Apple designer Jonathan Ive says current projects are his 'most important' work - Page 3

If you 'd use an Apple Time Machine along with the iCloud, you'd have the backup of any system or hard drive the moment it goes bad on you. Furthermore, you wouldn't need to go through any time-consuming transferring of data to a new computer as any other computers you have would already be synched, and the new once would self-sync. 

 

It seems to me you are looking for a solution to a problem that has been even more elegantly solved.

If an Imac hard drive fails - you have to take the Imac apart to replace it. If an external stacked hard drive fails on a Mac Mini it's simple to replace.

If the Imac motherboard fails - well I think the Imac is a right-off. But with a Mac Mini - at least the Display is unaffected.

If the Imac Display fails - well again I think the Imac is a right-off. But with a Mac Mini the computer is unaffected.

 

And similar arguments apply to upgrading one or other elements of the computer. I think that is the downside of an all-in-one design, but I don't see a reason why it has to be like that - it could be re-designed so that a component failure doesn't write off the whole computer. If you look at the side-elevations of the Imac that have been published on the thread - there's actually lot's of space available behind it for something clever - because of the back-projection of the stand.
 

>The real story here is what a blatantly racist person Jonathan Ives truly is.<

 

Real in what way? And racist against whom?

 

What comes through on the latter front (in the full Torygraph interview) is that, vis-a-vis receiving a Knighthood from his Head of State for excellence in designing and making things, Ive is proud of his birth-country's historical achievements in designing and making things. (I suggest Brunel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunel as his example).

The ODD in the iMacs takes up very little internal space and thickness. In the notebooks it's a much different story with the ODD taking up 25% in the 13" MBP.

I can surely image the ODD being removed (it's already been done in the Mac mini) and I can conceive of Apple making their iMac thinner (just as they've done many times before) but the ODD removal would just be a part of that change and not the reason.

 

I think a lot people don't really understand the positioning of the initial mac pro. You got something really competitive in the base design, which likely leveraged a portion of the headless imac crowd that wanted features beyond those of the imac. With the imac, even today thunderbolt disk options aren't really there yet. We don't have many options, and depending on disk configuration, I wouldn't be willing to take my chances on what Promise puts in there. It's entirely stupid really. They state RAID 5 support, yet there isn't any mention of what is used to populate it or if spare drives are available, and I would not wish to leave a RAID 5 sitting while waiting for a replacement drive. The Apple store also has a few complaints of DOA drives with that setup. You'd think for the price they could at least test it properly. Anyway I'm getting off track. I'm concerned that with the trend toward cheap hardware on the low end of the mac pro line, they've kind of driven that crowd off.

 

Yes... thinner. It appeals to stupid people and possibly those with poor taste in literature (not sure if anyone will get that joke). When I say stupid, the problem is that some people jump on a new design whether it's an improvement or not, just because something has changed. That's more about chasing bright shiny objects than computing needs. Considering how much heat some of these machines kick off and the fan speeds on the macbook pros under heavy loads, I wish they'd go in favor of better cooling rather than as thin as possible. Some amount of sealing or baffling would be nice too given the amount of spill threads I've noticed on macrumors, and no one ever expects it to happen to them. There are just better functional improvements they could make beyond thinning down every design. With the imac you're past the point of gaining real desk space anyway. Even shaving off a whole cm of density wouldn't give you that entire cm in usable space.

The external Superdrive?

All this photo shows is that Jonathon Ive and Apple are designing CNC machines to make MacBook Airs.

 

 

Ah, thank you. But that's the only thing I can think of, unless he considers the AirPort family "add-ons" because of their footprint.

I emphatically disagree.

You could elaborate on that. What could you possibly gain from a thinner imac? You don't see linear  gains in desk space by reducing density.

There are very few things that become classics that people have a hard time improving upon. The iMac on the other hand is a study in continuous improvement. That is bad for you but realize that detachable parts greatly reduce reliability. In general with electronics you want to minimize connections/connectors if you want good reliability. If there is one quality that justifies single board computers it is reliability. Of course if you are owner of a board that fails it might not feel all that great.

As to that board that failed, if it was one little chip you do have the option of reworking the board.
This is certainly true. Thinnest can actually take away from functionality. So any attempt to make the iMac thinner at the expense of performance is a mistake. However technologies march forward should give Apple new design opportunities.

This is an iMac we are talking about. So I have to ask what makes you beleive a bit thinner iMac suddenly becomes that much more functional? In a portable device thin and light do impact functionality, on the desktop the impact of going to thin can actually be negative.

It is astounding to me how little recognition Steve Wozniak gets in these discussions. There would be no Apple/Mac computers without him. Steve Wozniak (Woz) is the real mastermind behind 90% of all the technology we use today from not only Apple but ALL computers! He invented the keyboard / monitor interface using a TV for heaven’s sake! He invented the mouse. He put color on the screen. He made it possible to go on the internet. He invented the touch tone phone. He even invented remote control. He was the first to invent a real game to play on a computer. I could go on and on; the man is a genius! Not trying to belittle Steve Jobs I greatly honor the man; He was a mastermind of aesthetics, quality, and marketing but there would be no Steve Jobs, Ive, Cook, Microsoft, Android, or any other tech company today without Woz !

I have read Steve Job’s bio and Steve Wozniak’s bio - many here would do well to do the same. Then you would know how Apple and many other companies really came to where they are and who deserves the credit.

That's patently false. And yes, you may enjoy the slight literalistic pun in there.

 

Did he, now?

 

No.

 

But wasn't the first.

Just… stop lying.

 

None of these things happened.

 

And that's not even true.

 

You're going to want to read it again, but actually read it this time.

I can see you haven't read it....

No need to respond I'm done with Apple insider...

 

Long, long before the Jobs biography, absolutely I did.

I will not put up with being called a lyre when I KNOW what I am talking about.... GOOD BY!!!

Good luck

 

All the things you have said absolutely were mentioned in the book. Woz wasn't the inventor of any of them. 

 

He wasn't the first to play a computer game. He built a hardware Pong to play on his TV, is all.

He had nothing to do with the invention of the mouse. Xerox' PARC team did that.

He wasn't the first to do color screens, either.

He had nothing to do with the creation of the Internet.

He didn't make a touch-tone phone at all, and the remote he made wasn't the first by any stretch of the imagination. It was an incredible remote, to be sure, given that it had an entire Apple ][c in it.

 

I think you've simply misread the biography.

 

No, I was being real.

 

Soo you have a background in art or design do you? well let me know, I was just wondering if you can back up anything you just said.

Seems that your arrogance has overtaken your intelligence, which apparently didn't take very much...
All i was suggesting was that its a bit of a leap to say that Ive's designs are ripping off another persons work, using angles & lighting (smoke & mirrors) apparently can fool even this simplest of minds ;) (Ohh yeah i meant you, just thought id spell that out for you ;)  )

Better luck next time :)

 

This forum gets more Pythonesque by the day!

Really?

Nikola Tesla patented one in 1898.

-> http://www.google.com/patents/US613809