> Like what?

Like smartphones with an entire interface focused on multitouch. There wasn’t another one of those “proven in the market” before the iPhone.

Or, you know, the first mass-marketed personal computer with a GUI, and the first successful one with a mouse (Lisa, Mac).

The Kinect example is nonsensical, it wasn’t as an authentication device. Even if they used the same team and technology, so much more went into it (like the Secure Enclave) than simply repackaging what already existed.

Got anything more recent than the invention of the iPhone? That was almost 20 years ago now....

I do, but don’t really feel like nitpicking what counts or not with arbitrary rules we make up as the conversation goes along. I chose those examples deliberately because the conversation was about the company’s history and they are pretty unambiguous in their importance. Going in circles with “oh, that doesn’t count because it was not as recent as this undefined period of time I have my head” or any other restrictions is not interesting, and I don’t really care about defending Apple, I was simply providing a factual rebuttal.

Just look at the size of Kinect and compare it with faceid embedded in a phone. The word “just” is doing a lot of work in the parent comment.

Multitouch touch screens already existed. Shrinking technology, fine - but neither did Apple invent the technology to shrink existing multitouch down.

And for computers, much of that was derivative of the MoaD.

What have they invented?

Comparing a screen to a whole smartphone and a concept demo to full mass marketed successful products is quite disingenuous. You can do better. Either we argue in good faith or the conversation isn’t worth having.

The original point, and what Apple is known for, is precisely that they often don’t invent all the parts but put them together in a way that makes sense for and the general public wants to buy. Which also allows competitors to rise. Nitpicking every single component will always lead to “none of them invented transistors, or electricity”.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9huNI5sBd8

Denying Apple’s influence to certain classes of products is like denying Google’s influence to the internet, or Microsoft’s influence to offices. It’s nonsensical. I am not interested in flame wars or arguing with others about their biases for or against specific trillion dollar corporations.