Quote:
Originally Posted by PatNY
Size in and of itself is not innovation unless it genuinely took some sort of technological or engineering feat to achieve that size.
|
I agree.
I might argue (if I was pressed to argue) that the iPhone 5 does seem to have some innovation in that regard, for example.
Quote:
|
In this case, it did not.
|
I'll take your word for it.
Quote:
|
Forget the semantical slicing and dicing. Look at the iPad Mini objectively and try to say with a straight face that something new and different of a significant nature relative to the marketplace was accomplished here.
|
I have no position in the mini other than it doesn't particularly interest me. But at a glance, as I said, I'll take your word for it. I've seen nothing to suggest you're wrong.
For my part in this sub-thread, I was just amused by the definition post.
However, in the interest of integrating another sub-thread here, I do think the ORIGINAL iPad was innovative in a few ways, mostly involving the whole design+user experience gestalt.
There were tablets before...they were geek toys and not all that practical or popular.
There were smart phones and media players that were easy to use, but limited in what they could be used for, partially because of the size.
Combining the consumer usability, utility, and form factor as the iPad did was innovative, and a hugely successful innovation at that.
ApK