The only thing I see that are innovative are the front-facing camera and HDMI out. None of the other features you mentioned are innovative, they are just newer and more advanced, but not original. People does misuse the word "innovative" too often, especially when referring to new iPhone features. iPad doesn't have anything innovative either: just a bigger, newer and advanced and not original.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Did Apple use the same iPhone/iPod platform on the iPad to cash in the App Store?
- Thread starter thiagos
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The only thing I see that are innovative are the front-facing camera and HDMI out. None of the other features you mentioned are innovative, they are just newer and more advanced, but not original. People does misuse the word "innovative" too often, especially when referring to new iPhone features. iPad doesn't have anything innovative either: just a bigger, newer and advanced and not original.
First off, yes I realize it falls back to 3G, the selling point made by Sprint is "it's the first Wimax/4g phone". They make a big deal of putting a Wimax chip in a device that has a very limited network to back it up. Kinda sad really. I live in KC, near the Sprint World HQ and would love to see Wimax come to town, but it's slated "late 2010/early 2011". So the innovative part of Wimax, I agree on the technology, but I'm as close to being able to actually use Wimax as I am LTE right now, still a year out "maybe".
Just be clear a few notes on the word and it's meaning. Your definition maybe different, which is fine, but may help to understand why we see things differently.
Innovative:
"innovative - Characterized by the creation of new ideas or things; Forward looking; ahead of current thinking"
For starters, the iPhone 2g created the catagory that the HTC and the rest of the "touch" phones are based upon. iPhone was new and revolutionized the smartphone industry. HTC adding a few checklist items doesn't suddenly change the entire market segment. This just my opinion. Great phone for what it is, but not revolutionary. Again just my way of thinking.
Looking at each of your points as a question of if it's revolutionary.
-Larger screen/higher resolution? I say no. Next logical step, Dell Mini 5 already has a 5" screen with higher resolution. So at best this is following not leading or innovating in this area of design.
-8MP camera w/flash? I say no. Already been done. Next obvious step (bigger, faster etc..) Not a revolutionary idea imo.
-Front-facing camera? While maybe for the US market, common on phones around the world. UK/Asian markets already have them. Again nothing new in the mobile phone world looking at the worldwide marketplace.
- HDMI out? (Need to buy an adapter to hook to a regular HDMI port) Ok I'll give you that one as I don't' know of another phone with that capability. Great, but what are you going to do with 1gig of built in memory? Load up movies on Micro SD cards and carry a bunch of cards with you? HDMI out + 32 or 64gig of memory = great way to carry movies. This imo fails to inspire.
- Wimax? Yes and no. It's useless until the network is built out.
Just as it's pointless for Apple or any Verizon phone to have an LTE chip in it until the network is actually in place for someone to use. Innovative if Sprint was the first to bring it to the masses, currently only available in a few select markets.
The one you actually missed a good one... the ability to become a Wifi hotspot, imo innovate for a phone, although the Palm Pre Plus already introduced this feature. Speaking of Wifi, it only has a B/G Wifi antenna, on a 2010 future phone this seems rather lame.
IMO it takes more than a few additional HDMI, USB, SD card slot to make something a revolutionary product or a leap forward ahead of anything like it. The HTC/Android phones so far haven't shown me that, if others feel they have, then I'll respectfully agree to disagree.
Not going to quote your entire post, but note that I never called HTC EVO "revolutionary". However, I am absolutely convinced it is an innovative product which takes the entire category of smartphones forward by a leap.
You can sit here all day and downplay the importance of individual features.. And I am sorry that 4G isn't yet available in your area (it is available in mine).. But the fact remains that EVO phone is unlike anything else that's been officially announced on the market. And arguably it created a whole new category of "superphones", which will take the competition a while to catch up to.
My point with all this was a response to another poster who made a claim that mobile phone innovation only comes from Apple. Giving credit where credit is due, Apple did revolutionize the smartphone industry when the original iPhone 2G was first introduced. However, they have been resting on their laurels for the past 3 years, and the market is leaving them behind.
iPhone has been stagnant for a while and users are leaving for new and exiting products (like EVO). Apple's iron fisted control and walled-garden approach to App Store is hurting them more than it's helping them. iPad is just a continuation of iPhone paradigm in a different form-factor, and to me is a very un-exciting product. We will see how it plays out over time.
You can remain convinced in your mind that it's an innovative phone, but in general, it's not an innovative phone, it's an evolutionary phone. There's no such thing as "superphones", that's just marketing crap bought by Google for their NexusOne. A lot of people said the same thing about NexusOne that you are saying. Same thing was said about Palm, same thing was said about other so-called iPhone killers.
A smartphone is a smartphone, higher spec with better resolution and faster CPU does not make it a "superphone". That's all it is.
Just wait until you have the device in your hand. If you like it, great, you found a phone that fits you.
Chances are, there's going to be some cons on that phone, just like everything else.
The iPhone wasn't so innovative then either. I'd seen everything on the iPhone done before, not done quite as well. Same with the EVO. All been done, just not all together and not as well.
As for the 4G network being small... Umm... When I bought my iPhone 3G on release day there wasn't a 3G network where I lived. Sprints 4G is rolling out to my city this year.
You must not be aware of the first law of "reality distortion" science. A product or a feature is only innovative when introduced by Apple and Steve Jobs. Often such product/feature is referred to as "magical" and "revolutionary". Everything else is just iterative, evolutionary and/or has already been invented by Apple.
Hey, until WiMax coverage is extended over my pig farm in Podunk, Iowa - I fully expect all headset makers to cease from offering 4G chipsets in the new phones. Only when 99.999% of the US landmass is covered, only then the vendors should be permitted to sell new wireless technologies!