Re:Bell Labs Org Chart (1980)
by iamstupidsimple on Sunday January 23, 2022 @09:30AM
(#30046376)
Marketing is not why the iPhone took off, there is substance there even if you don't agree. A full UNIX kernel, capacitive touchscreen, low latency / high perf OS, 3rd party apps and a bunch of UX innovations. Yes everything existed individually but so did all the parts to make most groundbreaking products.
Re:Bell Labs Org Chart (1980)
by MagnumOpus on Monday January 24, 2022 @11:20AM
(#30059639)
The capacitive touch screen and its features were the one thing that catalyzed the revolution. OS-wise, many competing phones were more high performance/low latency, and the app store didn't exist for years.
So LG could have become Apple but for some poor UI decisions and worse marketing - they released their own capacitive-screen phone, the LG Prada, a month _before_ Apple, but cheaped out on the UI development: no on-screen keyboard, and not using the touch screen to its potential with scroll/page-turn gestures.
Re:Bell Labs Org Chart (1980)
by iamstupidsimple on Monday January 24, 2022 @12:25PM
(#30060799)
That's a circular argument and easy to say with hindsight. Apple is where it is precisely because it invested in making it happen.
iPhone was a triumph of product engineering. I had a Palm Windows Mobile device that was awesome in 2004. It gave me superpowers.
But, iPhone just hit it out of the park on a bunch of different levels. From the architecture, the software, UX and having the balls to tell Verizon to fuck off, they hit a home run.
I though that smartphones were a kind of inevitable outcome of technological advancement, and that many other similar products where already out there.
I have to agree that Apple's marketing was spot on, as it still works to this date.