Steve Jobs left designer Jony Ive more power than anyone at Apple - Page 2

Originally Posted by ConradJoe

Isn't that true of all department heads in big organizations? They answer only to the CEO?

Who did Cook answer to when Jobs was CEO?

Isn't there, for example, a CTO at Apple who answers only to the CEO? Who's the guy in charge of iOS development, for example? Who does he answer to? Beside the CEO?

Originally Posted by QRM

I know it's been said before, but...

The difference between (the new, post 1997) Apple and the rest has been that design has taken precedence to function. It seems to me that the ideas started with "a device that is about this big, weighs this much, looks like this, and is able to do..." and didn't get out the door until Steve was happy that it was close enough, with the emphasis in that order. The rest of the industry tries to fit (cram!) as much engineering into a given form factor with the form factor losing if push comes to shove...

...and hence it only makes sense to leave Jony Ive in a position of autonomy and authority.

Not all of the Apple's design choices have been home runs...but I can think of very few times has design suffered to accommodate function...


I agree with the comments above about the keyboards and rodents...but then I suspect that Steve saw them as necessary evils...hence the magic trackpad and iPhones and iPads without them...and now Siri...as much as I am glad I learned to touch-type so many years ago, it is clear that (Steve's vision of) the future is keyboard-less!

Originally Posted by Obi-Wan Kubrick

One of the main reasons I'm not concerned about Apple without jobs is Ive's

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

And the last time the Apple Board told the Innovator what to do, it killed the company.

You seriously believe they haven't learned from that?

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

And the last time the Apple Board told the Innovator what to do, it killed the company.

You seriously believe they haven't learned from that?

Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella

Don't you know how companies work?
Do I have to draw you a picture?

Originally Posted by kaiser_soze

It isn't easy to criticize Apple's designs when they are as commercially successful as they are.

But commercial success does not equate to objective superiority. Particularly when commercial success is dictated more by form than by function.

The debate will rage over whether Apple's products have lost sight of functionality, and whether functionality has been pushed so far to the back, in deference to form, that Apple's products are significantly flawed as a consequence.

The most definitive example of this, from my perspective at least, is the present batch of keyboards that Apple makes. When the aluminum slab keyboards first arrived I was attracted by the clean design and bought one to use with my MacBook Pro. I kept it for a couple of weeks, at which point it was obvious to me that I would never adapt to it. From a functional standpoint, it is just a lousy keyboard. The stroke is much too short, the tactile sensation is lousy, and the upper surface of the keys is practically a smooth plane. There isn't even any scallop on the tops of the keys. By any objective standards, they are decidedly lousy keyboards. The idea that when you buy a new computer from the world's premiere personal computer company that you have to go searching for a keyboard that you can stand to use is just not right. But this is how it is, and it has been this way for several years now, and there is no indication that Apple is going to return to making functional keyboards. There is no option, i.e., no personal choice. The only keyboards that Apple makes are the ones that Jobs and Ive liked and decided that people who use Apple computers should use. Why couldn't they do that and still make functional keyboards as an option for people who don't care about slick and sexy but who care about the functional quality of the keyboard? What is so wrong with letting individuals have it their way, as opposed to everyone having it the Jobs way?

A few years ago when a new generation of MacBook Pro was introduced, people who preferred non-reflective screens for functional reasons were at first denied the ability to buy them that way. Of course that eventually was corrected, but why was it that way in the first place?

Many people like the Apple mice, but there are lots of people who can't don't like them at all. Why can't Apple make and offer a more conventional mouse for people who prefer that sort of mouse, thereby sparing people from having to pay for an expensive mouse that they don't like and then having to go immediately to another store to buy an inexpensive mouse that they like?

The question remains: Will Apple ever resume production of fully functional keyboards where every consideration of functionality has not been tossed aside in favor of form?

Originally Posted by cjcampbell

I guess one could say that the "i" in iPhone, iPad, iPod, iMac, etc. stands for "Ive." His signature, perhaps?

Originally Posted by muppetry

Keyboard designs often seem to produce to very disparate opinions. Personally, I really like the latest Apple version - fastest and most accurate I have ever used, which I think is partly due to the very short stroke.

Originally Posted by ConradJoe

So what is the basis for this story, which implies that Ives is somehow different from the other SVPs?

Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson

For me the question is, when they've produced a dud (and they will at some point) who will have the power like Jobs did to put the breaks on and stop release, regardless of cost impact.

I hope Ive has that power.

Originally Posted by bdkennedy1

While I hope he continues to work his magic on us, unless he owns Apple he can be told what to do by the board of directors.

Originally Posted by Obi-Wan Kubrick

One of the main reasons I'm not concerned about Apple without jobs is Ive's

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

the suspense is killing me.

Originally Posted by kaiser_soze

The most definitive example of this, from my perspective at least, is the present batch of keyboards that Apple makes.

Originally Posted by kaiser_soze

When the aluminum slab keyboards first arrived... I kept it for a couple of weeks, at which point it was obvious to me that I would never adapt to it. From a functional standpoint, it is just a lousy keyboard. The stroke is much too short, the tactile sensation is lousy, and the upper surface of the keys is practically a smooth plane. There isn't even any scallop on the tops of the keys. By any objective standards, they are decidedly lousy keyboards.

Originally Posted by boeyc15

Sorry for being off topic- I really like my old thinkpad keyboard. When I see these square things now... I think 'what?' why did they go backwards? It appears and feels, IMO, cheap in comparision to the Thinkpad. Just my impression, your mileage may vary.

Originally Posted by boeyc15

PS - while Im ranting... hate these new HD screen shapes vs the old 4:3. It is 'functionally' less area to work with (although better on an aircraft economy seat I suppose). Again, on my old Thinkpad, the screen, was edge to edge, everything in nice tight packaged.
Bring back the 4:3 screens! Bring back 'real' keyboards'! End of rant, carry on.

Originally Posted by ArchAngel21x

I look forward to reading the book. I ordered my digital copy on iBooks today.

Originally Posted by Patranus

Let hope Apple doesn't become ego driven and other don't try and consolidate "power".

Originally Posted by kaiser_soze

...From a functional standpoint, it is just a lousy keyboard. The stroke is much too short, the tactile sensation is lousy, and the upper surface of the keys is practically a smooth plane. There isn't even any scallop on the tops of the keys. By any objective standards, they are decidedly lousy keyboards.....

...Many people like the Apple mice, but there are lots of people who can't don't like them at all. Why can't Apple make and offer a more conventional mouse for people who prefer that sort of mouse, thereby sparing people from having to pay for an expensive mouse that they don't like and then having to go immediately to another store to buy an inexpensive mouse that they like?....

Originally Posted by cjcampbell

I guess one could say that the "i" in iPhone, iPad, iPod, iMac, etc. stands for "Ive." His signature, perhaps?

Originally Posted by Flaneur

I'm not going to quote ConradsloppyJoehere

Originally Posted by kaiser_soze

It isn't easy to criticize Apple's designs when they are as commercially successful as they are.

But commercial success does not equate to objective superiority. Particularly when commercial success is dictated more by form than by function.

The debate will rage over whether Apple's products have lost sight of functionality, and whether functionality has been pushed so far to the back, in deference to form, that Apple's products are significantly flawed as a consequence.

The most definitive example of this, from my perspective at least, is the present batch of keyboards that Apple makes. When the aluminum slab keyboards first arrived I was attracted by the clean design and bought one to use with my MacBook Pro. I kept it for a couple of weeks, at which point it was obvious to me that I would never adapt to it. From a functional standpoint, it is just a lousy keyboard. The stroke is much too short, the tactile sensation is lousy, and the upper surface of the keys is practically a smooth plane. There isn't even any scallop on the tops of the keys. By any objective standards, they are decidedly lousy keyboards. The idea that when you buy a new computer from the world's premiere personal computer company that you have to go searching for a keyboard that you can stand to use is just not right. But this is how it is, and it has been this way for several years now, and there is no indication that Apple is going to return to making functional keyboards. There is no option, i.e., no personal choice. The only keyboards that Apple makes are the ones that Jobs and Ive liked and decided that people who use Apple computers should use. Why couldn't they do that and still make functional keyboards as an option for people who don't care about slick and sexy but who care about the functional quality of the keyboard? What is so wrong with letting individuals have it their way, as opposed to everyone having it the Jobs way?

A few years ago when a new generation of MacBook Pro was introduced, people who preferred non-reflective screens for functional reasons were at first denied the ability to buy them that way. Of course that eventually was corrected, but why was it that way in the first place?

Many people like the Apple mice, but there are lots of people who can't don't like them at all. Why can't Apple make and offer a more conventional mouse for people who prefer that sort of mouse, thereby sparing people from having to pay for an expensive mouse that they don't like and then having to go immediately to another store to buy an inexpensive mouse that they like?

The question remains: Will Apple ever resume production of fully functional keyboards where every consideration of functionality has not been tossed aside in favor of form?

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

Completely unrelated and in no way meant as an ad-hom insult like yours, but I always think of Stalin when I see his name because my first quick read-through of it when he joined was "ComradeJoe".

And now it's stuck in my head. Life's weird.

Originally Posted by Flaneur

I'm not going to quote ConradsloppyJoe here, and I hope no one else does, because he's up to his usual FUDmongering this morning. Total slime and sleaze--not him, what he says. Him, I have no words for.

Edit: So little regard for his subject, and so ignorant of detail, he can't even get Ive's name right. It's Ive, not Ives, Joe.

The good news in this story, that design is primary, the designer is worthy of independence, is what Joe is attempting to subvert. Ordinary rules of incompetence in corporate America don't apply. For comparisons, look at a company like Porsche, Joe. And please go away.

Originally Posted by bdkennedy1

While I hope he continues to work his magic on us, unless he owns Apple he can be told what to do by the board of directors.

Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer

Yes, prototypes are made there. All design and testing first before moving out for mass stamping.

Originally Posted by PeterRRRRRR

Sorry, have to say this is pretty much bullshit on Job's part. He's dead, he has no legal standing anymore regarding how Apple, a publicly traded company, operates. If the Apple Board wants Jony Ive gone, or instructs the CEO to produce a cheaper, plastic MacBook, that's the way it goes. I'm not saying that would be a good thing, or predicting it will happen, but the idea that Steve could make legally binding decisions that hold forth after his death, that's just silly.

Originally Posted by Flaneur

It's Ive, not Ives, Joe.

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

my first quick read-through of it when he joined was "ComradeJoe".

And now it's stuck in my head. Life's weird.

Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella

Don't you know how companies work?
Do I have to draw you a picture?

Originally Posted by isaidso

you're either extremely unintelligent; extremely young (naive), or just a simple troll.

Originally Posted by kaiser_soze

It isn't easy to criticize Apple's designs when they are as commercially successful as they are.

But commercial success does not equate to objective superiority. Particularly when commercial success is dictated more by form than by function.

The debate will rage over whether Apple's products have lost sight of functionality, and whether functionality has been pushed so far to the back, in deference to form, that Apple's products are significantly flawed as a consequence.

The most definitive example of this, from my perspective at least, is the present batch of keyboards that Apple makes. When the aluminum slab keyboards first arrived I was attracted by the clean design and bought one to use with my MacBook Pro. I kept it for a couple of weeks, at which point it was obvious to me that I would never adapt to it. From a functional standpoint, it is just a lousy keyboard. The stroke is much too short, the tactile sensation is lousy, and the upper surface of the keys is practically a smooth plane. There isn't even any scallop on the tops of the keys. By any objective standards, they are decidedly lousy keyboards. The idea that when you buy a new computer from the world's premiere personal computer company that you have to go searching for a keyboard that you can stand to use is just not right. But this is how it is, and it has been this way for several years now, and there is no indication that Apple is going to return to making functional keyboards. There is no option, i.e., no personal choice. The only keyboards that Apple makes are the ones that Jobs and Ive liked and decided that people who use Apple computers should use. Why couldn't they do that and still make functional keyboards as an option for people who don't care about slick and sexy but who care about the functional quality of the keyboard? What is so wrong with letting individuals have it their way, as opposed to everyone having it the Jobs way?

A few years ago when a new generation of MacBook Pro was introduced, people who preferred non-reflective screens for functional reasons were at first denied the ability to buy them that way. Of course that eventually was corrected, but why was it that way in the first place?

Many people like the Apple mice, but there are lots of people who can't don't like them at all. Why can't Apple make and offer a more conventional mouse for people who prefer that sort of mouse, thereby sparing people from having to pay for an expensive mouse that they don't like and then having to go immediately to another store to buy an inexpensive mouse that they like?

The question remains: Will Apple ever resume production of fully functional keyboards where every consideration of functionality has not been tossed aside in favor of form?

In most peoples vocabularies, design means veneer. Its interior decorating. Its the fabric of the curtains of the sofa. But to me, nothing could be further from the meaning of design. Design is the fundamental soul of a human-made creation that ends up expressing itself in successive outer layers of the product or service.