I'm not suggesting those were good ideas, only that they were rumors about innovative products that got a lot of attention, in part because everyone thought Apple must be up to something, because they hadn't made a big splash in a long time. Maybe the problem isn't that Apple's isn't innovating anymore, but that so many others now are as well, so innovation gets lost in the crowd. Companies like Tesla, Amazon, and Google share a space now that Apple had to itself for a long time.

Tesla - losing money

Google - the only thing they are doing profitability is selling ads.

Just look at Apple’s revenue split (second graph). How do you think that compares to Google?

https://sixcolors.com/post/2019/07/apple-third-quarter-2019-...

A “successful” product is one that you can sell for more than it costs to make. Anyone can sell dollar bills for 0.95 cents.

Amazon? Yes AWS is definitely successful and innovative, but the other half of Amazon?

> Amazon? Yes AWS is definitely successful and innovative, but the other half of Amazon?

IIRC, based on their latest report it's the other 30% (by revenue). Amazon is basically a cloud computing provider with a web store.

Apple-focused threads on HN quickly detach from reality when it comes to Google; Google sells "just ads" like Apple sells "just silicon and plastic"

So what other significant profit generating verticals does Google have?

What does any of this have to do with innovation, the topic of the thread? There are lots of very successful companies that don't release innovative consumer products. My point isn't that Apple is a bad company, it's not that other companies are 'better' companies. It's simply that the kind of 'home run' innovation for which Apple is famous has been missing for the last decade. The Apple Watch is a great product, it's very successful. I just don't think it was innovative the same way other Apple products have been.

But let's say it is. Going back to my original question (which I've been roundly downvoted for having the temerity to even ask): if Apple stopped innovating, would they still be the same company we love? Would fans still be so emotionally invested that they reflexively attack anyone who publicly criticizes the company, however obliquely?

I’m asking the same question. What possible home run could any electronic company create that could be a larger market than the phone market? There are 2.75 billion phones in use worldwide. Anything is going to pale in comparison to that market.

I'm not even looking for a financial home run. I'd settle for a Newton. If Apple had released Google Glass, at least it would show creativity and risk-taking. In fairness, it was easier at the time for Google to fail with Glass, though, because no one expects them to be great at consumer hardware (though they're in the process of raising that expectation). Apple has more reputation at stake, and maybe that's made them more conservative design-wise.

So you’re criticizing Apple for not releasing a product in a category that was a spectacular failure, but they don’t get credit for products - the Apple Watch and even AirPods - that are successful and profitable?

They don't get credit for innovating unless the product is innovative, no. Innovation is not synonymous with success, despite what appears in this thread as an overwhelming urge to conflate the two ideas. I'm observing that they haven't really innovated in 11 years. My original question, still unanswered, is if they stop really innovating but continue to be financially successful, will they still be the Apple we love? Can we love them just for releasing solid, evolutionary products (and now software services), or is the anticipation of some big new innovation an intrinsic part of the real Apple's identity?