Do products ever reach an "ultimate state"?

Below was a post that I've started on the Core77 forums:

Is there ever an "ultimate state" for a product whereby the product have evolved to the point where it cannot be significantly improved anymore? EG. I felt that Apple's MacPro, Mac Mini, and MacBook have already reached its "ultimate state" (in terms of industrial design). If there's ever going to be a design change to that product, it would be very minor or non-industrial design related (eg. a new processor, more rams, better graphics card).

See if you can list other products that have reached its "ultimate state".

Also what happens when a product have reached its "ultimate state"? Sit back, layoff all the designers, and watch the sales grow?

The natural answer is that as long as people continue to innovate newer technologies, there will always be a better "ultimate state". But what if the technology have become so advanced that it's no longer worth it to invest more resources into improving the product?

Is it really necessary to create different iterations of essentially the same product over and over again until every niche in the market is covered?

I've been doing quite a bit of what I would called "quickfire" houseware product concepts for the past month or so. Why I decide to called it "quickfire" is because most of these projects are commission based, therefore, I'm more inclined to move the project from concept to shipped product as quickly as possible so that I can get rewarded quicker and more frequent. In a way, I see that this scenario is like the part in The Inconvenient Truth where Al Gore was illustrating how people have this tendency to weigh "goldbars" more than the planet Earth. I know that this is an unhealthy practice for industrial designers as it really makes the use of the Earth's precious resources into a casual practice -- all just to satisfy human being's insatiable desire for a better object and most of all, money. So this begs the question: Is it really necessary to create different iterations of essentially the same product over and over again until every niche in the market is covered? My best answer is to make sure that I do what I can to make sure that what I design is as close to "the ideal" as possible so that there will be less desire for people to have to ever buy or design a better iteration of that same product again in the future. To do that, I felt that keeping the product down to its essential elements is important. As an industrial designer, I felt less compelled to design something when I see that the market is already saturated with already well designed products.