Apple

[chum1]

They get way too much credit for being innovative.  Hey, a phone is a phone.  A laptop is a laptop.  A media player is a media player.  In summary, eff Apple and their lemmings.

[EllToPay]

They're marketing genuises.

[WillieWatanabe]

They're marketing genuises.

[ew2x4]

They're just good at refining existing technology and passing it off as "magical" and "revolutionary". It's sad so many people actually believe them.

Something that will be obsolete in a year (could be argued it's already obsolete) is in no way magical, nor revolutionary.

[AzCat]

'tards focus on the technology when the genius is cornering the market in different forms of media.  Apple is to an increasing number of forms of media what Microsoft has been to software.  The innovation is in the leveraging of the technology rather than the technology itself. 

[michigancat]

The iphone and ipod were revolutionary products.  You really can't deny that.

[_33]

Apple is like the yankees or the lakers.  You either love them or hate them, but you can't deny the fact that they are better than whatever you like.

[chum1]

Cell phones and (maybe) mp3 players are revolutionary.  They didn't invent the technology for either.  They just put their box and brand on them.  

Bravo to anyone who thinks that one phone or mp3 player brand is better than all the rest.   

[michigancat]

Cell phones and (maybe) mp3 players are revolutionary.  They didn't invent the technology for either.  They just put their box and brand on them. 

Bravo to anyone who thinks that one phone or mp3 player brand is better than all the rest.   

Didn't say they were better than what's out there, I said they were revolutionary.

[chum1]

Didn't say they were better than what's out there

:rusty:

[pissclams]

Apple didn't invent the phone/mp3 player but they did redefine what a phone is and how to integrate one into a person's life.  From the operating system to the hardware itself, they completely redefined it all, and set the gold standard while doing so.  Meanwhile, every other manufacturer was happy designing and delivering crap.

Again, to me the key is how Apple has been able to take all of these disparate pieces of technology and link them together, and then integrate them into people's everyday lives.

There's a lot of things I don't like about Apple but I'm willing to give credit where credit is due.  Eventually they will be forced to change the iphone environment as they get overtaken by open source/Android but they've made and will continue to make a killing for a long time going forward.

[chum1]

Apple didn't really go over and above what was already out there: BlackBerry, Palm, and cameras and mp3 players in phones were common.

[michigancat]

Apple didn't really go over and above what was already out there: BlackBerry, Palm, and cameras and mp3 players in phones were common.

Yes they did.

[chum1]

Apple didn't really go over and above what was already out there: BlackBerry, Palm, and cameras and mp3 players in phones were common.

Yes they did.

Not in terms of functionality.  I'm not sure what else is as important with regard to innovation.  Making it idiot friendly?  Giving it a sexy image?

[hemmy]

Apple's marketing is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!), no idea why people like it.

[michigancat]

Apple didn't really go over and above what was already out there: BlackBerry, Palm, and cameras and mp3 players in phones were common.

Yes they did.

Not in terms of functionality.  I'm not sure what else is as important with regard to innovation.  Making it idiot friendly?  Giving it a sexy image?

Making something idiot-friendly is most definitely a part of functionality.

[_33]

Apple's marketing is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!), no idea why people like it.

If something works really well and people love it but you think it's Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!), chances are you are completely wrong.

[hemmy]

Apple's marketing is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!), no idea why people like it.

If something works really well and people love it but you think it's Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!), chances are you are completely wrong.

Many people believe in man made global warming too, doesn't mean its real. 

Seriously though, the PC vs Mac commercials were complete garbage.  Every single one of them Apple just trashed Windows, and most of the things they said weren't true.  People ate that crap up though, hence they are Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).

[chum1]

Apple didn't really go over and above what was already out there: BlackBerry, Palm, and cameras and mp3 players in phones were common.

Yes they did.

Not in terms of functionality.  I'm not sure what else is as important with regard to innovation.  Making it idiot friendly?  Giving it a sexy image?

Making something idiot-friendly is most definitely a part of functionality.

It's not nearly as significant of an innovation as text or email in a phone.  But if you're saying that one of Apple's greatest attributes is that they are able to deliver products that are easy for people to use, I'm not going to argue.  I'm just not as impressed with it as people seem to think I should be.

[_33]

Apple's marketing is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!), no idea why people like it.

If something works really well and people love it but you think it's Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!), chances are you are completely wrong.

Seriously though, the PC vs Mac commercials were complete garbage.  Every single one of them Apple just trashed Windows, and most of the things they said weren't true.  People ate that crap up though, hence they are Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).

You said the marketing was Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).  Making a ton of people believe "untrue" things about PC's and thus persuading them to buy Macs doesn't seem Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).  It seems brilliant.

[michigancat]

It's not nearly as significant of an innovation as text or email in a phone.

That's debatable.  (Also, FWIW, I don't own any apple products and don't plan to any time soon.  I just recognize them for what they are).

[kougar24]

Apple is really, really, really good at convincing people that they're designing products from the customer point of view (i.e. "giving the people what they want"), when in reality it's the other way around: people have been duped into wanting whatever Apple puts out.

Now, to Apple's credit, they're able to do this because back in the day with the iPod and to a lesser extent the iMac before it, they really did design those products to adhere to the voice of the customer, thus building their brand equity to the point where now, Steve Jobs can pretty much put the Apple logo on anything and people will clamor for it and claim they've been "waiting for this!" since "way back when."

[ew2x4]

The only thing revolutionary about the iphone is that it standardized multitouch and accelerometers. Both of which had been around for years, but nobody had a need to put them into phones. It pushed the market for smartphones dramatically. A product as a whole, I'd go back to my original post. It's just repackaged existing technology, built for mass consumption. The fact that people would spend $5-900 for first generation technology that currently has nothing more than a niche market is a joke and shows how sheepish people are, though.

[OK_Cat]

enjoy your razr, d00d.

[michigancat]

It's just repackaged existing technology, built for mass consumption. The fact that people would spend $5-900 for first generation technology that currently has nothing more than a niche market is a joke and shows how sheepish people are, though.

Are you still talking about the iphone?