Hacker News Reader

Comment by gnaffle | Hacker News Reader

I think Apple can rightly be credited with making smartphones and tablets mainstream. Smartphones and tablets were niches before the iPhone. Microsoft had tried for years pushing Windows Tablet Edition, but it only became a niche.

Do you think that was only because those devices lacked a capacitive touchscreen? If so, then why did every other company have to scratch their mobile platform after the iPhone came along? Why didn't Microsoft make Metro in 2006, after all, the techology was available (I tried a Panasonic Toughbook with a capacitive display way before that).

I agree that others should be credited for their inventions. Both RIM and others like Nokia helped pushed the technology forward, but they did so very gradually. It took an outsider to disrupt the industry (luckily, Apple had killed off the Newton, or they probably woudn't have had the incentive to do so).

View on HN

I agree with you about tablets but not about smartphones, some people back then, this in 2006, were discussing just how smartphones would be the future once they became cheap, this is what happened.

Besides everything being touch based, which was really disruptive, I believe a real disruption in the iPhone was that it included a full browser and not the mobile crap that existed back then, apps were good, but it was something that existed in other smartphones although without the centralized distribution medium, but they did exist.

Now some people are saying that Apple reign will not last just because smartphone prices will follow the same path that feature phones prices walked in the last 10 years, they will become much cheaper than now, I do not know about Apple remaining the leader or not but I do believe that smartphone prices will be really cheap in 2020, even for developing nations.

EDIT: typo and correction in the last paragraph.

No one would deny the incredible commercial success of Apple: It has changed the industry. Few would argue against the notion that Apple brought a fit and finish and UI model that completely changed the baseline of the industry as well, significantly raising the bar. The Apple quality tide lifted all boats, though some are still trying to bail out water and catch up.

For those right choices Apple has yielded incredible riches: Profits never before seen, quarter after quarter. They're a half-a-trillion dollar company.

All I argue about is this revisionist history that acts, essentially, like Apple is entitled to everything. That they borrowed nothing and created everything. It seems like I'm arguing against a strawman there, but it is too common of an opinion. It is an argument that is based upon taking the smallest trivia of Apple's implementation and making it the most profound, important thing ever, while everything else doesn't matter.

Another thing that we are missing here is Apple is expected to make products with great UI!

History of their company in making such products automatically creates a media hype around the products. Its like so long as products are not very bad, they are always good. And assumed to be so! They have done a lot of work to make that happen and deserve it too.

Don't forget that iPhone and iPad got the push because iPod generation of devices did a very good job convincing common folks that handheld devices can be usable. Again apple needs to be credited for this.

Android can be told to have copied iPhone's trend. Not as a product.

As you said others have done a better job building ecosystem to ensure such an innovation happens.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com