Huh, I guess my history been different, I always understood "innovative" as something like "new and different".

Making something cheaper can be innovative, depending on how you achieved that. But if you launched a product that is the same as a competitor only because it's cheaper, because your company is funded by VCs who can continuously inject cash to bleed your competitor, I wouldn't call that "innovative" at all.

But if you instead had figured out a way to actually create the same hardware but in a cheaper way, so that's why the price is cheaper, then you did innovative in the creation process, but I still wouldn't call the finished product innovative, I'd be more focused on the process itself.

One of you is talking about a technical revolution, that changes what things are or how things are made.

The other is talking about market revolution, where market dynamics change, typically by lowering the price.

The word used in the original comment was "revolutionized" and in reference to "the market", not "innovative" and not in reference to product functionality.