[kart23]

Mp3s and mobile phones made sense because apple had tech that nobody else had. The touchscreen and allowing tons of music to be stored were gamechangers. I dont think apple has anything up there sleeve here, just trying to compete in a segment they are already behind on.

[tinus_hn]

The iPod had less disk space and lacked features other players had. It was a hit mostly because it was easy to use and looked good.

[geerlingguy]

The scroll wheel. Every other player was a 'techie' device back then. I had a couple other MP3 players at the time; the entire experience from loading songs onto it to navigating around the UI with awkward buttons was annoying at best.

The iPod's simple UI, coupled with easy iTunes integration, made it head and shoulders above the rest... though the first few iterations were quite expensive compared to the competition.

[FabHK]

It also came after iTunes, and would just basically sync your entire iTunes library (few people had more than 5GB music back then) including artist, song title, etc. in mere minutes (over FireWire). It had amazing ease of use, and a great UI.

[jonny_eh]

The iPod had a smaller form factor than competing hard drive mp3 players.

[shawn]

The original iPod didn't have a touchscreen.

[Twisell]

Do we have actual fully-autonomous* cars sold today?

No.

So by definition Apple can’t be behind of nothing.

*Tesla "autopilot" which require all time human supervision clearly doesn’t count as of now.

[tonylemesmer]

They can be behind on R&D. Not saying they are, but advantage starts years before it gets to market.

[Twisell]

Only people under heavy Non Disclosure Agreement could assert that any of the competiting company is leading/behind in terms of R&D. An no such people would be foolish enough to comment about that publicly. Big money and strategic informations are at stack.

Conversely if any company brag about it’s leading mastery without delivering this should be considered as a PR stunt until proven otherwise.