It's more like the difference between a three-speed manual without synchromesh and an automatic. The difference in usability, and appeal to a wide audience, is massive.
Since you're using an endlessly reductionist definition of what is "new," I'll ask you: Has anyone created anything new in computing or consumer electronics in the last twenty years?
But it’s not a difference in the concept of what is a car.
Actually I’ve been very consistent in my definition of what new is, you guys just don’t like the answer. New is a new device concept, a new gadget, not an improvement on an existing concept, not even a really awesome improvement on an existing concept. It’s really not that difficult an idea. Miniaturizing computers to the point that they become the smartphone is new, that is a new device, a new concept, a new gadget; making the interface with smartphones better by adding multiple touch capabilities to the smartphone is not a new device, it is a better version of an old device. If it has to have a new name (HAS to mind you, not we gave it one anyway) there’s a good chance it’s new. Smartphone, new name, new device. MP3 Player, new name, new device. Smartphone with multitouchscreen, not new name, not new device.
Which is just a long version of what I said that got you guys whiny in the first place. Apple takes stuff that was already out there and adds some features and style and makes them pretty and popular. And there’s nothing wrong with that, the guy that moved car starting from an external hand crank to an internal button/ trigger put in one of the big leaps that allowed 20th Century America to be what it was. An awesome add on to an existing device, but it was still a car after he was done making it awesome.