Skip Navigation

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context
668 comments
  • You think Tim Apple is coming up with their innovations? Lol

    • Yeah dude, just look at all the innovations Apple has made to their phones for like the last 10 years...

      They got bigger... and the screens are brighter... and there are like 4 more cameras.

      So much innovation. :|

      • while I do completely agree with Apple depressing lack of any innovation recently, until modern foldable phones become commonplace, there is only so much you can do with a brick of glass.

          • before the display - "until you can figure out how to make a faster printer, there's only so much you can do to get your calculation results from the ENIAC system."

          • before the keyboard - "until you figure out a way to create punch-cards faster, there's only so much you can do to enter data into a computer."

          • before the mouse - "until you figure out a way to make people tap the arrow keys faster, there's only so much you can do to navigate a screen array of interactive elements."

          • before GUI operating systems - "until people get faster at typing in "DIR /P" on their keyboards and read the list of possible applications quicker than other folks, there's only so much you can do to navigate and access a computer's installed software."

          • before the iPhone - "Until you figure out a way to make a better keyboard there's only so much you can do with these Blackberry devices where half of the device is a screen and the other half is a full-size QWERTY keyboard."

          There is room for innovation.

          Just because you cannot imagine it, does not mean we have reached some sort of "pinnacle" of design for these stupid little glass screens.

          Apple has not innovated since Jobs died. Not because Jobs was some sort of genius engineer or even a great innovator, but because as Apple's head, Jobs was an asshole tyrant that terrified those below him into doing crazy things he suggested on a whim... and sometimes that meant they came up with dumb shit like the 20th Anniversary Mac and the Newton... and other times it meant they came up with a couple of new good ideas like the iPod, and the iPhone.

      • That's kind of a dumb way to make the point. Innovation isn't necessarily apparent in a photo with no context or information. A bronze sword and a steel sword still both look like swords, but there a huge technological difference between them.

        • Yeah photos don’t encompass the entirety of evolving technology… but come on… it’s not like Apple has put the iPhone through a literal evolution of metallurgy or material science like the hundreds of years time difference from going between the bronze to steel age.

          • Your implied point was that there wasn't any innovation, but there was, by your own admission above.

            Don't shift the goalposts by latching onto an analogy I made. The fact is that the technology has progressed quite quickly over the timespan represented in those pictures, and that fact underscores what's wrong with the post you were responding to - it wasn't a handful of rich folk that did it, it was the work of hundreds of thousands of people around the world. You had a much better point to make than the one you did.

            • Calm down. No one is shifting goalposts. You’re the one who brought up the ridiculous idea of making a comparison between pictures of different types of swords.

              My original “implied point” was that there is not the same level of innovation that occurred 20 years ago when we shifted from things like Nokias with tiny screens and not enough space to even hold a midi file to BlackBerry and then iPhone.

              The entire tech industry has consolidated over the last couple of decades to the point that every major startup these days ends up being a grift, or quickly gobbled up by one of the FAANG type companies and enshittified to avoid competition and market share erosion.

              I didn’t say a handful of rich people did anything. I actually believe the opposite.

              Passion drives innovation… not money. Money helps pay passionate people to innovate, but it also sometimes will stifle innovation when seeking profit first.

              I was saying with my shitpost pic showing the visual similarity between all the different models of iPhone from the last decade that - at least from a base standpoint, Apple is not really innovating much anymore. No different shapes, bezels, no thickness increases for better battery life… Hell the fucking LIGHTNING port is ancient now and only still there so Apple can keep getting their bridge troll toll for people making iPhone accessories.

              For the last 10 iPhone iterations the major features we can easily see are slightly bigger brighter screens, more lenses (and consequently better pictures) and trading fingerprint recognition for facial recognition.

              As far as points though, please - by all means, make a better point for me.

        • Okay but we all know iPhones and we all know that's about it.

      • Hey, they came up with some interesting colours no one has used in 80 years.

    • No, but it takes a person to control a company. A Person to direct the goals of a company. So I guess Tim Apple is somewhat involved if there is innovation or not.

      • No it doesn't. Worker-owned co-ops exist. Didn't you say you're in Germany? You should know all about that.

        • I don’t know what you think of us Germans. But we are rational capitalists. And I do believe to know a lot about it.

            • In the last link it literally says: “These comparatively low wages can make it very difficult to recruit managers from investor-owned firm”

              These concepts only work in relatively small companies. And first off all, this company might be ranked relatively high in Spain, but it still is just Spain.

              Further, to my understanding, the group could be actually described as multiple smaller companies housed under a big one. So that explains that party.

              • I'm just fascinated with how brains like yours work. Assuming any of this is in good faith, that is.

                It's like you just refuse to accept new information that may change how you view things. You're so resistant to admitting (to yourself, it seems) that you might be wrong, that your brain has "mechanisms" for making sure you never even have to consider the possibility.

                Every single point anyone makes, you are able to come up with some "counter" that, in your mind, confirms that you've always been right (it doesn't), and everyone who's arguing with you is just trying to trick you into admitting you were wrong, or that you learned something.

                It can never just be, "hey I didn't know that about my country, that's interesting. Maybe I should reconsider..." Because, you know, Germany has been the most financially successful EU nation basically since he inception of the Union, so your counter that worker stake in companies doesn't work is not based in reality. They're fucking thriving. You (allegedly) live there, my guy. Learn about why your own country is so successful.

                The lengths you will go to avoid learning something new or admitting you might have been wrong about something... Like it's protecting itself from new information. It's fascinating.

                • I'm just fascinated with how brains like yours work. Assuming any of this is in good faith, that is.

                  I am a connoisseur of discussion. A man who enjoys discourse. But indeed what I stated are my firm beliefs. And those beliefs have not yet failed me.

                  It's like you just refuse to accept new information that may change how you view things.

                  It always depends on the information. Some information just has less weight to it.

                  You're so resistant to admitting (to yourself, it seems) that you might be wrong, that your brain has "mechanisms" for making sure you never even have to consider the possibility.

                  Now I feel like I've been put on the spot. This might apply on some of my standpoints. But none so far in our discussion here.

                  Every single point anyone makes, you are able to come up with some "counter" that, in your mind, confirms that you've always been right (it doesn't),

                  Oh, just because the Information I have given, does not convince you or support your standpoint, doesn’t make it invalid. I’d like to pull up the Infinite Monkey Theorem at this point. A few false informations can also lead to the correct outcome. But now I have lost the thread.

                  and everyone who's arguing with you is just trying to trick you into admitting you were wrong, or that you learned something.

                  And are you not trying to prove me wrong? Is it not, that you claim my standpoints to be somewhat flawed, and yours must be the ultimate ratio?

                  It can never just be, "hey I didn't know that about my country, that's interesting. Maybe I should reconsider..."

                  I do reconsider when it’s to my benefit. But as said before, my standpoints have yet to fail me.

                  Because, you know, Germany has been the most financially successful EU nation basically since he inception of the Union, so your counter that worker stake in companies doesn't work is not based in reality. They're fucking thriving.

                  Average wealth per person in Germany is lower than in Italy or Greece. some german article to back up my claims Germany are not thriving. The German government is thriving.

                  You (allegedly) live there, my guy. Learn about why your own country is so successful.

                  Because it has the highest and second highest taxes in many sectors. And the government uses this money to influence other countries to their benefit. My people are not thriving. I wished for a concept similar to Switzerland. Still high taxes, but the money stays in the country without attempts to control European politics.

                  The lengths you will go to avoid learning something new or admitting you might have been wrong about something... Like it's protecting itself from new information. It's fascinating.

                  From my standpoint of course, this is the opposite standpoint.

You've viewed 668 comments.