Every time I see this argument, it comes across as lazy. iPhone (and smartphones in general) are a mature product, so of course it'll be iterative. But you can't compare the camera from the first few iPhones to the latest ones. I certainly didn't expect, when the first iPhone launched, that the camera on an iPhone would replace my dedicated camera for 90% of my use cases.

You make a good point, but at the same time, things are a bit stale if you look outside the Apple and Samsung bubbles.

For example, a Vivo X300 Ultra or Xiaomi 17 Ultra. Much better cameras, larger batteries, 90-100W charging, etc.

Those examples are still iterative.

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

OP also complained about the "lack of significant evolution", that's why I gave those examples.

Like the brands I've mentioned, Apple buys their camera sensors (from Sony), battery, and display. And yet they don't have the best camera sensors, the newer higher capacity batteries, the latest display tech, etc.

You can go 2 or 3 iterations before seeing a real improvement, and it's not always because better tech doesn't exist. They're just not pushing hard.

Shipping hundreds of millions of new phones every year isn't pushing hard while earning billions? Near every single company in the world would die to have Apple's balance sheet.

Apple Silicon in the past 5 years has trounced every single market player. Apple has to make decisions on things like sensors based on the supplier being able to deliver hundreds of millions annually -- by the time we see the hardware it was baked and locked in over 12 months ago.

In the areas I specifically mentioned? No, they don't push that hard.

Apple introduced 48MP camera sensors many years after they became available. For the past 2 or 3 years, there have been devices with much better cameras, but again, they're not iPhones. Some phones have been charging at peak 40-100W for a while, so when you look at Apple's 30-40W, it's not that impressive, is it? In a year or so they may release a foldable phone, but Samsung is already on the 7th iteration of the Fold. And so on.

It doesn't make their SoCs less impressive (typing this on a M4 Mac!) or the shipping of so many devices a lesser feat, but Apple is very conservative with iPhones, and that's very apparent when you look at all phones out there.

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

> iPhone (and smartphones in general) are a mature product, so of course it'll be iterative.

That's the kind of thing people say when they are out of ideas. The reality is that the mobile phone market was already a mature market, with Nokia as the leader, even before the iPhone was released. Then Steve Jobs showed the world how to innovate.

Don't forget about the Apple Car. 100% of that failed, and Tim spent a decade on it. Quite a bit of attention on here, but it seems we've quickly forgotten all about it since it was never seen.

https://hn.algolia.com/?q=apple+car

Apple was wise to get out of the EV business. It's very expensive in terms of factories, regulation etc and not very profitable. They had no first mover advantage, government backing or legacy advantage.

What's the best case scenario? Make few billion a year fuzzed with long term warranty liabilities? That might sound nice, but for apple their companion products like AirPods or the Apple Watch easily clear much better profit. Putting their corporate effort into another companion product is more economically sensible and far less risky.

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.

Really sucks we never got to see any of the prototypes or designs they built for it.

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.

I forgot all about the Apple car when assessing Tim's legacy, too.

I guess if you are gonna fail, fail so deeply that it doesn't affect your legacy :P

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.

Looking at the state of EVs nowadays, I'd say Apple dodged a huge bullet. EV is no special without self-driving and also batteries literally become trash after a few years.

EV batteries do not become "trash" after a few years.

What about Apple Silicon?

Its been more than 5 years since the M1 came out in Nov 2020

yes they innovated with apple sillicon but I would say it only shines in macOS environment. On iOS / iPadOS it's completely untapped - like having ferrari with only gravel roads around.

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.

Believe it or not, more than five years ago.

> I hope Ternus can turn this ship. Apple wasted the last 5 years without any significant innovation/revolution or even without significant evolution. No groundbreaking change from iphone 12 pro in current iphone 17 pro.

I daresay the iPhone 17 Pro is a compelling enough upgrade, hardware wise. Not much innovation, but their phone hardware is very usable.

But I'd prefer if Apple gave up 2 years of trying to "innovate" nonsense like Liquid glAss and polish up their software first, just like the old days.

I think the satellite connectivity is a pretty big deal and iPhone led with that. Also camera control literally changed how I use the phone.

For anyone else wondering what this means:

> lets you quickly open your iPhone camera and access common camera settings *points at button* (https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/use-the-camera-contro...)

The way you phrased it about changing how you use a phone, I was expecting you control a lot of the phone via the camera somehow (gestures?) and don't need to bother with the pesky touchscreen. But okay no it's just the camera button that has been on cameras and other phones since time immemorial

My washing machine still only washes clothes!

The Vision Pro was a big bet that failed. But they tried.

The satellite message thing?