> They take an idea that’s already been worked out (like MP3 players) and then just out-execute the competition.

I’m inclined to think of that as innovation. To your point, not a single, earth shattering kind (inventing the first mp3 player), but by 100 lesser improvements in a single product.

But yeah, all their stuff is that way. They didn’t invent smartphones, or satellite messaging in a phone, or rich mobile messaging, or end to end encryption of data on your cloud services, or biometrics and secure enclaves, etc. They just usually execute better than others.

▲

bigyabai 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Rhetorical question, though; does Apple execute better? Or do they just sell it better?

Because there are many entirely-feasible things that Apple failed to execute well. Xserve, Airpower, Apple Car, all dead and buried in one way or another. Today, all their tentpole successes are difficult to distinguish from pervasive marketing influence. We can't logically use sales, customer satisfaction or user retention as metrics to measure how successful services iCloud or the App Store are. And, with integrated products like Airpods and Apple Watch, the iPhone nearly reaches similar levels of arbitrary lock-in.

▲

al_borland 8 hours ago | parent [-]

I think it’s a little of both. Sure, they have failures, not no one is perfect.

I think the iPad is a good example. Bill Gates had a dream of the paperless office and tried to make the tablet PC happens by putting Windows XP on tablets with some pen support. I saw a few of them in my help desk days in college, but they never really caught on. They put a desktop OS on a tablet and it was annoying to use. They also tried handheld devices with the UMPCs, these were also a pain to use, and again, just ran XP.

Then the iPad came along. It didn’t just run OS X, it ran an OS designed around the way you’d interact with it. It was executed better. Steve Jobs also sold the hell out of it with all his “magic” talk. 15 years later and the iPad is still the only tablet anyone really talks about. Microsoft had a 10+ year head start, but failed to execute and market. They didn’t understand what they were actually making. Android tried to copy the iPad model with a mobile OS, but they didn’t seem to go all-in, so it felt half baked. Much of the iPad “marketing” is word of mouth. My dad had 2 iPads and loves them. He was sold on it by seeing be use one back in 2010 to take note and a conference we went to. He spent more time looking at the iPad than the speakers. Ironically, I don’t have an iPad anymore, it never fit into my workflow, but for many it does.

The marketing only works to remind people of the products of the core product executes well. Marketing alone won’t save a bad product. This is especially true when trying to create a category. Apple has seemed more successful with category creation than just about anyone else. They may not be first, but they define the market and get people to care about it. They did this with the iPod, iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch. MP3 players, smart phones, tablets, and smart watches existed before, but were fairly niche. Apple made them mainstream and opened up the market for others to be more successful as well. We can likely credit Apple with that modern laptop as well, starting with the MacBook Air, and then raising the bar on battery life with their new chips. They pushed the whole industry forward. This wasn’t marketing, it was execution. Having 24 hours of battery life in a thin and light package was simply better than the other options on the market.

▲

rchaud 26 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> 15 years later and the iPad is still the only tablet anyone really talks about.

When was the last time anybody talked about the iPad outside of a product launch event? iPad sales are falling [0]. It, like every other type of tablet, is a glorified YouTube/Netflix player for most people. It doesn't do anything that you can't already do on an iPhone. Even on "pro" iPad apps like Final Cut, exports are cancelled if you so much as switch to another app during the process. It is in no way a MacOS device.

[0] https://www.macworld.com/article/2865180/iphone-sales-pump-u...

[1] https://www.macstories.net/stories/not-an-ipad-pro-review/

▲

catlikesshrimp 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Before that monster you described, there was Windows CE (Windows CE used a different kernel), specifically for mobile. It supported networking and peripherals.

And it was very successful for years.

	▲	raw_anon_1111 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I programmed ruggedized Windows CE devices for field services for awhile. They were really never that popular.