x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Just because Apple leads doesn't mean everyone is following

Just because Apple leads doesn't mean everyone is following

Just because Apple leads doesn't mean everyone is following
We are very big proponents of giving credit where it is due, but that also means that we like to set the record straight when a company gets credit for more than it deserves. It's a very tricky line to walk, but one that we find most can't walk properly with Apple more often than any other company. We know that preaching objectivity in the tech world, especially when it comes to Apple, is something of a fool's game, but we can't help trying. 

Ever since Apple announced the new iPad, and especially the Retina Display of the new iPad, there have been the two standard camps that have set up on either side of the issue. There are those who want to praise Apple for the innovation, and often use that praise to attack other companies for not "being good enough" to make that technological leap first; and, there are those who want to claim that Apple didn't really innovate anything, and is merely using a component designed and manufactured by other companies. As is usually the case in these times, both sides are actually right. The key is to remember that just because one company is leading doesn't mean that the others are following.

Requirements of innovation 

Yes, Apple has pushed forward displays in consumer devices, and has been the first to do so at times. Many Apple supporters always like to make the claim that the technology has been possible, and Apple was the first to push it out, which is true. It's the point that often follows that doesn't really hold water. Often, the argument follows that other companies couldn't or wouldn't push this technology without Apple having done it first, but that's an extremely reductive view. Let's take the case of the Retina Display that Apple loves to market for the new iPad. 

Sure, the technology for higher pixel density on screens was possible 10 years ago, but we have to remember that something being technologically possible is actually a very small piece of the puzzle that we call innovation. It has been technologically possible to have electric cars for over a century now. Back in 1900, 28% of all cars on the roads in the US were electric. Given how that has played out, technological possibilities are quite obviously not the main factor in popular uptake. 

As far as high PPI displays, sure the technology has been possible for a while, but the need wasn't there. HD video wasn't pervasive until very recently, and the TV was still the focal point for visual media consumption, so naturally HDTVs got the push instead of computers. Additionally, before the wide variations in screen size which has come from mobile, there was no need to even talk about PPI, let alone make that a distinguishing factor of a device. The vast majority of computer screens fell within a range of about 12-15" on laptops, 19-27" on desktops, and 27-50" on TVs, and all of those devices were essentially used from a fixed perspective. Now, we've also added in the lower sizes of 4-10" between smartphones and tablets, which are completely mobile, and in our hands at all times. So, PPI is a more important metric, and one that has been especially important for Apple. 


That's not to say that PPI hasn't been important for other manufacturers. No one was "waiting for the Apple green light" to begin using the technology, rather, no other companies have been as focused on visuals nearly as much as Apple. Apple is a design company, so it wants the best visuals at all times. That means not only having well designed hardware, but having well designed software as well. With everything moving towards HD, the display and graphics processing is far more important than anything else on devices, and so, that's where we've seen Apple focusing its efforts and leading the way. Maybe Apple didn't design or build the display panels for the new iPad, but like it or not, Apple was the first to put a display of that quality into a popular consumer device, and that counts for quite a lot, even if that kind of push comes with problems as far as manufacturing

We already know that Apple is willing to slow down processes within iOS to give preference to UI interactions in order to give it that extra visual smoothness. And, we also know that the company ethos of Apple is to be incredibly focused on certain aspects in order to get them right, and possibly ignore other areas. So, it shouldn't really be any surprise that Apple would spend all of its efforts in updating all of the graphics of iOS, not to mention pushing the graphics processing ahead of data processing in order to be able to point at its visuals as the best available. 

On the other side, Android manufacturers are more concerned with making adaptable devices, so we've seen things like the PadFone, or laptop docks, or more work with a new generation of styluses (styli?). As with all technology, high PPI screens will make it around to everyone eventually, as they have with smartphones. Sure, Apple led the way with the iPhone's Retina display, but other devices have since easily eclipsed that with new 720p screens, and even before that qHD screens were able to get pretty close to the iPhone's display quality on many occasions. 


Every company wants to be the leader in something. Every company has a core focus. Google wants to be the fastest way to organize and find data, and wants to be malleable with open data and customization. Facebook wants to be the best at knowing what you want. RIM has traditionally wanted to be the most secure option for enterprise. And, Apple wants to create the most beautiful products around in a tightly controlled ecosystem. 

And, in those efforts, each company may ignore other aspects in order to reach its focus. Google has traditionally ignored design in favor of speed, and maybe has put too much faith in users rather than building better security from the start. Facebook has sometimes ignored user comfort in order to build a more complete database of interests and behavior. RIM forgot that there were consumer users and was left behind in that market, despite still excelling on security. And, Apple has ignored customization options in favor of presenting its design vision. 

Each company has its focus and its flaws, and we have to try to align our personal values with those company aims, not the other way around. Apple may lead in visuals, but that doesn't automatically make other companies followers. It simply means that other companies have different aims, and may look to innovate in other ways before pushing for the innovations that Apple makes. Similarly, eventually it goes the other way and Apple will adopt innovations that other companies thought were more important, like the notification tray. Every company leads at some point, and every company follows. That's just the beautiful circle of innovation. 

  • Options

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 17:37 19

2. good2great (Posts: 1042; Member since: 22 Feb 2012)

great read!

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 18:03 16

13. MichaelHeller (Posts: 2707; Member since: 26 May 2011)


posted on 23 Apr 2012, 18:33 7

28. Mandroid (Posts: 209; Member since: 22 Feb 2012)

Crap article was crap.

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 18:41 17

36. MichaelHeller (Posts: 2707; Member since: 26 May 2011)

Does that mean you actually bothered to read it?

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 23:26 9

76. the_s2 (Posts: 239; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

Michael, this reminds me of the trolling that was(maybe still) going on in gsmarena.com on a writer named Prasad. Initially, a few of his apple biased articles caught the attention of droid fanboys, which they exaggerated and they started bashing all the articles written by him altogether, even the articles that were non biased, and in some cases, android sided. Going through your comments, I understand your feelings. And compliments from me, this is the most neutral article I have ever read. Why dont you chill, and just ignore these haters? You are a great writer, and you shouldnt be let down by negative comments. All due respect, I am a droid fanboy, and I am against the ethics and unfair pricing of apple products. Technology is meant to be appreciated , and not bashed out, be it apple or samsung or whoever.

posted on 24 Apr 2012, 07:34 3

103. kshell1 (Posts: 1143; Member since: 05 Oct 2011)

As long as it isn't Ray S writing the article im fine. Now he is biased

posted on 24 Apr 2012, 10:32 3

110. MichaelHeller (Posts: 2707; Member since: 26 May 2011)

People can call me biased all they want as long as they're willing to discuss the points. Mandroid's actions here annoyed me far more than any troll because he came in and attacked my content while flat out saying that he didn't even bother to read the article. That is beyond unacceptable to me.

posted on 25 Apr 2012, 06:12

132. jroc74 (Posts: 6019; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)

I agree. Very nice article. The last line in the article says it all:

"That's just the beautiful circle of innovation."

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 17:38 2

3. joseg81 (Posts: 199; Member since: 15 Jul 2011)

do u mean Apple in the title?

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 18:03 5

12. MichaelHeller (Posts: 2707; Member since: 26 May 2011)

sure did. fixed that. sorry.

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 18:26 6

26. TROLL (banned) (Posts: 4851; Member since: 13 Apr 2012)

I keep laughing at UR avatar.... U and
Naithan the sad panda makes me laugh....

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 20:47 2

59. joseg81 (Posts: 199; Member since: 15 Jul 2011)

it's the cookie monster zombie :)

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 17:39 6

4. remixfa (Posts: 14604; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

who is Apply?

Apply apply with the colorful eye. spell check musta been drinking whiskey and rye.. singing this will be the day that I die.. this will be the day that i dye.

lol, sorry just read the singing quit notice thread. :)

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 17:53 8

8. kshell1 (Posts: 1143; Member since: 05 Oct 2011)

if its apply its a very very rotten apply .-.

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 20:45 5

57. remixfa (Posts: 14604; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

so i guess thats not 2-ply then. :)

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 21:46 2

72. corporateJP (Posts: 2458; Member since: 28 Nov 2009)

The Microsoft Excel chick is a good singer, plus she could catch it.

Just sayin'...

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 17:44 2

5. ivanko34 (Posts: 617; Member since: 04 Sep 2011)

must be apple not apply

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 17:47 11

6. remixfa (Posts: 14604; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

Good concise article, michael. Still trying to squash the fanboy riots, eh? Lets hope it opens some actual discussion up before the usual mudslinging starts.

was that electric car stat real? Does that count the old "wind up" cars they had going for a hot minute? interesting.

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 18:01 6

9. MichaelHeller (Posts: 2707; Member since: 26 May 2011)

as far as PBS told me, that electric car stat was real:

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 20:46

58. remixfa (Posts: 14604; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

neat timeline. They didnt mention wind up cars, so i guess thats part of the car movement. I almost forgot about gasoline crank starters though. lol.
Funny how they credit the invention of the electric starter as a main cause of the death of the electric car. the irony..:)

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 17:50 11

7. andro. (Posts: 1999; Member since: 16 Sep 2011)

Apple doesn't innovate,it merely pays Samsung
,sharp of LG etc for to use their new technology

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 18:01 15

10. MichaelHeller (Posts: 2707; Member since: 26 May 2011)

So, why doesn't Samsung or LG ever put these components into their own devices before Apple does?

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 18:07 5

15. BattleBrat (Posts: 1476; Member since: 26 Oct 2011)

Apple might pay them not to, or contractually obligate them not to.

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 18:08 9

16. TROLL (banned) (Posts: 4851; Member since: 13 Apr 2012)

Very logical question!

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 18:13 5

19. GENARAL.LEVY (banned) (Posts: 93; Member since: 17 Apr 2012)

Cause not everyone thinks like Mercedes or BMW.....

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 18:16 4

20. GENARAL.LEVY (banned) (Posts: 93; Member since: 17 Apr 2012)

Only the finest will do... Marque of distinction. Prestige.

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 18:21 11

22. taz89 (Posts: 2014; Member since: 03 May 2011)

my guess would be that samsung lg etc would make more money selling the retina display for example to apple rather than put it in there own product....what i hate is when some articles title is like apple invent retina for ipad when its not true and give no credit to the companies that actually make it.

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 18:22 9

23. Lucas777 (Posts: 2137; Member since: 06 Jan 2011)

exactly… apple designs them, but they are far from owning the means of production.. its cheaper and less messy to have sharp, samsung, lg implement it

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 19:27 6

46. jjjsong (Posts: 75; Member since: 27 Dec 2011)

It should be pretty obvious and logical that Apple requested screens of such spec and would like manufacturers such as Samsung, Sharp to make them.

In terms of how it can be achieved, it only makes sense that it's really up to Samsung's or Sharp's technology. I don't think Apple invented anything there.

And it should be obvious that since Apple requested this screen and it is most likely there are contractual terms to make this "technology" exclusive to Apple for a certain amount of time.

This has been my thought since the very beginning. Albeit I don't have any facts to back any of my thoughts up, it seems pretty logical to me.

posted on 23 Apr 2012, 19:44 5

47. remixfa (Posts: 14604; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)

my guess is that LG got a fat payday to let Apple introduce retina. As far as Samsung, the same probably happened with the hummingbird, though samsung did keep the better GPU version to themselves.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories