Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by SmokeyRobinson, Dec 23, 2010.
I think the author's confused "Innovator" with "Large Money Maker"...
MS has done a few things very well lately. But to say they are the most innovative company in the tech industry is comical.
Even though the term "innovative" is diluted in this day because nearly anything one can imagine is patented. So as the article points out, it's all about how much money you make.
This IS one of those times when I can say, Ah, Hell naw!
There is no way Microsoft deserves this one. The only innovative thing they have put out is Kinect. That's about it. The rest are just "me-toos" to the entire market.
I don't think Apple have been particularly innovative this year... iPad *may* have been, it certainly stirred the tablet market. Its put a usable GUI on a tablet with plenty of battery life. Shame its a closed system, all applications have to be blessed by Apple.
A Hi-Res display on a cell phone is just an iterative improvement....
FaceTime isn't innovative... video calling isn't new and its [FaceTime] usage is limited - that being WIFI only. Open WIFI isn't available everywhere.
AirTime isn't new either, my TV has supported wireless media ( including video ) play from PCs for over 12 months.. shame it just doesn't support OSX :-(
I don't think microsoft really deserves title of "Most Innovative Company" either... One thing for sure, Kinetic / similar implementations are going to make a huge an impact. Microsoft should open this up and make this available to other products. If they do, they are on to a winner.
A late-to-the-game phone that might have been impressive three years ago + a motion-sensing Xbox add-on?
They've gotta be kidding.
Where has all their R&D money been going?? Coffee runs and new chairs?
What they have done for the computer and gaming industry in the last decade means they more than deserve it over Apple. Anyone denying that is just plain fanboyish.
Gaming, yes (except for mobile, which is what really matters.)
Everything else . . . there's a reason Apple has MS in their rearview these days. Inflicting another version of Windows/Office upon hapless users (especially in the enterprise) is not innovation. It's milking a dying cow.
The really comical fact here is that MS spends "more" on R&D than Apple, with barely anything to show for it.
MS needs new management. Badly.
Honestly, I feel like the most innovative companies are really the 'little guys' that no one hears about until a big company acquires their tech and introduces it to a wider audience. I mean, where would Apple be with out IP from FingerWorks or MS without PrimeSense? Sure, it takes time and talent to take the raw materials based on someone else's IP and turn it into an touch iDevice or Kinect but it would be nice if the smaller companies got credit where credit was due.
I don't know why I'm even asking but care to explain why mobile gaming is the only form of gaming that matters w/o, in any way, shape or form, tying it back to Apple?
Well in the past year Apple has not exactly brought much to the table. They brought updates but that was it.
MS has their gaming stuff, WP7 and they also have everything they do in the enterprise world which much of it is pretty innovating just it is not in the consumer face so very few people know or care much about it.
I agree with this. There isn't anything this year that Apple was innovative. You can argue the iPad and maybe the iPhone 4( and that is a big maybe), but I rank the Kinect a greater innovation then the iPad and iPhone 4( I seriously love the Kinect. Games have to catch up to it, but they will in time). If this was 2007 or 2008, I would be saying they would be smoking crack( 2007 with the iPhone and 2008 with the MBA and unibody MBP's), but MS deserves it this year.
Some people are still paid by Microsoft to say good things about MS.
I think I recall MS spending more on advertising than R&D. And some of the advertising money goes to shills.
LOL. Surely changing the tablet industry (something MS has tried and failed for a decade) isn't innovative at all.
Do you know Kinect was bought by MS? Surely buying an interesting product = innovative.
Because it's the only place where Apple competes?
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
I wouldn't worry about it too much. TheStreet got it wrong, while ten others will get it right (or already have.)
The only real innovation MS is capable of these days is copying Apple, but even that practice has become commonplace industry-wide.
You will find that is the case with most top selling products nowadays. Let's see what innovation Apple have brought to the table this year:
iPad (a large iPod touch really)
An iPhone with terrible antenna issues
The worst iLife yet
A social network (how original)
FaceTime (which is just webcam support between iOS and OS X. Which was previously achived by Yahoo Messenger.)
This year has not been Apple's year. Just upgrades of stuff we already have. Kinect alone wins the award in my opinion, whether it was developed by Microsoft or not.
And Apple didn't invent the GUI, mouse, iTunes, etc. They bought/were given the rights to them or bought the company out. Yet, they are credited for those innovative products.
People like you still exist?
I'm not in anyway denying that the iPad is useful. I got one for my gran this Christmas and she loves it. But seriously, it's just a larger version of the iTouch. No denying it.
Does anybody really care what a magazine, website, blog, et. al. says about who is #1 in ______ category? I couldn't care less about Kinect, in fact I won an XBox 360 with Kinect at our company Christmas party and the GF promptly sold in on Amazon the next day.
What Street or any other site/blog/group says has zero affect on the products I use
If you want Apple #1, start a blog and proclaim Apple the winner of your "most innovative company for 2010" award and give them a "leg lamp", after it is a major award
But honestly, does it really make any difference?
It is like Car and Driver naming ____ as car of the year
Who cares? I buy the car I want regardless of what some magazine says
That is sort of right. However, GUI and mouse are items that might just items that may never see themselves outside labs if not for Apple. Kinect was being shopped to different buyers. Plus, Wii and iOS already demonstrated that the motion control games can be profitable, so Microsoft isn't heading into can we make motion control profitable segment.
A good part of what people know as GUI, such as drag-and-drop is developed at Apple.
I wrote a long article about apple gui myths, here's page 4 on the GUI inventions:
to me fair the motion control by Wii and iOS both require another device to be used for it.
Kinect does not require you holding anything else. It tracks your movements on its own.
As for people saying the iPad should be so great.
I ask what makes it really that much different than an large iPod touch. Everything I have seen it is does not make it that much difference than an over size iPod touch.
One thing that was invented at Microsoft that would make life lots lots easier for everyone and that has never seen the light of day: A system that prevents spam by making it costly for the sender to send an email. Basically, to send me an unsolicited email, you have to spend say 60 seconds of CPU time. Which limits any spammer to about 1000 spam emails per day. The algorithms very, very cleverly designed to be limited by memory latency, which is the one thing in computers that scales least well, so buying a bunch of eight core machines doesn't help much. (If I _want_ emails from you, I can send you something similar to a pre-paid envelop). So people at Microsoft _can_ innovate, it just doesn't get out of their labs.
Then why did nobody else do it before Apple? The iPod Touch was available for 2 1/2 years before the iPad was released. So what stopped everyone else from building a "larger version of the iTouch"?
That's not "sort of right"; it's completely right.
Apple didn't invent touchscreen, or smart phones, or apps for smart phones either. They just did what they're best at: putting existing technologies together really well (and marketing the hell out of them).
But I too am confused at anyone calling Microsoft "innovative" since they put existing technologies together poorly, and don't market it particularly well (that whole "i'm a PC" campaign reminded me of people you see in a bus station on the wrong side of town).
Sadly some people are so emotionally connected to Apple that they see a report like this as an insult to 'their' company and hence themselves.
The first thing I thought when I saw this story was "What's the Street"?
The second was "I bet *LTD* will be along soon to argue that it's wrong".
well apple had a fair scaleable OS for it but does not change the fact.
In the past year Apple really has brought very little new the to the table. iOS got something that it was lacking big time (multitasking and even then it just brought it to wanna be level)
Facetime was a gimic and very limited. iPad was the biggest thing and like others pointed out multiple times it is more or less a big iPod touch.