Technology

So for you, you're objectively not smart enough to have the debate with. You're all set, you don't need to do anything 👍

Ok ok, I'll give you what you seem to need. Let's step back a moment and recall the context of this thread: Apple's being shady as hell about complying with the DMA and everyone's piling on. I've noted that Apple is pretty greedy, but probably not as objectively evil as some other big tech companies, so this is a circlejerk. But, it's verboten to say that Apple's not terrible. I've also said that at least they innovate, but that's also verboten. You can't say Apple innovates. So, that's why we're here.

Now, going from memory, I've listed some Apple products that I think were innovative for their time. You've made a few counterpoints. Btw, it did take some time for that reply. I hope you weren't... researching? If not, congratulations: you're fellow GenX and either you have an eidetic memory or you work in UI/UX. Either way, you did teach me a couple of things, so thanks for that.

Let's go point by point:

• MS stole from Xerox and Apple did too, but Apple was sued - You didn't mention that Xerox lost the case, since you can't patent the concept of a UI. Also, Apple released their first Mac more than a year before Microsoft released Windows 1.0, which by all measure was utterly atrocious and looked slapped together. Are you sure Microsoft didn't borrow from Apple instead of Xerox? You're leaving out all the context here and I don't come away thinking the early Macs were not innovative.
• Apple stole from LG when they noticed Google was building a mobile OS - You didn't mention that although LG sued Apple, Apple then produced design docs that proved they'd been working on that years earlier... and LG lost the case. I'm not even going to bother linking to Wikipedia. I didn't remember the Prada, though. You omitted things here too, so I'm not feeling like the iPhone wasn't innovative. It was the first commercially viable smartphone. You make a good point that Apple and Google were in an arms race on smartphones, though I'm not sure if you knew you were making that point. Of course, Google being Google, they bought the solution, still got beaten to the market, and then Android absolutely sucked ass for years anyway. Not to mention, early Android was basically iOS with a Google search box and moar telemetry.
• 192 kbps existed and so do hardware DACs - I didn't know what DACs were, so thanks for that. But, I wonder if anyone could hear the difference on the headphones of the time? I also hadn't heard of the Cowon and don't know anyone who had one. I wonder if they sold... eleven units? Maybe you meant Creative Zen? Creative sold a ton of MP3 players and I had a few, but the iPod was much better. This is a straw man argument anyway, though. You're saying that since one random MP3 player that nobody bought had a better DAC, and also that 192 kbps exists (this is literally just offered randomly), the iPod was not innovative. I'm not sure it's working out for you.

As for this:

The real issue for you isn’t your “done seeking out a non-group think argument”, the reality is you are desperately looking for a group-think group that only sees Apple as some all mighty and infallible company that can do no wrong and none can do better than them. I wish you the best of luck finding such a group, but as you’ve noticed, it won’t be here.

That sounds great. If I were 20, I'd be very intimidated and I'd feel cast out. I'd be sad. But actually, that's ... another straw man argument! Love those. I'm "desperately" looking for a group that thinks Apple is all-mighty, I won't find it here, good luck with that, etc. Well yes, but actually no. Congrats on proving that a thing I never said is unavailable to me 😂

That took 20 minutes and I could have done literally anything else with that time. I should bill you.