right place, and had enough vision to make it something revolutionary. You already admitted previously that they did not have some unfair advantage that no other company had, so clearly "right time right place" is not the sole reason they were so successful.
As for verge, i never really said anything about time. In fact, ive stated more than once that Apple may have brought us the future somewhat sooner than what would have otherwise been the case. Key here is that the future, to a large extent, was already given.
Proof? All I need is a link.
That was KnightWRXs argument. I only provided theoretical basis for it, showing that it could indeed be rational to do so.
Well you jumped into an argument where something was presented as fact, and then failed to provide any evidence that it was actually happening. Had KnightWRX said "theoretically this could have happened" you would be right. He didn't. He stated that companies like "HP, MSFT, IBM sit on patents without ever suing"...I wasn't calling him out, I simply asked for an example as I had never heard of that. Neither you nor him were able to provide one.
No, i started out that very argument with economics and game theory. Completely in line with what was said above. Now drop this.
You asked me for examples of your ridiculous statements. I provided them.
(EDIT: just looked it up, seems it's an Amiga feature first showing up in 1985).
