The reality is, we can’t have paradigm shifts on every renewal cycle. Users become familiar with the way the iPhone works, in particular in relation to its integration with the iOS/OSX eco-system. The trick therefore is to resist change for change’s sake, but still bring worthwhile – and inspiring – improvements to the experience.

There are some big ‘wows’ to be had, nonetheless. LTE (if it works as Apple says it does) will be massive for iPhone 5 users because hitherto, LTE implementations have been power hogs. Photo Stream Sharing is a BIG wow for the effortless way photos can be shared among a group. Social network nuts will jump right on this, but business users will too. I think we will surely see enhanced apps being developed to take advantage of the 2X speed bump overall.

And the Maps facility looks really cool to me. Not just for the sheer usefulness of the approach Apple has taken, but because it gets us out of the Google ad-driven environment at least for this application area. I really do not want my mobile experience to become as ad polluted as TV certainly has been for decades, and the mainstream web along is today. Google is an ad business (98% of its revenue is from ads) so you can expect Android to be a funnel for ads, as indeed it is already. Hopefully Apple will not go this route.

I think the iPhone 5 would be a great phone, and undoubtedly help Apple make a ton of money. But there is competition now that is just as good, and maybe a little better in some areas. I just expected them to do something a little bigger.

The main point is that this silly article pokes fun at Apple’s iPhone 5 Keynote (which is OK in itself, everyone should be able to take a joke and there surely was stuff in Apple’s presentations that one could chuckle at), but the problem is the inference that today RIM remains in some way a competitor to Apple. That’s the point of difference my comments at least are trying to address because, in my opinion, RIM is no longer relevant to Apple.
The focus for RIM ought to have nothing to do with competing with Apple, but taking on weaker companies against whom RIM stands a chance of carving out a successful future.
Poking fun at Apple is an unhelpful a legacy from the days when RIM was indeed a powerful competitor to Apple, and of course from the time when it was itself much stronger than Apple in the phone market. But those days are gone and will not come back. RIM lost. You can thank Balsillie for that.
What would be good to see is articles pointing out where RIM can beat weaker companies like HTC, LG, Microsoft/Nokia and Samsung (but good luck with the last two.) Forget Apple, it’s off in the distance doing its own thing.

Apple makes a ton of money for one reason only: LOTS of people buy their products, figuring the company offers great value for money. Purchases are, in the vast majority of cases, individual decisions by folks spending their own hard-earned money. To imagine they’d be happy to toss away their cash without thinking about it is to dismiss their ability to figure out a deal when they see it.

And to say Apple doesn’t make quality is just plain silly. They are building high-end precision engineered products that ‘just work’ and offering them at competitive prices, in volume. It’s like being able to buy the quality of a Rolex at the price of a Casio.

It’s far from easy to make things that ‘just work’.

The easiest thing in the world is to add more buttons and connectors, add more convolutions in your software to provide choices that just end up confusing the user. The art is in stripping stuff away without compromising utility. It’s a skill Apple has grown over 30 years and it’s now in the company DNA. Almost everything they do is built on this principle. To many, that’s a sign of real quality. Your definition may differ, but you would be in a small minority on that. As I said, LOTS of people choose Apple.