I honestly don't think it should be considered innovative. People come up with new ways of using existing technology all the time. It shouldn't be considered innovative. I put aluminum foil on my antenna to extend its range, should I be considered innovative? As a matter of fact, I think putting aluminum foil on antenna is more innovative than using heat pad to heat up food. Why? When aluminum foil was invented, it was never intended to be used to detect electromagnetic waves. On the other hand, those heating pads were invented to heat stuff up. So using these heating pads to heat up food is exactly what it was invented for. Innovation should be something that is not existent before and is revolutionary. A shaking ball for making ice cream is innovative. Using the shaking ball to make frozen yogurt, instead of ice cream, is not innovative.
And that's exactly why we'd get nowhere with this debate, because you and I have different ideas of what "innovation" means.
Take Apple, the poster child for Western innovation. Is it really innovative, or is it simply responding to market demands?
Then you look at Chinese electronics companies that make cheaper knock-offs. A knee-jerk reaction would be to dismiss them as unoriginal and not innovative. However, if we think about it, the question really should be: why *wouldn't* Chinese companies make knock-off products?
Original product design takes a lot of resources. Apple is rewarded for that investment by being the leader in its industry. However, in China, Apple products are luxury items, much like LV bags: only the rich can afford them.
This leaves a market of hundreds of millions. A company that caters to this market doesn't need to invest in R&D, all it has to do is copy a few interesting features and price its products much cheaper than Apple.
Why doesn't that happen in North America? It's not just because of stricter patent laws. In a way, the current tablet market is much like the cell phone market in China. The iPad 2 is the leader, and there is a plethora of much cheaper tablets, from Blackberry to ASUS to Kindle to the defunct HP (which once went on sale for 99$).
So why are those cheaper tablets struggling for a market share in North America, while the cheap iPhone knock-off are selling like hotcakes in China? It all comes back to the market. The
. To many families, that's 2-3 months worth of income. To my in-laws, for example, a comfortably middle-class small town family, this is an entire month's salary. A knock off might cost 1000 RMB, by comparison.
On the other hand, an iPad 2 sells here for 700$, which is only 20-30% of the monthly income of a middle class family. People are much more likely to pay more for a better product *when they can afford it*. If we multiplied the price of all tablets by 4, I bet people would be much more willing to buy 1000$ Kindles than 3000$ iPads!
So in the end, the whole argument is not about innovation. It's about the market.