"Picasso had a saying -- 'good artists copy; great artists steal' -- and we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."
Explain that Jony.
Picasso referred Art. in Art, a great artist appreciates and treasures the original, so he never makes a copy of it. An idea that does not evolve to something useful to human life is just an idea. Stealing those should not be a shame. If I have an idea of how a human can fly, but just don't do anything with it, then I'm okay for someone to take that idea to make a product for it.
You guys really need to stop citing DED as a reference. His lack of credibility only hurts your position when you cite him. His piece on Apple, Xerox, and MS where he tried to rewrite history was laughable at best, intellectually dishonest at worst.
Here then, here is a better source...why don't you give us a history lesson?:
Poor Pazuzu opened the thread with a lovely, provocative post, in which he brought up the famous quote about great artists stealing.
In doing so, two things have occurred:
One group of people have responded to the quote with their own interpretations of what this quote really meant. GTR's answer stood out for me as being particularly accurate.
Another group of people—notably you and SolipsismX—have responded by hurling petty insults at Pazuzu for daring to ask a stimulating and pertinent question on the nature of the quote.
It's ironic that the person who has posed the best question and stimulated the best answers should also be the person who has received the most hatred from people like you.
You left out the third group who pointed out that the quote might not have been used by Picasso at all.
There's a difference between taking a great idea (ie. the mobile phone) and reinventing/redesigning it to be something even greater (ie. the iPhone), versus someone taking an iPhone, pulling it apart and copying it part-by-part, hardware and software. That's stealing someone else's hard work. It's really easy to be second when someone else has done all the hard work first.
I was messing around with a Note 4 the other day, it has an anodised aluminium frame with, surprise surprise a diamond cut bezel.
Of course it's nothing at all like the one Apple introduced with the iPhone 5.
But this anecdote wasn't about someone screwing up; it was about Ive's team putting their heart and soul into something only for Steve to be overly harsh about it. I don't think Jony requesting Steve to not be quite so harsh (at least around Jony's team) is being vain. It's not about wanting to be liked, it's about wanting your hard work and effort to be recognized.
Steve was never an A-for-effort kind of guy. He held himself to that same standard. Different management style than most, but he pushed people to be great. I was there. He was tough, often unfair, but always pushing for great results, not great effort. A lot of people did wilt under that. Most rose to the challenge.
All actual copying aside (and there's plenty -- just not part by part), I'm glad nobody is copying the ridiculous cable standards.
Actually, I'm sure there is part-by-part copying - as I said, it's a lot easier to look at each part, it's function, design, location and to copy that, than to start with nothing and say ok, let's make a phone.
Steve was never an A-for-effort kind of guy. He held himself to that same standard. Different management style than most, but he pushed people to be great. I was there. He was tough, often unfair, but always pushing for great results, not great effort. A lot of people did wilt under that. Most rose to the challenge.
I understand that, and I'm not suggesting Apple should just reward people for effort. But I also think if people have spent a lot of time on something (put their "heart and soul" into it as Ive said) one can be a bit more careful with how they relay their criticism. In Walter Isaacson's book on Jobs Ive said he would often show things to Steve alone because he knew Steve's knee jerk reaction would be to say it was shit and rubbish the whole thing.
Like the opinion of, let's say, Jesus, or any other martyr, dead philosopher, politician, etc, I guess you get my drift.
Except we have no idea what Steve's opinion would be since he's no longer here. It's not like Steve never changed his mind on things. Some would argue Steve never would have signed off on a larger screen phone. But if he saw that Apple was losing share to Android because people wanted larger screens he very well may have moderated his position on that.
Except we have no idea what Steve's opinion would be since he's no longer here. It's not like Steve never changed his mind on things. Some would argue Steve never would have signed off on a larger screen phone. But if he saw that Apple was losing share to Android because people wanted larger screens he very well may have moderated his position on that.
I was mostly referring to your statement "his opinion doesn't matter any more". Of course we won't know if eventually he would have changed his mind about a larger phone. Like we don't know how many times Jesus changed his mind, eg. What in my eyes still matters very much is the opinion of Steve in form of his paradigm for products and their development.
Except we have no idea what Steve's opinion would be since he's no longer here. It's not like Steve never changed his mind on things. Some would argue Steve never would have signed off on a larger screen phone. But if he saw that Apple was losing share to Android because people wanted larger screens he very well may have moderated his position on that.
That, and if he saw how the new size enabled a new use case, a new combination of portability and mind-expanding gorgeousness . . .
The point being, if we haven't learned from Apple that each new form factor—iPhone, iPod touch, iPad, iPad mini—pulls in a whole new galaxy of users based on well-executed form factor alone, then we've missed one of the core insights that motivates the design and engineering people who work there and keeps them sane while they work on what is insanely great.
In the case of the 6 Plus, they would not have released it unless it could be given the most visually powerful LCD screen ever mass produced, and they waited until that was possible from the LTPS suppliers, and until it could be driven by the A8 and its graphics capabilities.
This is reasoning from a positive question about the form factor—what should this be really good for, and how can we make it so?—rather than from a negative: "Well, it looks like we got to make a Samsung Note slab-like device because we're losing the Asian and the late teen market, so how can we not lose face on this?"
Without playing the what-would-Steve-have-done game, I think it's clear which kind of question was ultimately behind the origin of the Plus.
I still love the designs Apple comes out with (except for the ugly lines on the back of the iphone 6), but I do wish they wouldn't talk so much bs in interviews.
Didn't want to do a big phone before they got it right. What exactly made this one right and previous attempts not right? Aside from a lot nicer materials, the new iphone isn't far off the first iphone. The ui's still the same.
Comments about copying were also great a few years ago, but what has anyone really copied recently. Most features they add have generally been in someone else's product already and I wouldn't say they are copying, but other than cheap chineese copys that happen in every market from watches to cars, who else is really copying.
Jony Ive is full of BS. How many week-ends with their family did someone at Apple miss, to come up with "Hey, Siri!" vs. "OK, Google"? This is just one example.
Comments
Steve Jobs: "
"Picasso had a saying -- 'good artists copy; great artists steal' -- and we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."
Explain that Jony.
Picasso referred Art. in Art, a great artist appreciates and treasures the original, so he never makes a copy of it. An idea that does not evolve to something useful to human life is just an idea. Stealing those should not be a shame. If I have an idea of how a human can fly, but just don't do anything with it, then I'm okay for someone to take that idea to make a product for it.
You guys really need to stop citing DED as a reference. His lack of credibility only hurts your position when you cite him. His piece on Apple, Xerox, and MS where he tried to rewrite history was laughable at best, intellectually dishonest at worst.
Here then, here is a better source...why don't you give us a history lesson?:
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=On_Xerox,_Apple_and_Progress.txt&sortOrder=Sort+by+Date&characters=Bruce+Horn
Steve Jobs is dead. His opinion doesn't matter any more.
So all laws must be written by living people? Good to know¡
Poor Pazuzu opened the thread with a lovely, provocative post, in which he brought up the famous quote about great artists stealing.
In doing so, two things have occurred:
One group of people have responded to the quote with their own interpretations of what this quote really meant. GTR's answer stood out for me as being particularly accurate.
Another group of people—notably you and SolipsismX—have responded by hurling petty insults at Pazuzu for daring to ask a stimulating and pertinent question on the nature of the quote.
It's ironic that the person who has posed the best question and stimulated the best answers should also be the person who has received the most hatred from people like you.
You left out the third group who pointed out that the quote might not have been used by Picasso at all.
There's a difference between taking a great idea (ie. the mobile phone) and reinventing/redesigning it to be something even greater (ie. the iPhone), versus someone taking an iPhone, pulling it apart and copying it part-by-part, hardware and software. That's stealing someone else's hard work. It's really easy to be second when someone else has done all the hard work first.
I was messing around with a Note 4 the other day, it has an anodised aluminium frame with, surprise surprise a diamond cut bezel.
Of course it's nothing at all like the one Apple introduced with the iPhone 5.
Mediocre poets imitate, to quote T S Elliot.
Steve Jobs is dead. His opinion doesn't matter any more.
Like the opinion of, let's say, Jesus, or any other martyr, dead philosopher, politician, etc, I guess you get my drift.
Actually, I'm sure there is part-by-part copying - as I said, it's a lot easier to look at each part, it's function, design, location and to copy that, than to start with nothing and say ok, let's make a phone.
It's funny that Jony told the story about Steve chastising him for being vein, in an interview with a magazine called Vanity Fair.
Actually, I'm sure there is part-by-part copying
Do you have a citation? The G1 had a slider keyboard, which is a huge difference and would drastically change the BOM from a part-by-part copy.
I understand that, and I'm not suggesting Apple should just reward people for effort. But I also think if people have spent a lot of time on something (put their "heart and soul" into it as Ive said) one can be a bit more careful with how they relay their criticism. In Walter Isaacson's book on Jobs Ive said he would often show things to Steve alone because he knew Steve's knee jerk reaction would be to say it was shit and rubbish the whole thing.
Except we have no idea what Steve's opinion would be since he's no longer here. It's not like Steve never changed his mind on things. Some would argue Steve never would have signed off on a larger screen phone. But if he saw that Apple was losing share to Android because people wanted larger screens he very well may have moderated his position on that.
I was mostly referring to your statement "his opinion doesn't matter any more". Of course we won't know if eventually he would have changed his mind about a larger phone. Like we don't know how many times Jesus changed his mind, eg. What in my eyes still matters very much is the opinion of Steve in form of his paradigm for products and their development.
That, and if he saw how the new size enabled a new use case, a new combination of portability and mind-expanding gorgeousness . . .
The point being, if we haven't learned from Apple that each new form factor—iPhone, iPod touch, iPad, iPad mini—pulls in a whole new galaxy of users based on well-executed form factor alone, then we've missed one of the core insights that motivates the design and engineering people who work there and keeps them sane while they work on what is insanely great.
In the case of the 6 Plus, they would not have released it unless it could be given the most visually powerful LCD screen ever mass produced, and they waited until that was possible from the LTPS suppliers, and until it could be driven by the A8 and its graphics capabilities.
This is reasoning from a positive question about the form factor—what should this be really good for, and how can we make it so?—rather than from a negative: "Well, it looks like we got to make a Samsung Note slab-like device because we're losing the Asian and the late teen market, so how can we not lose face on this?"
Without playing the what-would-Steve-have-done game, I think it's clear which kind of question was ultimately behind the origin of the Plus.
Didn't want to do a big phone before they got it right. What exactly made this one right and previous attempts not right? Aside from a lot nicer materials, the new iphone isn't far off the first iphone. The ui's still the same.
Comments about copying were also great a few years ago, but what has anyone really copied recently. Most features they add have generally been in someone else's product already and I wouldn't say they are copying, but other than cheap chineese copys that happen in every market from watches to cars, who else is really copying.
Have you SEEN Android phones?
9/10 trolling; I felt bile rise.
0/10.