Steve Jobs left designer Jony Ive more power than anyone at Apple - Page 3

I agree that there is a lot form over function at Apple. The first AIR is a perfect example. However the current iPhone design is pretty excellent. Further it is pretty break resistant.

That doesn't explain one thing, my 3G cracked its back yet my iPhone 4 has yet to do so. 😳. Just saying.

Possibly Fadal. By the way that is one excessively clean machine shop.

I don't know where you get these conclusions. People also put cases on their plastic iPhone 3G and 3GS, and the aluminum-backed original iPhone. Plastic can shatter too. The appeal of glass is not about glass being more shatter resistant: it's simply a nicer material. It doesn't scratch as easily as plastic and look worn out after a year.

And I would not over-generalize about iPhone 4 owners; some don't use any bumpers or cases at all, preferring the naked look. I don't buy your "form over function argument"

Priceless. Couldn't tell if this was tongue in cheek or not but I just had to comment...

I hope that form gets dialed back a bit to allow function to perform better.

i like hearing this guy speak. we need to see more of him at those apple press conferences

I don't necessarily agree that the glass back is a poor design. I have a 2+ year old 3GS that I am waiting for another month to upgrade. I have never used any kind of case or protector or bumper on it. I keep it either in my pocket, in my hand, or on a cloth on my dresser when charging. The front glass is perfect except for one tiny small dent/scratch (looks like a tiny spot that can only be seen by angling to external light), while the plastic back is all scratched up and there is a crack from the dock connector slot running up the plastic 1/3 of the way. I am pretty sure this crack is solely from using the dock connector, so an all metal/glass phone will be way more durable for me, and will have many fewer scratches. If you are one of those who leave their phones laying around all over the place, then get a protective case, but if you are like me; No worries.

Please enlighten me how a dead CEO can legally dictate or prohibit the actions of a publicly traded company.

You seem to be trying to say that you have a question that you would like for me to answer. The only problem is that I have no idea exactly what that question is.

You comment reduces in effect to this: Every aspect of physical design is subjective, therefore it is not possible to criticize any of the designs on an objective basis.

That is an inherent problem with the question at hand. Anyone can always take that position and refute anyone who dares to suggest that many of Apple designs emphasize form to the point that function is tossed out the window. Taken to an extreme, disingenuous point, that same tactic could lead a person to imply that it is not objectively better for the upper surfaces of the individual keys to have shallow scallops so to make it easier to find the individual keys. Or to imply that keyboards where the rows are staggered in separate planes like rows of bleachers do that for not good reason, but only for whim. You might also claim that keystrokes so short as to be barely perceptible are not inferior to keystrokes that measure up to some threshold that is difficult to pin down but still quite real. It does not logically follow, from the fact that it is difficult to say with objectivity what that threshold should be, that there is no objective truth to the general consensus that keyboards with very short travel, such as the keyboards that are typical of notebook computers, are inferior for that reason to keyboards with longer travel. Your challenge was disingenuous. I don't need to go and survey a bunch of professional typists just to produce an answer that is already manifest to people with good sense.

Furthermore, you completely overlooked the other point that I made very clearly, which is that people should be allowed individual choices. People who don't want those manifestly cheap, inferior, junky keyboards ought not under any circumstances find it necessary to go buy an aftermarket keyboard. That's the real problem, that I pointed out and that you just ignored. If you like the damned keyboard, then fine, by all means use it. But I can't stand it, and there are lots and lots of people who feel the same way. If you doubt this, all you have to do is go read the comments on the Apple store. Jobs and Ive liked the slab keyboard, and once Jobs decided that it was Applelicious, it was a foregone conclusion that if you wanted an Apple computer, that was the keyboard that you would get if it came with any keyboard at all, and the only Apple brand keyboard that you would be able to get for a computer where the keyboard is considered an accessory. There is the rub, that annoys me. They should have continued to make the sort of keyboard that conventionally and broadly is regarded as a keyboard of the sort that professional typists prefer, and they should have made that keyboard an optional choice for people who prefer that sort of keyboard.

I have no qualms about going so far as to say that it is a lousy keyboard, because it could not be more manifest to me that it is a lousy keyboard. Your mother is an exception. This is a silly debate. Do a web search for "typing championship", look for some youtube videos and look at the sort of keyboards that are using. If you were to conduct a survey of professional typists, you would possibly find a few who actually like the slab keyboard, but there can be no question that they would be a very small minority. Anyone who doubts this is either very naive or just simply being a PITA.

As evidence that Apple does not put design ahead of function, you point out that Apple added a matte option for some of the MacBook Pros. And you claim that it is pretty much an industry standard. You are just making stuff up, and even your reasoning is made up. None of what you wrote constitutes any sort of sound argument to the effect that Apple does not put design ahead of function. Not one word constitutes any such argument. No one ever suggested that Apple had put anyone in a dungeon or anything along those lines. That argument implies that Apple would have to have done so before there would be any validity to the assertion that Apple puts form ahead of function. That makes no sense, and the easiest way to demonstrate by hypothetical example of the extreme case. If Apple make the keyboards really, really tiny, only about four inches across, then few people would question the loss of functionality, and yet no person would be sent to the dungeon. It is thus manifest that your reasoning is silly.

And how do you infer, from the circumstance whereby you can buy decent keyboards from third parties, that this is evidence that Apple does not follow form over function? I could go on, but hopefully you get the point. The reasoning by which you argue, that Apple does not put form ahead of function, just does not make sense.

Mr Ive deserves his own authority.

Apple was dearly gone when Steve was fired, because there was no one to guide the design aspect of Apple products.

I disagree. Engineering is about compromises. Further, Jobs himself has said good design is not about how something looks but how it functions. The glass likely improves antennae reception, is more scratch resistant, and is recyclable. Now is the compromise worth the increased risk of damage. I do not know, but I have plenty of family members with iPhones who have never broke one. That is subjective. I would think if the issue was large enough, Apple would switch to another material like a carbon composite, metal, or maybe even plastic.

How much money does one need, even to live a very luxurious life? He's a relatively young man who could retire today and live out the rest of his life without a financial worry.

And remember - $128 million is what he's worth, not what he's made (at least according to the report). He's made far more. I have no idea how he lives, but I would imagine that he probably lives in a killer house.

Of course a large portion of that $128 million could be in Apple stock. And you see what happened in the last week just because they didn't break another new record selling iPhones, while people waited for the new phone to come out. How the stock price falls when it's already known that Apple sold 4 million phones in the first weekend is way beyond me. But if the stock price falls, Ive could be worth far less.

Having said that, where else could he work where he'd have the total respect of the CEO, the freedom to create whatever he wants, his own "laboratory" and make a ton of money? So many other companies would say, "let's farm out the design work" and close this facility down to save money. And he's probably even more important now to Apple than he was when Steve was running Apple, since no one else on the current management team probably thinks about design the way that Jobs did.

What's interesting to me about this chart is that:
- it's actually a quite traditional hierarchically organized company (with a lot of VPs!)
- why doesn't Ive have any senior level people reporting to him?
- it reminds us that Tim Cook as new CEO has got to find a new COO.

What you say is very interesting.

Ive is the only one who has nobody reporting to him. What sort of fifedom does he really have at Apple? Without the connect to Steve, is he now an island?

Apple makes what they feel is the best option for the majority of the market they are targeting, You can't expect them to do otherwise. Stop your bitchin, if you don't like an Apple product you can always vote with your feet and buy another company's whatever. If enough people do, Apple will address it or lose customers but right now most seem to like what Apple is offering.

Ive is doing what he should be doing: industrial design. Managing a tree of people under him, and counting beans would be a waste of his talent.

Ive Is the next Steve jobs.

Get off your "professional typist" kick! I personally love the Apple Extended Keyboard, and have 2 extra ones, one of which I always have with me that I use when at client's and am forced to use a Wintel machine.

Yes... I admit it took getting used to, however... I for one... one single measly person in the universe, find the AEK FAR superior to the "klickety-Klack" hack-beasts that you prefer. I also am far faster on it then any other keyboard I have ever tried.

Oh. I guess that doesn't count because I'm not a professional typist. However, I have been using computers now for some 30+ years, and learned typing on an early 1900 Underwood that my dad bought at a garage sale when I was in grade school.

Oh yeah. I'm still not a "professional typist" for that little bit of history either.

PS. some well-known authors prefer quill-pens I've heard, even to this day.

PSS. I guess Apple is doomed now because they don't cater specifically to "professional typists"? Right?

It wasn't a question for you to answer, but an observation for you to consider.


Yes, because what you consider "good" is based on lots of people who are conditioned to, or have adapted to, a particular approach or solution to a problem (alpha-numerical input), and they've become very good at using the various differentiating elements of that solution. It is good that every aspect of physical design is subjective, else our world's design problems might not produce such a wide array of solutions. That would be a very drab world of sameness and without much discussion to be had.


It's worth noting here that your dramatization is in fact an extreme, disingenuous affirmation that Apple not only puts form first, but does not consider function at all.


Yes, all of the design elements you specify as critical necessities are indeed subjective when considering the greater alpha-numerical input problem. It may be objectively true that they are in fact the critical design elements of the specific solution who's absence you so laboriously lament (i.e. older keyboards), but you fail to realize that your supposedly objective needs completely invalidate all of Siri's potential. Consider that Siri is attempting to resolve the same problem: alpha-numeric input. If we can some day do with our voice what you can do with your fingers, is it still objectively true to say that scalloped surfaces, staggered keys, and deeper stroke are superior design elements?


Perhaps you've missed Apple's general approach to business? They aren't interested in offering countless products to pander to each and every consumer group, and that has been sited many times over (feel free to google "apple simple product line"). It was doubtless an imperative design goal to decide upon one, singular mechanical keyboard design that could be consistent across their entire product line and, I would argue, this has been to their great benefit, regardless of how many people dislike it.


I appreciate your benevolent permission. By the way, is there is a fair and equal representation of all those who feel differently than yourself in that comment forum?


This is in line with their "simple product line" initiative and is a very popular business practice: standardize the variables you can control such that consumers know exactly what to expect and are only faced with meaningful decisions (feel free to google "choice is paralyzing"). You represent a small subset of consumers that consider choice of keyboard meaningful AND choose a specific type of keyboard that conforms to your subjective desires for scalloped surfaces, staggered keys, and deeper stroke. You, sir, are the minority.


Yes, sometimes it sucks to be in the minority.


Lucky for the rest of us: you're not the new CEO.

It seems to me that "professional typists" comprise a very small minority of Mac users...

...and just as professional graphics artists or photo editors who may find Apple monitors wanting have other options, so there are also other keyboard choices for they who so wish...

...we could even take a detour into the rationale behind the QWERTY layout...

The whole point of Apple's path under Steve Jobs seems to have been to make the user's experience better and the point to that seems to be to get the machine out of the user's way, making the translation of ideas into finished " products" as simple as possible. In many cases, that involves the translation of thoughts expressed as words, phrases, and sentences formed in the mind somehow into binary code in electromagnetic storage...I'm certain that Steve Jobs must have been frustrated by that problem--there must be a better way than finger tapping on a keyboard layout designed specifically to slow down the operator.

The point is that Steve Jobs likely saw the keyboard as a necessary evil and something which would ultimately go away...so why waste effort in perfecting the device...rather create one that functions more than well enough for the majority while fitting into the minimalist form of the remainder of the product lines?

Why else was Siri considered such a game changer...? The keyboard is arguably one of the weaker points of the iPhone...so instead of trying to make the keyboard better, the Apple answer is to develop a way to get rid of it...a way that "simply works".

You have the objective v subjective aspects backward. Physical aspects of design (such as long or short key throw) are objective, but preference for one or the other is subjective. I strongly prefer short key throw. I even prefer the shorter throw on the Air keyboard to the somewhat longer throw on the MacBook Pro or external keyboards.

The fact that I find the long throw of those oldschool keyboards that you prefer slow, clumsy and somewhat anachronistic doesn't negate your preference for them (I don't mind shallow scallops, btw).


What consensus? The better notebook reviews are quite favourable wrt Apple's keyboards: no flex, fast, light action, quiet, durable, etc. It's easy to understand that they may not be the best design for all use cases, certainly they're not for traditionalists.


This is where you veer into the subjective. There's no evidence that the keyboards in question are cheap or junky. They would be inferior if you prefer long-travel scalloped keys in bleacher rows, but inferiority/superiority in this case is based on a personal typing preference, not on all use cases. Personally, I really disliked the previous series of Apple keyboards that had all the characteristics that you appear to like.


If your preferences are so strong, it's hard to believe that buying a keyboard that you prefer is such an onerous chore. They don't cost much, and they last a fair time.