Famous designer says Apple will reveal 'revolutionary' product within 8 months - Page 3

Regardless of what you think or why you yourself buy Apple products the truth is a good majority of people buy Apple devices because they are "sleek and sexy"

1. Computers already existed- adding the word personal to it did not make it a new product.

2. There were already touch screen/music players, putting them together in one package is still not new.

3. Tablets existed before the iPad.

It is just Steve reaching out from the other side to yet again creating an interest in what Apple is doing.

I agree with most people here, if it is a TV so what, we all have one and most people do not recycle their TV all that often, Most people hang on to their TV 10 plus years or not more. I do not see people going out and buying or replacing a TV if they already spend $1000 plus for a big screen.

I challenge people to come up with the next great consumer electronic that everyone must have at a cost point that people will not think twice about. I can not see any thing on the horizon that I must have. This is the challenge Apple has in the next 5 yrs. Yes People would like a better TV experience of any content at any time where they want, but the entire video delivery model today is so screw up and they is no kill app or product which will fix it the next year. The entire systems will have to evolve over the next 10 yrs.

Not so up on punctuation, are you?

Sounds like the kind of copy that melds perfectly with this Starck guy's design sensibilities.....

Really?

Did you make that up or do you have proof?

Don't be so sure.

No, they made an evolutionary product.

I agree 100%. I think people are missing that the issue is that a TV has a lousy user interface. I think that what we'll get is an iPanel with AirPlay to the 'remote' but the REMOTE is your iPhone, your iPad, or perhaps a dedicated internet TV device with a touch interface (7" tablet that is design).

The simplicity is in the UI in the hand; it can play one thing on the screen and you can browse to select the next thing on the iPanel.

Back in the days when a majority of autos used DIN-sized radios that weren't tied into the HVAC system, this might have been possible. But now that replacing radios is a really big deal, if not impossible in so many cars, I can't see Apple getting involved in this. And while Apple would have loved to do an OEM deal with a car manufacturer 15 years ago, those numbers are quite small compared to what Apple is doing today. There's also the issue of driver distraction if you built in iPad or equivalent into a dashboard.

So while Apple might convince some car manufacturers to provide easier integration (with cables or mounts), I don't think a built-in car stereo/iPad is what we're talking about here.

I agree with those who say that the term "revolutionary" is thrown around far too much these days. It's just hype.

I believe he probably is referring to an Apple TV, which I expect to be disappointing and/or way overpriced (although not necessarily unsuccessful). In the long run (and I'm talking 10 to 20 years from now), I expect Apple to be a robotics company. You heard it here first.

Once Apple releases a new product, everyone feels that it was obvious, but here we are, trying to imagine what a new revolutionary Apple product would be and no one can really come up with anything that hasn't already been rumored. It just goes to show how much genius there actually is at Apple. If Apple was able to again come up with a completely new product category that became a major part of their business and didn't substantially erode their other product lines, it would probably be the most extraordinary thing ever achieved by a business and the stock probably would hit $1000, as some pundits have predicted. The real question is that now that Apple is so large, can they still produce great products when they must appeal to a mass consumer audience. Apple is no longer producing BMWs; they're producing Fords. High quality Fords with elegant designs, but Fords nonetheless.

You have to remember however, that designers tend to throw around that "revolutionary" word a lot, and that Phillipe Starck, while an excellent designer, is also a gigantic egomaniac (even by famous designer standards).

That's not victorian... it looks like Paris

Apart from that, Stark has been proven several times to have his interns do his job and get the praises and the money. Check out the story of the logo of the French presidency of the european union which proves that point.

My personal guess: Apple will put out the iCar, a car that answers to your voice. Or the iYacht, an affordable yacht for every millionaire. Or maybe the iCyborg, an apple servant that fetches your coffee...

You are mixing up practicality with "design sense," most of your objections are practical ones in regards to what you see in that one picture and nothing to do with "design sense" at all. Then you criticise the photographer who took the one picture you base all this stuff on?

Phillipe Starck is by all accounts a gigantic, a-hole, egomaniac, but he is also one of the most successful designers who ever lived and highly regarded by almost everyone in the field.

The things I can't understand about this news, are:

- Starck's reputation is built mostly on furniture design and household accessories so this only really makes sense if Apple is designing a lamp or a couch.

- Ive is a designer of the same calibre, I don't understand why they would go to Starck and why Ive wouldn't be totally upset about that.

- The most likely new product is the TV, but the best design for a TV is a simple black slab. there is literally nothing to "design" on a TV set except the internals.

I totally agree bout the blabbermouth thing, but he is French after all. If Steve Jobs was still alive he would be in deep trouble I think. The very fact that he announced it ahead of time himself is a gigantic ego move on his part.

Really? Live events such as sports, or local newscasts are obsolete? Apple has a way to crack that?

I'm not suggesting that an iPanel wouldn't be awesome, at all. More like until Apple has a way to change the medium (which ironically even home internet is still controlled by the cable companies) it's really just another take on a 'smart' TV that will still need to slave to a cable box and not really revolutionary.

Ridiculous claptrap.

He is also famous for smelling really, really bad. I still dig some of his work though.

You realise the word you used is as offensive as the "n-word" right?

I hope someday you need help and the only one around to help you is one of "those people."

As the photo shows, Starck is one of those design figs who sacrifices comfort for look. Check out that low-backed, back-pain couch
and the narrow-backed, unpadded, arm-fatigue, armless dining-room chairs. Like the plastic seats at Burger King and McDonald's,
that furniture for children and emaciated, stick-figure runts is bound to get rid of guests in 20 minutes, as it's furniture on which an
adult American will never relax.

Then, there are his overpriced, oddball devices for the home: They always end up on Target's end-caps as clearance items, because
there are never enough retail-slave design figs to buy them. From sky-blue-plastic-accented kettles (Who the FK uses a kettle,
these days, instead of a microwave oven?) to odd-looking, odd-sized, odd-shaped, sky-blue-plastic-accented toilet-brush holders,
the sensible consumer's reaction is: "WTF? Starck's ugly, misshapen junk is an eyesore, and the fartwork appliance's odd angles,
bulges, etc. won't let it stack or fit alongside anything else nearby."

So, his "revolutionary" comment makes me cringe, just like the heavier, thicker, yawn-inducing iPad 3: More of Apple's HYPE,
channeled through another fawning parasite.

P.S. I wish I could have accented this post with sky-blue plastic.

Starck produces tons of middle of the road junk and puts his silly name on lots of things he had no hand in designing, but ....

... he is also responsible for quite a few beautiful, perfect, iconic designs that will live on at least as long as Dieter Rams' stuff in museums and design history books etc.

We can only hope that this is one of his good ones.

Isn't that really just an Apple take on the smart TV, or the current Apple TV expanded in some way?

No music and TV are two very different animals. Music isn't live, it isn't already fed into every house (short of useless FM radio) it isn't bundled, it isn't controlled and delivered by the same vehicle, and on and on...Music NEEDED a medium to reach the audience better for the 21st century, what the Industry didn't like was the aggressive pricing, but that's a different story. In this case Apple would want to be a middle man in something that doesn't want one.


Useless personal attack in which you have no proof of. I own each first gen model of each device you listed, so no. The rest...sources? I'm hopeful it would be successful but there's no evidence, just mere speculation based on hope. TV is hardly in 'crisis'


WHat logic? what numbers?

I haven't met him in person but from what I've seen and heard of him I can't stand the man.

However, I own some of his work. Good design is good design regardless of the personality (or lack of one), of the designer.

Experts? Really? Ooookay. Don't drink the Kool-aid!

Last week I cancelled Directv, bought an over the air antenna and installed a wifi tv box. I saved over US $ 100 /month. In March I installed a prepaid card in a wifi smartphone, saving over US $ 60/month. I also replaced all the cell phones plans of my family with prepaid phones and asked my family members to limit individual phone calls to 1 minute each. Together with other cost cutting measures (replacing expensive software updates with free software) I saved over US $ 250 a month or US $ 1500 a year. A truly revolutionary Apple product would allow me to reduce my monthly computer/communication/entertainment bills to zero.

Shoes haven't been updated in a while:

• Same basic shape (foot)
• Same complicated interface (laces, buckles, velcro or zipper)
• And no matter what your context (what you're wearing, where you are) they remain the same color.

I think Apple's (and Starck's) iShoes are positioned do better:

• Tie and untie your shoes via Siri
• Provide haptic feedback when you're going the wrong way (map and GPS services)
• Retina uppers change color and intensity adaptively (ambient light sensor)

And so much more. AppleInsider, you can quote me in your next headline as saying "Apple to revolutionize footwear in 2012."

Wearable computing is the next phase.

Lunatik

$1.2 million and going:
Pebble Watch

Sony Smart watch

I can't wait for the iBeret!

This thread is all noise and no signal, just like the original article.

Yes indeed.

I am quite amazed at how many posters on this thread are still railing against the photograph and using it to criticize his designs. They seem to think it is a picture of his apartment and that the furniture is of his design and that he took the photo. Hilarious.

I sure hope you are joking when you say "experts".

IF Apple does come out with a TV, it would be really cool if the designed an easy to setup/use home theater system. I was on vacation a week ago renting a big house and in their family/media room they had a big screen plasma TV and home theater system. Someone changed one of the settings on the receiver by accident and it took an A/V guy 2 hours to figure out how to fix it. I'd love Apple to come up with an easy way to connect and manage your TV and peripherals. Also something with amazing sound quality. Oh and while they're at it a really nice car deck where I can slip in my iphone would be sweet.

Maybe longer. Seriously, a company lke Apple, employing some of tephra smartest people anywhere will have 100's of great ideas floating about. Look at iPad; the concept was developed well before the first iPhone, in fact iPhone derived from that project yet it must have been at least six years before iPad hit the market.

As to what it is I don't know, frankly I have little need for a TV. What I would love to see Apple do though is to get into robotics. The industry and technology is still young but even simple devices can be useful.

Maybe he cracked the secret to integrated, easy-to-use security.

Precisely. So that's why our thoughts are blocked. Because we're not thinking in revolutionary ways. So how about this:

No need for a screen in the car. You're driving. You also have a computer in your pocket. So how about the next revolutionary product being... SIRI. But not like you think. It's Siri all by itself (herself?). It's a nano sized button. That's it. Put it in your car. Press the button and ask. Put it in your office, on your fridge, in your bathroom. It communicates with iCloud, etc, so it knows everything about you and can search the web.

It costs $99. Press it as you step into the shower and ask about your days schedule. Press it in the car and ask directions; then ask to be guided turn by turn...

The possibilities are endless. In fact, put it on audio-aware and you don't even need to press the button.

(Apple, to answer your next question, yes, I'd love to work for you. Find me through the fallow website godsnap.com.).

Interesting... Can you elaborate on this "connectivity subsumes content" concept -- especially as it applies to the current stranglehold of bandwidth/accessability applied by the cablecos?

I don't understand. Jonathan Ive & his team are doing a great job. Why having a big ego like STARK ruin the Apple aesthetic?

There's no need for a marketing gimmick.

He did stuff for Microsoft before and it sucked.

http://www.engadget.com/2004/08/31/f...osoft-optical/

I have no idea why Apple would bring him in.

I'm shocked that idiots are really using that photo as a way to discredit this guys design sense. You can't glean anything from a random photo that AI put on their site for effect.

Whatever it is we'll probably have to log in with a unique secure password in order to use it.

Not Apple juice

Speaking for myself, I was face-palming based on that ridiculously silly looking speaker thing-y on which an iPod sits.

Out of curiosity, I went and checked his furniture design: looks even funnier.

But I guess there's no accounting for taste....

The photo might have looked much better as a large high res image where detail in the highlights and shadows were visible. At any rate - in terms of design any photo will do if it is deemed right from a design point of view. It could be out of focus yet 'perfect'.

I agree there's something very odd about this whole thing and I personally find most of Philippe Starck's work 'over designed'. Too flamboyant and showy. That is just my opinion, of course, but as you said, Ive is the main man at Apple so why bring in another designer? Maybe they just get on well and wanted to work together. Stranger things have happened.

As far as designing a flat screen goes - there is definitely a lot of 'design' that goes into that. The hard drive images that were posted above shows that. There is also the Porsche designed HD by Lacie. Its just a rectangular box with no features whatsoever, but it is pretty unique all the same.