Key Takeaways

  • Jordi Hays cited Blake Scholl to argue that Apple failed the standard Steve Jobs set in 2010, shipping foldable hardware without explaining why the category deserves to exist.
  • John Coogan argued that UI context makes hardware flaws irrelevant: running two apps side-by-side turns the center crease into a natural boundary rather than a display defect.
  • The real value of a pocket foldable is eliminating the decision to pack a secondary tablet for unexpected 20-minute waits.
  • Product positioning breaks down when hardware upgrades collide with cultural pushback on screen addiction and daily phone usage.

The Disagreement

When Apple previewed the iPhone Duo, tech commentary split between mechanical critique and product purpose.

Hays pointed to a critique from Blake Scholl. In 2010, Steve Jobs sat in an armchair on stage and defined exactly why the iPad needed to exist between a smartphone and a laptop. Hays argued Apple skipped that homework with the Duo. “Apple seems to have made a pretty great version of a foldable phone without saying why foldable phones deserve to exist,” Hays said. He pointed out that selling a device designed to capture more visual attention feels strange amid rising cultural fatigue around digital habits: “I think it's somewhat uncomfortable because of the overarching sort of discussion around phone addiction and screen time.”

Coogan took the opposite view, focusing on physical utility over category philosophy. He dismissed worries about the center crease, noting that Apple used precise render lighting to downplay it and that software design solves the rest. “Especially if this is a mode where you're using two apps,” Coogan said. “You don't care about the middle at all.”

For Coogan, the device solves a basic friction point: carrying an iPad requires advance planning, but a foldable stays in your pocket. “If you have the Duo, it's your daily driver. It's always on you. You didn't need to think, oh, I should break an iPad because I'm going to be stuck waiting in this line for 20 minutes.”

Who's Right (and When They're Wrong)

Coogan is right about user habits. Hardware flaws fade the second software gives them purpose. Early critics hated the iPhone notch and the Dynamic Island, yet users adapted within days because the software integrated around the cutouts. When split-screen multitasking splits your workspace cleanly down the center, the crease stops being a visible blemish and becomes an interface margin. If a founder builds a tool that turns low-value dead time into productive work, customers buy it regardless of philosophical purism.

Yet Hays and Scholl identify the larger marketing trap. When you introduce a radically new form factor at a high price point, you cannot rely entirely on users figuring out the use cases themselves. Jobs understood that if you do not define the job-to-be-done, your detractors will define it for you as an overpriced gimmick. Apple avoided explaining the product's place in daily life, leaving it vulnerable to the charge that it merely feeds screen addiction.

What to Do With This

Audit your core product onboarding or sales deck this week. If you are asking users to adopt a new behavior or pay for an unfamiliar format, write down the single gap it fills between two existing habits. If you cannot describe that middle space in one clear sentence, rewrite your landing page copy before writing another line of code.