But if I follow the logic of your analogy, Jen, then I’d see things a little differently: the really brave thing for Apple to do would have been to develop a phone that simply made and received calls better than anyone thought possible - like your pasta dish - perfection in simplicity. All they have really done is stretch their (rightly) successful user interface across another platform, and they’ve signalled that TV and movies will be next.

The brave and risky way forward would have been to abandon the iPod model and ignore the technology convergence trend, just as the brave and risky way forward for innovation agencies is to never again mention Apple as an example of great innovation.

In my opinion, what’s driving Apple’s success is the badge value of the brand in what has become a pluralistic consumer space; you’re either with Apple and their great leader or against them. It’s the same pluralism exploited by Virgin, Aussie Home Loans, and, previously, Nudie.

And Jen, don’t you secretly wish that your iPhone had the same GPS-mapping capability enjoyed by your Nokia-wielding friends?

So too, does Apple iPhone’s beautiful simplicity matter more to me than Nokia’s increased functionality & extra goodness.

I have already seen the next phone I want, it’s a remake of Marc Newson’s Japanese mobile phone that basically does nothing except let you make & receive calls and send & receive texts. But it’s a beautiful thing.

I’m as geek as the next person but you can have too much of a good thing. A stunning handset that just does the basics in a beautiful way? I’d like to see more of that.