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.
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.
> 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.
For example, Tim had the discipline to get out of the EV projects. Which was likely wise given the challenges the sector has faced in profitability, and Apple's long term outside option to accrue vehicular services revenue through CarPlay. Yet someone in his position could have burned $200B pretty easily to try and build a business there.
The only mistake he made was not buying Tesla around the M3 launch. Elon was desperate and would have sold it to him for cheap. He didn't take the meeting.
Otherwise I completely agree, once Tesla reached takeoff, it's too hard for anyone else to do it without burning mountains worth of cash.
We have many people in my wider team (Finance) that are AI skeptics purely because of their experience with Copilot. Like they don't know what AI is actually capable of when outside of the shackles of Copilot.
I've never tried their platform, but I once made an account on Upwork and it is absolutely ridiculous. I'm sure they are very similar.
People are asking for AWS help and giving root passwords to random contractors. A lot of people asking for CPA letters for loans and help with tax problems but their budget is under $100. And outright fraud posts are often seen asking for people to open bank accounts or otherwise bypass KYC.
Upwork now has an AI feature to help write job posts, so all the time you can see things like "If you want to attract freelancers like X, I can change it." So now the job posts are all written like corporate ones talking about "highly experienced in X" but pay almost nothing. Half the time the clients don't even know the words in their own post. And it charges every time someone applies to a job and then more to boost to top of list because every job gets 30+ applications supposedly.
I think introducing the MacBook Neo now, at that price point, was a genius move. While they're playing the waiting game on AI, they're cementing the next generation into the Apple ecosystem and getting them to not sway towards whatever device(s) OpenAI is cooking up.
The MacBook Neo feels like the iPod of this generation.
> getting them to not sway towards whatever device(s) OpenAI is cooking up.
Why is this even relevant? The Macbook Neo's biggest competitor is not an imaginary future product, it's the Chromebooks and Windows devices that constitute the majority of laptops sold.
It's relevant because it hooks people into an ecosystem. It builds brand loyalty when they have a good experience with the product...and the services that come with it (Music, Apple TV, iCloud, etc.).
I'm not suggesting MacBook Neo is a competitor to what OpenAI will release. I'm suggesting Apple will be a brand competitor, and getting people familiar with the Apple ecosystem from now will potentially lead to higher loyalty when it comes time to decide between OpenAI product vs Apple AI product.
I'm waiting to see some other reviews of the Omarchy and Dell XPS combo on battery life. DHH has overhyped some things in the past - he posted a screenshot on X last week showing ~40 hours battery life remaining on the Dell.
But it's so good to see the Windows side catching up to Macs now. So tempted to try out Omarchy on the XPS.
reply