You're still missing the point - yes, everybody has access to the same hardware components that Apple does but it's the way that Apple integrates them into their products that distinguishes them.
By your definition Apple never innovated in their history because any other manufacturer could have done the same thing with technology that existed at the time. So by your estimation a Mercedes and a Scion are essentially the same car.
No you're missing the point. That "integration" you are referring too has a name. It's called "SOFTWARE". Apple can't and don't make a better circuit board trace or PCI or Sata bus to connect 2 pieces of hardware. Nor do their hardware devices include magical pieces of hardware that are missing from other vendors. Apples hardware is different from other vendors in 2 distinct ways:
1) The visual aesthetic of their cases.
2) The physical assembly of the hardware pieces, which unsurprisingly is driven by 1.
Apple doesn't innovate in any meaningful way on the hardware front. Almost all of their hardware is purchased from 3rd parties. They don't make screens. They don't make batteries. They buy reference ARM designs for their chips on iOS devices or stock Intel chips for their Macs. (ARM doesn't manufacture chips, so EVERYONE buys reference ARM designs and has someone else physically manufacture them.) They buy hard drives from Seagate and Western Digital. They buy track pads from Synoptics. They buy memory from Samsung (among others). The unibody aluminum cases were not invented by Apple either. They took the exact same machining technology used in the manufacture of various Aircraft and Military equipment cases and applied it to manufacture a computer case. (You might make the argument that just doing that is innovative, and while novel, it didn't require the production of any new intellectual property.) They buy Wifi chips. And on and on and on. So NO. Apple doesn't invent much (if any) hardware technology. They buy and assembly almost all of their technology, just like all computer and device manufactures today. They combine it with truly unique software (mostly unique from a UX, not functional perspective) and some unique process innovations. (eq application of Aircraft milling to cases).
As for your car analogy, that is also fatally flawed on 2 grounds. First Scion and Mercedes are both cars. And they both could largely build the same car. Mercedes differentiates their "hardware" in the quality of the components they choose. (eq Better engines, better finish materials, larger brakes, wheels, etc.) And secondly, Mercedes has in fact invented new "hardware" over the years. They've invented various safety systems, for example anti-lock brakes.
Apple pre-Steve Jobs act 2 was much close to a true hardware company in that they designed and manufactured their hardware. In Jobs act 2, Apple could no longer afford to do that, so Apple turned first to Motorola, then IBM, and now Intel (and ARM) to source it's parts and reference designs, while they focused on software, aesthetics, UX, marketing, and sales.
