A puzzling lack of innovation?

[NickZac]

I might be wrong too. Most people I know went directly from Zip/Jaz to CD-R. This was when I worked at a small computer company. It could very well be what we pushed.

That is true; many business jumped on the CDR/RW as soon as possible as Zip Drives were a nightmare between the 'click of death', outrageous pricing, smaller size, and slower speed (many of them were LPT). So it may have been what killed it; undoubtedly it had a major impact on ending the popularity of the Zip and numerous other storage systems. It seems like products designed to replace or exist with the CD either failed outright or just never caught on; the advent of inexpensive flash based memory definitely has gotten ridiculously popular and is really the only huge storage success since the CD.

I would say the flash drive kill off Zip drives. CD-R were to slow and could really not be reused multiple times over and were fairly costly for limit use. It was over a dollar per CD-Rat that point of time.

Zip Disks were much more expensive than a dollar a disk and Zip disks could not hold nearly as much as the CD. Most external Zip Drives were LPT driven well into the age of USB1/2.

Indeed though the flash drive was the end-all of Zip and related technologies. The higher capacity Zip Drive held 250MB; today's higher capacity USB drives hold over 250GB with a 500GB flash drive coming our way.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Zip Disks were much more expensive than a dollar a disk and Zip disks could not hold nearly as much as the CD. Most external Zip Drives were LPT driven well into the age of USB1/2.

Indeed though the flash drive was the end-all of Zip and related technologies. The higher capacity Zip Drive held 250MB; today's higher capacity USB drives hold over 250GB with a 500GB flash drive coming our way.

I did not say that Zip disk did not cost money but they were reusable tme and time again.
CD-R were one time use then throw away.
Zip disk were always a small nitch item. CD-R did nothing to really kill them off it was flash.

 

[BaldiMac]

You could make a case that apple had not "innovated" but rather saw an opportunity to leverage current technology in a sector that was under utilized.

By that reasoning, nothing is innovative. All products leverage current technology. It's not quite possible yet to leverage technology that hasn't been invented.

the iPod, is a great example of this. It was not the first MP3 player.

The innovation wasn't in the iPod wasn't in introducing an mp3 player. It was introducing an mp3 player with a large hard drive for storage in a portable form factor with fast and easy syncing to iTunes. With a simple and efficient UI, as well.

 

[nightfly13]

Wifi's been huge

I don't know the history well enough to give one party credit for a massively innovative product, was it Apple with Airport? Or was it Linksys or Netgear? Maybe some can help me, but whoever deserves the credit for launching it as a mainstream product, wifi has been as transformative and game-changing as any other single tech innovation in the last decade.

 

[RedTomato]

But simple truth is since the iPhone apple has not had anything really innovated come out.

I think the iPad is also innovative. I don't have one, and I don't plan to buy one, (it doesn't suit me and is overpriced for what it can do for me) but it is remarkable how much technical people have criticised it, and how much non-techs love it and have forked over large amounts of money for it in the middle of a serious recession.

Certainly reminds me of the iPod when it came out, to a similar reception. I remember reading Slashdot's dismissive review of it.

'No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.'

An electrican who came over to do me a quote had one. I asked him to show me how he used it. He used it to look up electrical specs, regulations, prices of parts, and electrical reference books. He was able to hold it at the same time as working, or hold it next to whatever wiring he was inspecting, which he couldn't do so easily with a laptop. Certainly a hit for him and worth the money he paid.

Tablets are something that Microsoft and various companies have been working on and releasing for at least 10 years, and throwing millions of dollars at. Apple has waited 10 years, an eternity in tech terms, and completely blown all the other tablets out with their first tablet product. That's innovation.

I don't know the history well enough to give one party credit for a massively innovative product, was it Apple with Airport? Or was it Linksys or Netgear? Maybe some can help me, but whoever deserves the credit for launching it as a mainstream product, wifi has been as transformative and game-changing as any other single tech innovation in the last decade.

I wish there was some kind of large online encyclopaedia that accepted contributions from anyone, and contained information about almost anything. It would be insanely cool if its name had the same first two letters as the product you're trying to look up. Nah, can't be.

But yes you're right about Wifi. It's been a revolution. I remember when it first came out, and trying to make my own antennae from a strip of aluminium (Pringles didn't have the range) to connect to a friends house to share their broadband, which was a rare and precious thing in these days.

That's another game-changer isn't it? The step up to broadband / ASDL / Cable from dial-up modems.

 

[nightfly13]

*snip*
I wish there was some kind of large online encyclopaedia that accepted contributions from anyone, and contained information about almost anything. It would be insanely cool if its name had the same first two letters as the product you're trying to look up. Nah, can't be.

I didn't just go to the 802.11* wikipedia entry because I figured it would be way more info than I'm looking for and woudln't clearly mention the real question: which company is behind the run-away success of Wifi? I suspect you didn't go there to answer the question for the same reason.

 

[NickZac]

I did not say that Zip disk did not cost money but they were reusable tme and time again.
CD-R were one time use then throw away.
Zip disk were always a small nitch item. CD-R did nothing to really kill them off it was flash.

This is true. I used Zip drives extensively for education and personal use because we already had them, but I can't generalize that to the greater whole.

 

[RedTomato]

I didn't just go to the 802.11* wikipedia entry because I figured it would be way more info than I'm looking for and woudln't clearly mention the real question: which company is behind the run-away success of Wifi? I suspect you didn't go there to answer the question for the same reason.

So you knew where to look, but couldn't be bothered to read it? If you actually looked, you'll find the history of wifi there and the names of the companies that founded the Wifi Alliance.

 

[*LTD*]

Tablets are something that Microsoft and various companies have been working on and releasing for at least 10 years, and throwing millions of dollars at. Apple has waited 10 years, an eternity in tech terms, and completely blown all the other tablets out with their first tablet product. That's innovation.

Perfectly stated. This should be a sticky.

 

[Liquorpuki]

This is true. I used Zip drives extensively for education and personal use because we already had them, but I can't generalize that to the greater whole.

I used them as a floppy replacement and for backing up data. From what I can remember back then, CDR's/CDRW's took too long to write and would F up a lot.

So you knew where to look, but couldn't be bothered to read it? If you actually looked, you'll find the history of wifi there and the names of the companies that founded the Wifi Alliance.

From his list of companies, I think he's trying to figure out who brought the wireless router to market. And I've searched and I can't figure it out either.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

I think the iPad is also innovative. I don't have one, and I don't plan to buy one, (it doesn't suit me and is overpriced for what it can do for me) but it is remarkable how much technical people have criticised it, and how much non-techs love it and have forked over large amounts of money for it in the middle of a serious recession.

Certainly reminds me of the iPod when it came out, to a similar reception. I remember reading Slashdot's dismissive review of it.

'No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.'

An electrican who came over to do me a quote had one. I asked him to show me how he used it. He used it to look up electrical specs, regulations, prices of parts, and electrical reference books. He was able to hold it at the same time as working, or hold it next to whatever wiring he was inspecting, which he couldn't do so easily with a laptop. Certainly a hit for him and worth the money he paid.

Tablets are something that Microsoft and various companies have been working on and releasing for at least 10 years, and throwing millions of dollars at. Apple has waited 10 years, an eternity in tech terms, and completely blown all the other tablets out with their first tablet product. That's innovation.

Reason I do not call the iPad innovative is it is nothing more than a big iPod touch.
iPod touch no one call innovative because it is just an iPhone with out the phone. Hence the reason that iPad is just a big iPod touch.
Now the size helps out a lot of people and a lot of people like the larger size. I been slightly tempted by it as well but in terms of innovations I do not call a large iPod touch innovative.

This is true. I used Zip drives extensively for education and personal use because we already had them, but I can't generalize that to the greater whole.

Yeah I had to use one for school for 2 semesters as the amount of files I needed to save got to around 40 megs. This was in 2003 and at the time flash drives of that size were quite costly. In 2005 I paid 30-40 bucks for a 256 meg flash drive. by 2005 the cost of flash memory was pretty low so the 64 and 128 meg flash drives were cheap enough to completely kill off Zip drive.

 

[BaldiMac]

Reason I do not call the iPad innovative is it is nothing more than a big iPod touch.
iPod touch no one call innovative because it is just an iPhone with out the phone. Hence the reason that iPad is just a big iPod touch.
Now the size helps out a lot of people and a lot of people like the larger size.

Wasn't this argument dropped with the bathtub/swimming pool analogy?

An iPad is a big iPod touch with different hardware, different software, different form, and different features. And it's in a different market. And it's purchased for different reasons.

It's defined a market that Apple's largest competitors have been trying to break for 10 years, and outsold them all in 6 months.

Yeah. It's exactly the same as a big iPod touch, if you ignore all the differences. But that can be said about anything really.

I been slightly tempted by it as well but in terms of innovations I do not call a large iPod touch innovative.

And yet no one else brought one to market first. How can something not be innovative if it created a new market?

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Wasn't this argument dropped with the bathtub/swimming pool analogy?

An iPad is a big iPod touch with different hardware, different software, different form, and different features. And it's in a different market. And it's purchased for different reasons.

It's defined a market that Apple's largest competitors have been trying to break for 10 years, and outsold them all in 6 months.

Yeah. It's exactly the same as a big iPod touch, if you ignore all the differences. But that can be said about anything really.

Same software. It is just a slightly modifiy verson of iOS but it is the same software do not kid yourself.
I will say it is the same form factor but I will not really give you the hardware thing on it at all.

And yet no one else brought one to market first. How can something not be innovative if it created a new market?

Umm they did not have iOS. After the iPad hit it became very clear that iOS is very scalable and can easy handle the larger size but it was still slightly modified iOS.

 

[ctyhntr]

True, the question begs can they screw it up even further? I see Palm as a prime example of taking a big fortune and turning into a little fortune.

When the Palm startup approached US Robotics for funding, US Robotics bought them. One of the smartest moves, as years later Palm was spun off it was worth more than in stock capitalization than its parent company 3com. Its a crying shame that Palm stopped being innovative, after all they came out with the first wireless PDA (Palm VII).

I see the iPhone as the natural successor the the Palm, after Palm dropped the ball.

Palm deserves credit for creating the PDA market and for WebOS (which hopefully HP doesn't screw up).

 

[BaldiMac]

Same software. It is just a slightly modifiy verson of iOS but it is the same software do not kid yourself.

Slightly modified? I'm sure Apple was just twiddling their thumbs for the year or more that it took them to modify iOS to run on the iPad.

Do you understand the difference between "different" and "same"? And "software" and "OS"?

Yes, it's got the same core as iOS on the iPhone, but it's got a modified user interface. (To some extent, the same can be said about iOS and Mac OS X.) But the real difference is with the apps. Built in apps and third party apps. They are significantly different than iPhone apps.

I will say it is the same form factor

Other than being a different aspect ratio. With different bezels. Maybe you expected them to really innovate with a circular tablet?

but I will not really give you the hardware thing on it at all.

I don't really need you to give me anything. I stated a fact. The hardware is different in a iPad compared to an iPod touch.

Umm they did not have iOS. After the iPad hit it became very clear that iOS is very scalable and can easy handle the larger size but it was still slightly modified iOS.

Ooooohhhh, so applying an OS designed for touch input to a tablet form factor isn't innovative because no one else could do it first? Does that make any sense? And "they" did have Android.

How do you rationalize around the fact that the iPad created a new market?

 

[Rodimus Prime]

blah blah blah....

End of story is I will not give call Apple innovative when it comes to the iPad. If that is the best apple has in the past 3 years it is pretty weak. It almost like people are having to struggle to come up with reason to say Apple has innovatived much since the iPhone.

If there were multiple other big things beside the iPad in the past 3 years I would be more incline to agree with you but the iPad runs on slightly modified software compared to the iPhone and iPod Touch. My guess is it just recompiled to work on a different cpu but very little code changes.

You have a slightly different form factor. Everything else is basicly the same.

So if all you have is the iPad in 3 years then no Apple has not provided anything innovative since the iPhone came out. If at best they have gone to the next logical step and I refused to call logical steps innovative.

 

[KnightWRX]

Tablets are something that Microsoft and various companies have been working on and releasing for at least 10 years, and throwing millions of dollars at. Apple has waited 10 years, an eternity in tech terms, and completely blown all the other tablets out with their first tablet product. That's innovation.

You keep using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means.

The fact that Apple managed to launch a successful tablet after many tried before them doesn't mean their tablet was innovative, only that it was successful.

 

[BaldiMac]

End of story is I will not give call Apple innovative when it comes to the iPad.

I don't think your opinion is the end of the story.

If that is the best apple has in the past 3 years it is pretty weak. It almost like people are having to struggle to come up with reason to say Apple has innovatived much since the iPhone.

Nobody struggled. Apple created a new market. It's clear as day. Nobody introduced a slate PC with an OS designed primarily for multitouch input before Apple. Doing something first is innovation by definition.

My guess is it just recompiled to work on a different cpu but very little code changes.

That's a pretty bad guess considering they both use the same cpu at different clock speeds.

They spent more than a year modifying iOS to run on the iPad. It wasn't "very little code changes."

You have a slightly different form factor. Everything else is basicly the same.

If you ignore all the differences.

So if all you have is the iPad in 3 years then no Apple has not provided anything innovative since the iPhone came out. If at best they have gone to the next logical step and I refused to call logical steps innovative.

There are a lot of things that seem logical with hindsight. It's just coincidental that Apple has gotten there first.

 

[roadbloc]

I'll add Serato to my list. Since its release a few years back it's managed to kill vinyl,

Vinyl may have decreased in popularity over the past six years, but it's far from dead.

 

[LethalWolfe]

If
However, the craziest, most innovative and arguably the most success product over the past 10 years has been.....the iPod, which took MP3 players from expensive and rare to common and reasonably priced.

The innovation wasn't in the iPod wasn't in introducing an mp3 player. It was introducing an mp3 player with a large hard drive for storage in a portable form factor with fast and easy syncing to iTunes. With a simple and efficient UI, as well.

The iPod was not reasonably priced and didn't offer largest amount of storage. Compared to most other MP3 players it was feature bare, but what it did offer though was a clean, sexy look and the most friendly user interface around.


Here's a couple more (to keep things on topic):

Matrox for it's MXO (which is a one of a kind product AFAIK).

HP for their DreamColor monitor.


Lethal

 

[Don't panic]

inkjet printers

 

[Liquorpuki]

Vinyl may have decreased in popularity over the past six years, but it's far from dead.

Thanks to Serato, DJ's now carry a MIDI controller and a laptop full of MP3's to gigs instead of turntables and record crates. Up and coming artists now push songs as mp3's on iTunes instead of spend a grip of money to press a couple hundred copies of vinyl from one of the few remaining record pressing plants to hand out as promos. And late last year, Panasonic discontinued the 1200's, which were industry standard turntables for well over 3 decades.

If the only ones consuming vinyl are a niche group of analog audiophiles, I think it's safe to say vinyl is dead.

 

[roadbloc]

Thanks to Serato, DJ's now carry a MIDI controller and a laptop full of MP3's to gigs instead of turntables and record crates. Up and coming artists now push songs as mp3's on iTunes instead of spend a grip of money to press a couple hundred copies of vinyl from one of the few remaining record pressing plants to hand out as promos. And late last year, Panasonic discontinued the 1200's, which were industry standard turntables for well over 3 decades.

If the only ones consuming vinyl are a niche group of analog audiophiles, I think it's safe to say vinyl is dead.

Utter rubbish. It's about half and half. Vinyl still has plenty of years left. The way things are going, vinyl's days are limited, but at the present moment, I see and know plenty of DJ's who still use Vinyl over the modern CDj's and Laptop with Ableton Live installed.

 

[Liquorpuki]

Utter rubbish. It's about half and half. Vinyl still has plenty of years left. The way things are going, vinyl's days are limited, but at the present moment, I see and know plenty of DJ's who still use Vinyl over the modern CDj's and Laptop with Ableton Live installed.

CDJ, there's another soon to be dead piece of gear

Over here, modern = a VCI + Serato or Traktor

 

[lPHONE]

Android or whatever looks promising, lol
I hear people buy them, but I never see them. People need to learn to not be embarrassed about their inferior phones.