[Wowfunhappy]

> something like the iPhone was inevitable given all the experimentation going on in the market.

I agree, but I don't think it would have been as polished as the iPhone out of the gate.

> Apple also made the Newton. But folks don't call back to it or praise its makers very often.

As a sibling comment mentioned, I think the Newton was perhaps better than you're giving it credit for, but my point isn't that Apple makes great products, it's that it's possible at certain times for certain teams within large companies to "feel it".

Perhaps entertainment could be another example. Do you think the team that made Wall-E didn't "feel it"? What about Zelda Breath of the Wild?

[kibwen]

> as polished as the iPhone out of the gate

I think people are forgetting how extremely unpolished the iPhone was out of the gate. No app store. Even something as fundamental as copy/paste took until years later.

[borski]

You’re talking about features. It didn’t have that many, sure.

But the features it did have were extremely well polished.

Part of the reason it took them forever to add copy/paste is because Android phones had 12 different ways to do it and it was unintuitive as a result. I’m not suggesting Apple’s solution is better; but it’s definitely intentional and thought-through.

At the time, Apple was one of the very few companies with really intentional design. Now many companies have adopted that philosophy.

[Wowfunhappy]

There's a difference between polished and feature-rich. I'd actually argue the iPhone was more "polished" before they introduced the app store—their vision was pure.

[ghaff]

On the other hand, it was really the third-party apps that arguably distinguished the iPhone from the manufacturer-centric phones previously.