iPhones: Always Evolutionary
By Harry McCracken | Wednesday, October 12, 2011 at 6:00 am
“…really just a minor improvement…”
“Trust me, Apple won’t maintain its lead in the market if it continues making iterative updates.”
“But one thing didn’t happen today: We weren’t blown away. We weren’t surprised. We didn’t jump up and down, screaming. We don’t even know if we’ll rush right out and get one.”
Boy, people really aren’t all that giddy over the iPhone 4S, are they? It’s not like the old days, when every iPhone upgrade prompted hooting, stomping, and cheering by throngs of grateful Apple fans. Apple should be worried. Very worried.
Except: Those quotes above aren’t about the iPhone 4S. They’re about the iPhone 3G, 3GS, and 4, and you can read the stories they came from here, here, and here, respectively.
I dug those sound bites up as I thought about some of the initial commentary that declared the iPhone 4S to be a snooze compared to earlier upgrades. I had a nagging suspicion that a fair number of people always say that about new iPhones. And in fact, they always do.
The first iPhone was–by almost anyone’s standards–a revolutionary device. The ones that have followed it have all been evolutionary. There have been a few high-profile improvements, like the iPhone 3G’s 3G data and the iPhone 4’s “retina” display, but mostly, Apple has made lots and lots of minor-but-worthwhile tweaks. And it’s devoted a tremendous amount of effort to improving iOS, which current iPhone owners don’t need to buy a new iPhone to get.
Now that the iPhone is almost five years old, it’s worth recapping the changes that each new version has brought. Which is what I try to do in the chart below. It’s not comprehensive–for instance, it doesn’t cover improved battery life, and I don’t dig down into the nitty-gritty of wireless standards. But putting it together refreshed my memory and confirmed my suspicion: There was never an unimaginably wonderful iPhone upgrade. Just four solid, evolutionary ones to date–including the 4S, which reviewers are saying nice things about.
Each of the feature lists below focuses on improvements and additions over the prior iPhone:
Got any additions or corrections to the above?
Comments are closed
Read more:
13 Comments For This Post
October 12th, 2011 at 7:22 am
The processor in the iPhone 4S is an A5, which is based on the Cortex-A9. It also should be noted that "Cortex-A8" and "Cortex-A9" are the proper names for these things. The way you have it listed is backwards, and weird. It would be like calling Intel's Core i7 processors "i7 Core".
October 12th, 2011 at 7:28 am
Also, the Verizon iPhone release-date is wrong. It was released on February 11th, 2010, and not "11/10".
October 12th, 2011 at 8:01 am
HSDPA concerns download, not upload speed. I’m not sure but i think the first iPhone was 4/8gb capacity.
October 12th, 2011 at 9:50 am
I would argue that the 3G was the truly revolutionary product, not because of anything in the hardware but because it introduced the App Store and user-installable native apps.
October 12th, 2011 at 10:40 am
I would alter the wording on the first mention of the Cortex A8 to match the others A8 Cortex
October 12th, 2011 at 10:47 am
iPhone 4 has a flash
October 12th, 2011 at 12:37 pm
The iphone 4 was a pretty big leap over the 3GS for the screen alone.
October 12th, 2011 at 3:16 pm
I’m absolutely not hating on Apple here, but the line: “The first iPhone was–by almost anyone’s standards–a revolutionary device” made me do a double-take, as I never for a moment considered the iPhone revolutionary (as a device. As a movement, that’s a different matter.)
The iPhone successfully took the PDA in the direction it was going anyway by adding a phone to it. They did it extremely well, but it wasn’t revolutionary, I would argue, by any reasonable measure. I am a bit surprised to hear a read tech-head argue otherwise. It was evolutionary (and as a concept, inevitable.)
To call something evolutionary isn’t to insult it and in my opinion doesn’t detract from Apple’s accomplishment one bit.
But perhaps I misunderstand what you mean by “revolutionary.” What I think when I hear that word is something that is completely new thinking, either a new product category or a new way of doing something. The iPhone wasn’t either of those things.
October 15th, 2011 at 4:47 pm
Quite correct. Revolutionary is incorrect.
October 12th, 2011 at 7:07 pm
History is a potent tool, Harry, and you have a better command of its illuminating power than any other journalist I know.
October 13th, 2011 at 1:22 am
iPhone 3GS is described as having 7.2 Mbps HSDPA upload, but presumably you meant downloads since HSDPA is a downlink channel.
January 25th, 2012 at 2:36 am
The processor in the iPhone 4S is an A5, which is based on the Cortex-A9. It also should be noted that "Cortex-A8" and "Cortex-A9" are the proper names for these things. The way you have it listed is backwards, and weird. It would be like calling Intel's Core i7 processors "i7 Core".
February 2nd, 2012 at 4:11 am
The iPhone successfully took the PDA in the direction it was going anyway by adding a phone to it. They did it extremely well, but it wasn't revolutionary, I would argue, by any reasonable measure. I am a bit surprised to hear a read tech-head argue otherwise. It was evolutionary (and as a concept, inevitable.)
To call something evolutionary isn't to insult it and in my opinion doesn't detract from Apple's accomplishment one bit.