Briefly: On last minute iMac and iPhone design changes - Page 2

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

White, black and grey were said to be candidates for a replacement color, with black winning out despite its slightly conspicuous appearance.

Originally Posted by msantti

I prefer the black logo.

One would get sick and tired of seeing yourself all day with the mirrored one.

Originally Posted by Matthew Yohe

These statements are almost too ridiculous for words. "Pull the wool", "Looks larger than it is", "The sides look thinner than they actually are". What?! They tell you the exact specs of each model. What is your deal? The black trim has nothing to do with it "looking bigger". (which by the way, I use my iMac by looking at it, and am not constantly thinking about the dimensions of it. If it looks big, that's because it is.) The trim is there to to give contrast between the LCD and the surface. Apple isn't deceiving anyone at all.

Originally Posted by Denton

Someone needs to lay down some basic axioms for Apple fan-boys. The first is quite obvious:

1. No matter how good an Apple product, a vocal minority will always complain about every design choice made by Apple.

Originally Posted by Mr. H

It's difficult to believe that the decision to switch from plastic to glass was made just two weeks before they sold over 250,000 iPhones. Could they really have done it in that short a time?

Originally Posted by melgross

That's not it at all, as you should know.

The more SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost. If Apple offer both, then it migh have raised the price by $50.

Why do you think Apple puts cheap gpu's in its machines? To save a few bucks.

Originally Posted by addabox

And yet they managed to offer choice on the 'Books, without raising the price.

Originally Posted by melgross

That's not it at all, as you should know.

The more SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost. If Apple offer both, then it migh have raised the price by $50.

Why do you think Apple puts cheap gpu's in its machines? To save a few bucks.

Originally Posted by melgross

How do you know what the price would have been?

Originally Posted by Duddits

I know I may just be a cat, but I think the logo should have been like the one on the Cinema Display, a nice innocuous brushed alluminum logo that bubbles up from its surroundings.

The screen would have floated better without the black apple beneath it. Perhaps the haste with which they needed to make the change clouded their judgement.

The silver logo didn't neccessarily have to be a mirror; it could have been silver matte so it's there but not so prominent, elegant in its understatement.

I don't think it is that big of a deal, actually. It's just that given Apple's usual "MOMA" design standards, it seems a little jarring.

Originally Posted by addabox

I think the design decision process went like this:

--Jobs wants the outer case to be a solid piece of aluminum, so he can have his material du jour plus the seamlessness he craves.

--Therefore, the screen has to be inset, somehow.

--So carve an inset into the block of aluminum, and use a sheet of glass to make the screen surface perfectly flush with the surrounding case.

--Glass is glossy

--That's good, right?

--But now we have to attach the glass somehow.

--Friction and magnets! Genius!

--But now we have to cover up the magnets and the edge of the aluminum inset, which we can see through the glass.

--We can't put a real bezel on there, that'll screw up the flush front surface.

--Paint the perimeter of the glass black (or put on some kind of appliqué, whatever).

--Make the black perimeter just big enough to cover up the edges of the aluminum and the magnets. Meh, looks kind of tacked on.

--Make the perimeter bold! It's a design statement!

Serve to a grateful world.

Originally Posted by city

$50 for handling another SKU number sounds like a lot. Why would it be more than $5?

Originally Posted by melgross

I don't know why they went for glass.

Was it purely for style, or was there something else?

But, it does make it easy to change the glass.

Originally Posted by addabox

Because they were offered at the same price points as the models they replaced? Like pretty much Apple always does?

Originally Posted by addabox

I think the design decision process went like this:

--Jobs wants the outer case to be a solid piece of aluminum, so he can have his material du jour plus the seamlessness he craves.

--Therefore, the screen has to be inset, somehow.

--So carve an inset into the block of aluminum, and use a sheet of glass to make the screen surface perfectly flush with the surrounding case.

--Glass is glossy

--That's good, right?

--But now we have to attach the glass somehow.

--Friction and magnets! Genius!

--But now we have to cover up the magnets and the edge of the aluminum inset, which we can see through the glass.

--We can't put a real bezel on there, that'll screw up the flush front surface.

--Paint the perimeter of the glass black (or put on some kind of appliqué, whatever).

--Make the black perimeter just big enough to cover up the edges of the aluminum and the magnets. Meh, looks kind of tacked on.

--Make the perimeter bold! It's a design statement!

Serve to a grateful world.

Originally Posted by melgross

There's no carving of blocks of aluminum. These are stampings.

I do think the way the glass was put on was ingenious though.

The use of magnets allowed them to put the glass on easily, so that a glass suction cup could remove it.

By doing that, they concealed the screws.

But, this makes the case easier to disassemble than people think it is. So, it serves a function other than style, and may even have the primary reason why it was done that way.

Originally Posted by Catman4d2

the iphone and the new imac are great products but they are ugly,and not as attractive or drool worthy as the products they replace, the plastic white imac is a non recycleable item my ass.

and with this idiotic imovie "iclip" software i really hate apples direction latley...

mac is becoming windows/and pc yuck.

Originally Posted by addabox

Yes, Mel, I realize they weren't literally carving the aluminum block. A figure of speech for my little scenario.

Originally Posted by melgross

Very cute, guys, but once it's on, you can't see your reflection.

Originally Posted by melgross

Well, it was certainly dramatic!

Originally Posted by JamesWvr

Jobs claimed that it was to make it look good, but it's pretty much impossible to tell that the iMac has glass on it; it just looks shiny. He also claimed that the glass is highly recyclable (which I'm sure was to please the nature-protection groups).

I personally think that Apple getting hammered for not having as high of a recycling rate at other computer companies is ridiculous because I know that a ton of Mac users keep their old computers, they don't just throw them away. I have a Macintosh Classic II sitting on my bookshelf that I never use, but I'm not going to throw it away. I don't know any PC users that put their old Windows boxes on their bookshelves to look at on a daily basis.

And with the mirrored Apple logo... I have an eMac that has a mirrored Apple logo in the same place that it would be on the iMacs, and when using the computer, I cannot see myself in the mirror. Maybe it would be possible to see your reflection on the iMacs, but in order to see myself on the eMac, I have to slouch over and look directly at it.

Originally Posted by Rot'nApple

Very cute yourself, but to each his own and we each may have our reasons for not caring for a glossy screen.

However, his Steveness and crew seemed to have made that decision for us all!

Kinda like the founder of Ford cars and trucks, Henry Ford told is customers regarding his first car, "You can have any color your want, as long as it's black!"

Originally Posted by addabox

Exactly! I considered "rip the inset from the living flesh of the aluminum" and "cast an inset from the molten aluminums of creation" but decided to tone it down.

Originally Posted by melgross

That's not it at all, as you should know.

The more SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost. If Apple offer both, then it migh have raised the price by $50.

Why do you think Apple puts cheap gpu's in its machines? To save a few bucks.

Originally Posted by melgross

Yeah, but that would at least have been closer to the truth!

Originally Posted by Rot'nApple

So instead of the $200.00 and $300.00 price break you'd be getting a $150.00 or $250.00 price break instead?!

More SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost??? Apple started out with the iPod SKU, then the Mini iPod SKU, then the Shuffle SKU, then the... you get my point... Aplle already has a limited product line MacBooks & MacBook Pros for laptops and The Mac Mini, iMac, PowerMac for Desktops... adding screen options for production runs can be managed effectively without creating havoc for their inventory control. There are some brilliant minds over at Apple, this shouldn't stump them or present a problem. It is more of the attitude of what Apple puts out is what you wil get. Love it or leave it type thing. And in certain circumstances, I'm sure some people will pass on this new iMac design until Apple either offers them a choice or the person gives in to Apple's conformity.

Originally Posted by addabox

The truth is more like ripped the inset from the...... Nevermind.

At any rate, I think it's pretty clear that the controversial black border is an artifact of how the glass is inset into the case.

Originally Posted by melgross

That's fine, but it doesn't have anything to do with the reflections.



Well, the MacBook is doing better than any other model Apple has ever had. Would it do better if there was choice? Maybe, maybe not.

Originally Posted by Rot'nApple

It would be a better argument if you were to give the breakdown of Matte finish MacBook Pro's sales vs. Glossy MacBook Pros.

MacBooks may be doing well by virtue of price point then having to do with a glossy screen.

It would also be interesting if Apple did have a glossy screen iMac and a matte finish iMac on display at their Apple Stores to see which one the public would go for, then they can base their production runs ratio on that and not be paying for warehousing slow moving inventory.

Originally Posted by josephwinters

hehehe...

You guys argue and bicker like little old ladies.

Originally Posted by addabox

EEEEEE!!!! EEEEEE!!!!! EEEEEEE!!!!!

Oh shit, I laugh like a monkey.

Originally Posted by melgross

Yes, as hard as it may be for you to believe, it does add to the cost. You just don't want to think it through. It's a joke to you. But, if you do think of what happens, from the first designs, to the stocking of the stores, you would understand that the more SKU's the higher the price.

That doesn't mean that prices won't come down with new designs. Technology moves ahead, and so prices do come down. But multiple SKU's prevent it from coming down to what it might.

Remember that with the new iPods, Apple kept removing more accessories with each new iteration, to keep that price down. People noticed, and complained about each time it happened. I'm sure people here remember.

I'm not saying that I don't think Apple should have offered two screens. I've said the opposite.

I'm just giving you one reason why Apple may not be offering it.

But, the easily removable screen does offer a way to replace them without taking the machine apart. Interesting.

Originally Posted by melgross

But the audience for the MBP is mostly different from most of the iMac audience. I'm not sure we could compare a laptop customer to a desktop cone that directly, or one buying a much more expensive device..

Originally Posted by Rot'nApple

I use to work for a small education company (small as in "Cottage Industry") that was the sole distributor of both a professional and consumer line of educational teaching materials of a product line well over 100 items - teacher manuals, workbooks, audio, software, consumables and the like, of a product used to teach English through storyline characters versus the American way of rules like "i before e except after c". This product, produced in England, authored by a woman named Lyn, was a success in the UK - used in 80% of the schools.

We were the sole outlet here in the states selling to school districts, private schools and parents. Although I have no idea as to the "going on" of intellect and artistic creation, design, print, publish, and marketing of the materials, I do know all about inventory, exchange rates and inventory control and having precious shelf space occupied, especially when it's YOU who is laying out money before ever recouping those monies from the profits realized in sales of said materials. So what I say is not based on a joke!

Also, being the sole outlet in the states but not the "authors" of the materials we had to fight tooth and nail for them to create an "Americanized" version of their product so American students would learn the "American' version of words like 'color' not 'colour' etc. We never won out, though. Also, like Steve Jobs, they too thought they new what was best for the market here, much to our chagrin, some of the materials we pruchased just languished, while other materials could have had greater potential if only expanded upon. But the American way versus what worked in the UK and "we've been at it longer" was all we ever heard from them. We also learned about inventory control the hard way, by pre-ordering in bulk, but a lot of items were left on the shelf and a big bill was left to us to pay. We soon changed our ways by extending delivery times and by keeping smaller quantities on hand and increased frequency of orders placed to England.

In the end, being the bunch of novices we were, we paid off our huge business debt, worked our inventory down to managable levels of what sold great and what didn't and had a smoother operation then our inital growing pains. Apple is no "Cottage Industry" and I am sure their inventory and production has been worked down to a science of what serves them best. Having two versions of the iMac, even if one requires BTO, would not be the ruin of Apple! Trust me, they invented, manufactured, warehoused and store shelved "The Cube" for Heaven's sake!

Originally Posted by msantti

I prefer the black logo.

One would get sick and tired of seeing yourself all day with the mirrored one.