Those examples are still iterative.

OP is alluding to the fact that Apple hasn't created industry changing categories like the iPhone.

I think you're looking far too narrowly at technology if you view it only through the lens of a smartphone.

Maybe this is reductive but I always suspected the car project was a Jony Ive indulgence.

In the years after Jobs' death, Ive was pampered as many people attributed Apple's vision and taste to Jobs #1 and Ive #2. Losing both would've trashed the stock and Apple's reputation at that time.

Ive loves watches and cars. Despite launching the Apple Watch with a $10k+ gold version and a heavy fashion emphasis (another Ive indulgence), it fortunately became a viable product but more due to the health and fitness features.

I just don't think Apple goes down the car path without Ive at his most outsized influence at that time. But Ive wanted to put his mark on the automobile.

Now he's doing it for Ferrari but in a much more traditional sense. Buttons and switches instead of entirely touchscreen, human drivers and not driverless, etc.

Absolutely! At the very minimum, an Apple EVSE would have been a shippable product. But no, Tim couldn't even get that after 10 years, thousands of dedicated employees, and hundreds of millions of dollars spent.

Apple spent $1 billion over 10 years doing the ground work to see whether or not they wanted to get into making a car and that’s a problem?

Google is gonna spend between February and December 2026 $185 billion on their AI technology, and how much has Microsoft spent somewhere near 100 billion dollars or how about OpenAI (we don’t know yet) but that number will be my numbing or Meta which is some where in the $80 billion mark.

Tim Cook has nothing to worry about Apple didn’t squander billions of dollars they put the money where they should’ve put it in Apple Silicon and everything else they do well.

Google got a $1 billion refund and OpenAI got nothing. I’m sure Sam thought when he went into the meeting with Tim Cook that he was gonna come out with $50 billion and he came out with zip. Apple made the right choice.

The level of power in the iPad, and the level of underutilization of that power due to it being handicapped by the OS is mindboggling to me. Although to some extent it makes sense - with Apple owning the whole supply chain it probably wouldn't actually save them much money to make a less powerful chip just to put in it, and they need selling points for the top end models.

>ferrari with only gravel roads around

sounds like a ton of fun to me. Just sending it rally-style everywhere :)

a better comparison is buying a Ferrari to drive around your town at 40 km/h

And yet it is the best tablet you can buy on the planet top to bottom software and hardware, is it perfect no, what is this phantom alternative to an iPad M4 Pro? Note I already have a desktop computer. I don’t need two of the same thing in short I don’t need Mac OS on two devices.