Man don't take the handles away!!! They were sooo useful on my G3. What other computer has handles? I guess you don't move your desktop much! Those things are annoying to move without handles.
The designs don't really have much to do with minimalism. The towers are more Art Deco, and the color white, which Apple has grown so fond of, is no more minimalist then beige, black, red, or any other color.
You should check your definitions:
Minimalism:
1.\tmin·i·mal·ism or Min·i·mal·ism a movement of abstract artists who produce uncluttered paintings and sculptures that make use of basic colors and geometric shapes in impersonal arrangements.
2.\tsimplicity in artwork, design, interior design, or literature, achieved by using a few very simple elements to maximum effect
Art deco:
A style of architecture, interior design, and jewelry most popular in the 1930s that used geometrical designs and bold colors and outlines.
Apple is absolutely driven by the essence of a minimalist design. This is both true for the materials that are used and the product form. To call the G5 tower art deco is well and truly at odds with the well accepted definition of art deco.
As an example, when the team put together the iMac, there was a lot of discussion about an initial design that Ives put together which was subsequently abandoned because it (in Job's words) "was not true to itself". As far as colour is concerned, colors can be associated with emotions and emotional minimalism. What sense does one feel when they see a red ferrari compared with a white ferrari? White is the most neutral, and simplistic colour that exists.
The border on the Garage Band interface is a wood grain, a departure from the brushed aluminum. Is this a hint of things to come, or just a nod to high end audio console hardware?
I'd say that is just in the trend of making music software look like hardware...
the wood sides look like a synthesizer.
a lot of audio software have the wood thing going on
1.\tmin·i·mal·ism or Min·i·mal·ism a movement of abstract artists who produce uncluttered paintings and sculptures that make use of basic colors and geometric shapes in impersonal arrangements.
2.\tsimplicity in artwork, design, interior design, or literature, achieved by using a few very simple elements to maximum effect
Art deco:
A style of architecture, interior design, and jewelry most popular in the 1930s that used geometrical designs and bold colors and outlines.
Apple is absolutely driven by the essence of a minimalist design. This is both true for the materials that are used and the product form. To call the G5 tower art deco is well and truly at odds with the well accepted definition of art deco.
As an example, when the team put together the iMac, there was a lot of discussion about an initial design that Ives put together which was subsequently abandoned because it (in Job's words) "was not true to itself". As far as colour is concerned, colors can be associated with emotions and emotional minimalism. What sense does one feel when they see a red ferrari compared with a white ferrari? White is the most neutral, and simplistic colour that exists.
Regarding colors - white is the brightest of all colors as it reflects the entire spectrum, I find it far less neutral then a gray, or even black. It is the number of colors and the way they interact with each other and the environment that is important for minimalisum. White is in no way necessary for minimalism, and I would have greatly preferred Apple to have used different color.
Regarding the G5 - I'm sorry, but with the superfluous feet and handles, and the cheese greater mesh, the towers are not minimalist -- they might not exactly fit into art deco, but that's what came to mind when I first was a row of them at the apple store.
BTW: A more complete definition of Art Deco:
Movement in design, interior decoration, and architecture in the 1920s and '30s in Europe and the U.S.
The name derives from the Exposition Internationale des Arts Décoratifs et Industriels Modernes in Paris in 1925. Its products included both individually crafted luxury items and mass-produced wares, but, in either case, the intention was to create a sleek and antitraditional elegance that symbolized wealth and sophistication. Influenced by Art Nouveau, Bauhaus, Cubist, Native American, and Egyptian sources, the distinguishing features of the style are simple, clean shapes, often with a ?streamlined? look; ornament that is geometric or stylized from representational forms; and unusually varied, often expensive materials, which frequently include man-made substances (plastics, especially bakelite; vita-glass; and ferroconcrete) in addition to natural ones (jade, silver, ivory, obsidian, chrome, and rock crystal). Typical motifs included stylized animals, foliage, nude female figures, and sun rays. New York City's Rockefeller Center (especially its interiors supervised by Donald Deskey), the Chrysler Building by William Van Alen, and the Empire State Building by Shreve, Lamb & Harmon are the most monumental embodiments of Art Deco.
I think Apple's design team has done a fine job with the tasks they are given. I suspect those tasks are basically looks and function. They need to make something which looks unique, so it's clearly recognized as a Mac; and make something which is functional, so that it cools the computer components, is somewhat rugged and accomplishes this in a case that's as small as possible for those components.
That said, I think they've gone overboard a bit with white cases, although I think white looks better than black would. I also think the case materials for Apple portables could be better. While looking good, iBooks and PowerBooks are too easily scratched. A portable should be made out of material that will not show scuffs and scratches. Perhaps this is impossible but it should have a higher priority.
As craiger77 suggests, I think we'll eventually see Mac case materials similar to the iPod minis and I'd welcome it. I sure wouldn't buy pink though.
I totally agree. But I'd have to say that that was the highest compliment you can pay. Clockwork Orange? Tron? Manhunter (not sci-fi, but absolutely gorgeous to look at)? Blade Runner? Brazil? Yeah, baby.
You forgot Strange Brew. The iMac always reminded me of the white hockey gear...
But seriously, the people how say the iMac design sucks probably haven't really used one that much. The round base and stark white might look silly in a photo (I was a little taken aback when the Time cover was leaked), but when you actually use one the base simply disappears and the only thing that you actually notice is the floating screen. To me it's perfect, I never think about the base except for inserting a CD.
But seriously, the people how say the iMac design sucks probably haven't really used one that much.
Well, you can't just make such a blanket statement, design aesthetic is very personal.
When I see an iMac, I think... Volkswagon Golf - it's a snow-white girly-computer. I don't know if that's exactly what I'd call it, but it's definitely on the feminine side of the street. Same goes for the eMac. It appeals to the SF crowd because it goes with their Yaletown decor. The G5 on the other hand looks like it means business - heavy, industrial, monolithic.
Do I have faith in Apple's Design Team? I believe they are capable, but hit the mark (for me) about 50% of the time. That's not bad all things considered.
Trust them? For the most part, the current designs suck, so I really don't have any faith in the Apple design team.
The white enclosures of the eMac/iMac/iBook looks like something out of an early 80s SciFi flick. I really don't like the color white at all, and the foolish shape of the iMac is one of the things that is keeping the price so high.
I think that the handles and feet of the Powermac are a bad design -- if they would get rid of them and make the actual case part an inch taler giving the user an other 2 more internal drives I would be a lot happier with the design.
The iPod's silver back and sides with a white colored face is just ugly. The mini iPod is better, but it is still stuck with the white control wheel that clashes with the rest of the case.
The powerbooks are kind of bland, they should take advantage of the anodizing process and add in some color to their aluminum skin. It would also really be nice if they would add a thicker more powerful version to their lineup.
I've thought for a while now that the Apple design team lost it years ago, and they have done nothing recently to change my mind.
Edit - Note: the 2nd paragraph was supposed to say that "The white enclosures of the eMac/iMac/iBook looks like something out of an 1960s SciFi flick" -- not the 80s (think 2001).
Well considering how many iPods were sold, I guess you are in the minority concerning the iPod's appearance. As for the iMac, I've seen it in more movies then any PC, and it's always in high end contemporary type spaces.
just because you don't like white, or contemporary pieces, I guess just means Apple design isn't for you. But given the awards they've racked up over the past years, the amount of fever the 3 generations of iPod and now iPod mini have caused, I think it's safe to say that your opinion doesn't stack up to the rest of the world.
Well, you can't just make such a blanket statement, design aesthetic is very personal.
But design aesthetic is not design.
When you actually sit down and use an iMac, the base fades into the background, which it can do because it's curved (sharp edges and corners catch your eye) and matte finished (specular highlights do likewise). What you're left with is the keyboard under your fingers and the monitor in front of your eyes - the computer becomes the interface.
This has nothing to do with looks, or color choices (except that, again, matte white isn't an attention-getter). It has to do with usability. This is the most critically important aspect of design, and when someone says you have to use an iMac to appreciate the design, this is what they mean. Looks are important, sure, but they're also secondary. Most of the "improvements" I've seen suggested actually put looks ahead of function. Everything on the iMac is the way it is for a reason.
Regarding colors - white is the brightest of all colors as it reflects the entire spectrum, I find it far less neutral then a gray, or even black. It is the number of colors and the way they interact with each other and the environment that is important for minimalisum. White is in no way necessary for minimalism, and I would have greatly preferred Apple to have used different color.
Regarding the G5 - I'm sorry, but with the superfluous feet and handles, and the cheese greater mesh, the towers are not minimalist -- they might not exactly fit into art deco, but that's what came to mind when I first was a row of them at the apple store.
The G5 towers aren't defined by simplicity? Huh? Look at it sides ways. There's one continuous piece of metal. Look at it from the front, a long rectangular shape with two sleek simple, form following handles, and a textured front face with only 2 areas to break up the texture. That's minimalism, that's simplicity. That's clean design. I wouldn't say art deco, more contemporary industrialism.
White is clean. White with minimalism and simplicity evokes members of 2001. Visions of a smooth clean futuristic formula. Besides, grey, tan, blue and black have all been done before. Only in the movies had you before seen a white slick computer. Not to mention the iBook and iPod were all following that same white-consumer trend for Apple.
Regarding the G5 - I'm sorry, but with the superfluous feet and handles, and the cheese greater mesh, the towers are not minimalist -- they might not exactly fit into art deco, but that's what came to mind when I first was a row of them at the apple store.
The handles are designed to lift the case and the mesh is designed to permit air to flow freely through the case.
Perhaps you are right afterall, this stuff is superfluous.
Well considering how many iPods were sold, I guess you are in the minority concerning the iPod's appearance. As for the iMac, I've seen it in more movies then any PC, and it's always in high end contemporary type spaces.
just because you don't like white, or contemporary pieces, I guess just means Apple design isn't for you. But given the awards they've racked up over the past years, the amount of fever the 3 generations of iPod and now iPod mini have caused, I think it's safe to say that your opinion doesn't stack up to the rest of the world.
I don't think I am in the minority opinion on the iPods appearance. Look at how well the iPod mini is taking off -- even though you get a lot less for your money then you would with the iPod -- it shows that a lot of other people like colors other then white. (I'd bet that if the iPod originally came out with a choice of black or white, the black model would have outsold the white one by about a two to one ratio).
I like contemporary pieces and I don't really dislike the color white ( I always paint my walls and ceiling white, and I've had a white car). I just find white unappealing as a color for my computers (and come to think about it just about any other electronics or furnishings).
Jonathan Ive is a great designer. He has been designing for Apple since 1998 (and wining prestigious designs awards for his work). I love many of his designs: the Powerbook G3, the original iMac, the Titanium Powerbook, the G4 Cube - all of them great designs. He also did the iBook and iPod, which I like except for the color.
Now the flat-panel iMac, which he also designed, is a wonder of engineering, but it has some problems (besides the color, which by now you know I will not like). The main problem is that the hemispherical shape of the base, while aesthetically pleasing, is not well suited to computer components, making the insides very cramped and expensive to manufacture (cooling is also a problem). This is why we haven't seen a G5 iMac yet.
The powermac G5 is very pretty and is also a wonder of engineering (with its multiple thermal zones and dedicated low speed fans, etc.). That being said, it is a very poor design for a pro- level computer, and I am far form the only one who has complained of its short comings (the lack of room for more drives, only having one removable media drive, handles that get in the way of stacking drives or other things on top of the case, etc,). The case of my old Powermac 9600 is by far better for a pro level computer than the current G5 tower.
Now I fully admit that color is just a matter of taste, and apple started going with the all white theme for branding purposes, so it can be forgiven. The flat-panel iMac and G5 tower are another matter. They almost seem to be made by a team that is more concerned with wining awards for aesthetics rather than making insanely great computers for the rest of us.
I hope that the Apple design team will come up with something great for the next revisions, but judging by some of there recent offerings, my expectations are not as high as they once were.
Well, I think all you're saying about the color is that it's just another neutral, and that you like colors that stand out more. Nothing wrong with that. I think Ive and company have gone with metals and white for their stuff because they're associated with appearing clean, simple and they're neutral. So it's not unfair to say that white is the new beige (or more accurately in Apple's case, platinum) at Apple. I think Apple has heard both sides of the color argument: brighter, more distinct colors catch more attention and maybe appeal more to people when they focus on it. People also found it frustrating to deal with color on their Macs and have to consider how it looks in a room, at least at home. White goes with (almost) everything. Colors likely help move items off the shelf. Colors also create some trouble with inventory. As I said before, white and metals make people think "simple" and "clean." They can also make people think "boring" (which is why the materials are still carefully considered so they don't look cheap). We could go back and forth all day. I think Ive's decision is to reinforce the idea of Macintosh simplicity, using color to express this. Certainly, the insides aren't simple and are quite elaborate, but it's done to make the outside express this image. (That's usually the case with regard to minimalism, modernism or whatever you want to call it anyway.)
I think Apple had a very different idea in mind than an ATX-style box when they designed the G5 case. It might be wise for Apple to consider something else if it's really not what the majority of their customers are willing to buy. If it would increase sales enough, they might introduce some sort of shell to stuff with third party items, though I don't think Apple has really ever catered to that segment of the buying public, even with heavy-duty pro users. Having said that, I see more people talk about the potential of expansion and upgrades, both on the Mac side and the PC side than do it, and that definitely includes pros, who want the latest hardware in all respects all the time. Those people just buy new machines with new technology all around. Those who just want the extra storage in those bays usually end up with external storage anyway, either remote of localized via Firewire, SCSI or whatever. I mean, this is only anecdotal evidence, but with the most serious pros I know, I either see them replace their Macs every year like clockwork and give their old ones to the finance department or else they're running Quark 3 on beige G3s running OS 9 and littered with all sorts of drives (and manuals) around them. Again, this is only my experience, and I don't mean to speak for others. The only thing I would add is that Apple has always been about close integration and control of the hardware top to bottom. The 960 was an aberration historically. It was done when Apple was quite desperate and could not differentiate itself from other computer makers. In that sense, the 960 and its ilk have only hurt Apple by not being anything special enough, not like the G5 which is really a workstation with a more targeted audience. The 960 tried to speak to everyone and, in another way, no one.
I don't think I am in the minority opinion on the iPods appearance. Look at how well the iPod mini is taking off -- even though you get a lot less for your money then you would with the iPod -- it shows that a lot of other people like colors other then white. (I'd bet that if the iPod originally came out with a choice of black or white, the black model would have outsold the white one by about a two to one ratio).
While I enjoyed your post, I have to disagree with this first paragraph. In the last quarter, Apple sold nearly a million iPods. About 100,000 of them were minis. People are buying the minis for various reasons; because they're cute and tiny, the size of a business card; because there is a choice of colors, which itself appeals to some people; and because they're $50 cheaper than other iPods. I don't believe for a second that a lot of people dislike the G1, G2, and G3 ipods because they're white. If so, Apple wouldn't have sold three million of them.
I dont think Ive's has a minimalist Aesthetic, I would classify it as Bauhaus. All of his designs are driven by functionality. The indicator that he is a really good designer is that despite a functional priority, these machines really look good. Not everyone likes them, but most people like at least one of them.
You can see plenty of examples of bad functional design all around you, and plenty of exmaples of non functional design. If you look at older mac designs you will see more non-functional elements in them. The iMac in front of me has white vertical lines impressed in its plastic. The G3 powermacs are blue and white. The G4's have the lines.
Those machines have dated. The current round of designs have all the hall marks of classics, they wont date, they will keep on looking great.
Certainly, there are users who want functionality that isnt present in the machines ( eg: multiple optical drives in the G5 ). But a lot of that is compromise. There is plenty of wasted space round the PCI slots, would you prefer to have to compromise there? At least you can add firewire drives, and conveniently put them on your desk.
On the colour front, white goes with a lot more decor than red, or yellow. Any gray between black and white is alright. I think this is really more of a cost issue than anything. Apple sell enough mini ipods that they can make a few colours ( and this is proven to them by the success of the ipod ). But the same doesnt really hold for computers. They dont have the volumes required to be putting cases through different colouring processes. Should they get market share back up it'll change. The original iMac demonstrated this perfectly. How many other Macs came in five colours? White is a compromise.
While I enjoyed your post, I have to disagree with this first paragraph. In the last quarter, Apple sold nearly a million iPods. About 100,000 of them were minis. People are buying the minis for various reasons; because they're cute and tiny, the size of a business card; because there is a choice of colors, which itself appeals to some people; and because they're $50 cheaper than other iPods. I don't believe for a second that a lot of people dislike the G1, G2, and G3 ipods because they're white. If so, Apple wouldn't have sold three million of them.
I know quite a few people who don't like the color of the iPod, but we all buy them anyway because it is by far the best player out there. The dissatisfaction with Apples choice of white has contributed greatly to the growth of after-market coloring companies like ColorWare and color case makers like iSkin
I've never said that people would not buy an Apple product because of its color, only that when offered a choice of colors most people would choose something other than white.
Considering that every consumer electronics ID team out there is playing follow the leader these days, whether you like it or not, whatever Apple does is gospel.
I totally agree. But I'd have to say that that was the highest compliment you can pay. Clockwork Orange? Tron? Manhunter (not sci-fi, but absolutely gorgeous to look at)? Blade Runner? Brazil? Yeah, baby. That's my fav. era/genre combo.
Just a small little quibble... A Clockwork Orange is an early 70's movie - not early 80's.
Comments
Man don't take the handles away!!! They were sooo useful on my G3. What other computer has handles? I guess you don't move your desktop much! Those things are annoying to move without handles.
Originally posted by Res
(LOL -- I like the rhinestone quip).
The designs don't really have much to do with minimalism. The towers are more Art Deco, and the color white, which Apple has grown so fond of, is no more minimalist then beige, black, red, or any other color.
You should check your definitions:
Minimalism:
1.\tmin·i·mal·ism or Min·i·mal·ism a movement of abstract artists who produce uncluttered paintings and sculptures that make use of basic colors and geometric shapes in impersonal arrangements.
2.\tsimplicity in artwork, design, interior design, or literature, achieved by using a few very simple elements to maximum effect
Art deco:
A style of architecture, interior design, and jewelry most popular in the 1930s that used geometrical designs and bold colors and outlines.
Apple is absolutely driven by the essence of a minimalist design. This is both true for the materials that are used and the product form. To call the G5 tower art deco is well and truly at odds with the well accepted definition of art deco.
As an example, when the team put together the iMac, there was a lot of discussion about an initial design that Ives put together which was subsequently abandoned because it (in Job's words) "was not true to itself". As far as colour is concerned, colors can be associated with emotions and emotional minimalism. What sense does one feel when they see a red ferrari compared with a white ferrari? White is the most neutral, and simplistic colour that exists.
Originally posted by SeanL
The border on the Garage Band interface is a wood grain, a departure from the brushed aluminum. Is this a hint of things to come, or just a nod to high end audio console hardware?
I'd say that is just in the trend of making music software look like hardware...
the wood sides look like a synthesizer.
a lot of audio software have the wood thing going on
Originally posted by McCrab
You should check your definitions:
Minimalism:
1.\tmin·i·mal·ism or Min·i·mal·ism a movement of abstract artists who produce uncluttered paintings and sculptures that make use of basic colors and geometric shapes in impersonal arrangements.
2.\tsimplicity in artwork, design, interior design, or literature, achieved by using a few very simple elements to maximum effect
Art deco:
A style of architecture, interior design, and jewelry most popular in the 1930s that used geometrical designs and bold colors and outlines.
Apple is absolutely driven by the essence of a minimalist design. This is both true for the materials that are used and the product form. To call the G5 tower art deco is well and truly at odds with the well accepted definition of art deco.
As an example, when the team put together the iMac, there was a lot of discussion about an initial design that Ives put together which was subsequently abandoned because it (in Job's words) "was not true to itself". As far as colour is concerned, colors can be associated with emotions and emotional minimalism. What sense does one feel when they see a red ferrari compared with a white ferrari? White is the most neutral, and simplistic colour that exists.
Regarding colors - white is the brightest of all colors as it reflects the entire spectrum, I find it far less neutral then a gray, or even black. It is the number of colors and the way they interact with each other and the environment that is important for minimalisum. White is in no way necessary for minimalism, and I would have greatly preferred Apple to have used different color.
Regarding the G5 - I'm sorry, but with the superfluous feet and handles, and the cheese greater mesh, the towers are not minimalist -- they might not exactly fit into art deco, but that's what came to mind when I first was a row of them at the apple store.
BTW: A more complete definition of Art Deco:
Movement in design, interior decoration, and architecture in the 1920s and '30s in Europe and the U.S.
The name derives from the Exposition Internationale des Arts Décoratifs et Industriels Modernes in Paris in 1925. Its products included both individually crafted luxury items and mass-produced wares, but, in either case, the intention was to create a sleek and antitraditional elegance that symbolized wealth and sophistication. Influenced by Art Nouveau, Bauhaus, Cubist, Native American, and Egyptian sources, the distinguishing features of the style are simple, clean shapes, often with a ?streamlined? look; ornament that is geometric or stylized from representational forms; and unusually varied, often expensive materials, which frequently include man-made substances (plastics, especially bakelite; vita-glass; and ferroconcrete) in addition to natural ones (jade, silver, ivory, obsidian, chrome, and rock crystal). Typical motifs included stylized animals, foliage, nude female figures, and sun rays. New York City's Rockefeller Center (especially its interiors supervised by Donald Deskey), the Chrysler Building by William Van Alen, and the Empire State Building by Shreve, Lamb & Harmon are the most monumental embodiments of Art Deco.
Originally posted by ~ufo~
I'd say that is just in the trend of making music software look like hardware...
the wood sides look like a synthesizer.
a lot of audio software have the wood thing going on
The new PowerMac G5 with your choices of casing- Cherry, Oak, or Walnut.
I just hope that they fixed the heating problem or those computers would be smokin!
Macaddict16
That said, I think they've gone overboard a bit with white cases, although I think white looks better than black would. I also think the case materials for Apple portables could be better. While looking good, iBooks and PowerBooks are too easily scratched. A portable should be made out of material that will not show scuffs and scratches. Perhaps this is impossible but it should have a higher priority.
As craiger77 suggests, I think we'll eventually see Mac case materials similar to the iPod minis and I'd welcome it. I sure wouldn't buy pink though.
Originally posted by 1337_5L4Xx0R
I totally agree. But I'd have to say that that was the highest compliment you can pay. Clockwork Orange? Tron? Manhunter (not sci-fi, but absolutely gorgeous to look at)? Blade Runner? Brazil? Yeah, baby.
You forgot Strange Brew. The iMac always reminded me of the white hockey gear...
But seriously, the people how say the iMac design sucks probably haven't really used one that much. The round base and stark white might look silly in a photo (I was a little taken aback when the Time cover was leaked), but when you actually use one the base simply disappears and the only thing that you actually notice is the floating screen. To me it's perfect, I never think about the base except for inserting a CD.
Originally posted by spankalee:
But seriously, the people how say the iMac design sucks probably haven't really used one that much.
Well, you can't just make such a blanket statement, design aesthetic is very personal.
When I see an iMac, I think... Volkswagon Golf - it's a snow-white girly-computer. I don't know if that's exactly what I'd call it, but it's definitely on the feminine side of the street. Same goes for the eMac. It appeals to the SF crowd because it goes with their Yaletown decor. The G5 on the other hand looks like it means business - heavy, industrial, monolithic.
Do I have faith in Apple's Design Team? I believe they are capable, but hit the mark (for me) about 50% of the time. That's not bad all things considered.
C.
Originally posted by Res
Trust them? For the most part, the current designs suck, so I really don't have any faith in the Apple design team.
The white enclosures of the eMac/iMac/iBook looks like something out of an early 80s SciFi flick. I really don't like the color white at all, and the foolish shape of the iMac is one of the things that is keeping the price so high.
I think that the handles and feet of the Powermac are a bad design -- if they would get rid of them and make the actual case part an inch taler giving the user an other 2 more internal drives I would be a lot happier with the design.
The iPod's silver back and sides with a white colored face is just ugly. The mini iPod is better, but it is still stuck with the white control wheel that clashes with the rest of the case.
The powerbooks are kind of bland, they should take advantage of the anodizing process and add in some color to their aluminum skin. It would also really be nice if they would add a thicker more powerful version to their lineup.
I've thought for a while now that the Apple design team lost it years ago, and they have done nothing recently to change my mind.
Edit - Note: the 2nd paragraph was supposed to say that "The white enclosures of the eMac/iMac/iBook looks like something out of an 1960s SciFi flick" -- not the 80s (think 2001).
Well considering how many iPods were sold, I guess you are in the minority concerning the iPod's appearance. As for the iMac, I've seen it in more movies then any PC, and it's always in high end contemporary type spaces.
just because you don't like white, or contemporary pieces, I guess just means Apple design isn't for you. But given the awards they've racked up over the past years, the amount of fever the 3 generations of iPod and now iPod mini have caused, I think it's safe to say that your opinion doesn't stack up to the rest of the world.
Originally posted by Concord
Well, you can't just make such a blanket statement, design aesthetic is very personal.
But design aesthetic is not design.
When you actually sit down and use an iMac, the base fades into the background, which it can do because it's curved (sharp edges and corners catch your eye) and matte finished (specular highlights do likewise). What you're left with is the keyboard under your fingers and the monitor in front of your eyes - the computer becomes the interface.
This has nothing to do with looks, or color choices (except that, again, matte white isn't an attention-getter). It has to do with usability. This is the most critically important aspect of design, and when someone says you have to use an iMac to appreciate the design, this is what they mean. Looks are important, sure, but they're also secondary. Most of the "improvements" I've seen suggested actually put looks ahead of function. Everything on the iMac is the way it is for a reason.
Originally posted by Res
Regarding colors - white is the brightest of all colors as it reflects the entire spectrum, I find it far less neutral then a gray, or even black. It is the number of colors and the way they interact with each other and the environment that is important for minimalisum. White is in no way necessary for minimalism, and I would have greatly preferred Apple to have used different color.
Regarding the G5 - I'm sorry, but with the superfluous feet and handles, and the cheese greater mesh, the towers are not minimalist -- they might not exactly fit into art deco, but that's what came to mind when I first was a row of them at the apple store.
The G5 towers aren't defined by simplicity? Huh? Look at it sides ways. There's one continuous piece of metal. Look at it from the front, a long rectangular shape with two sleek simple, form following handles, and a textured front face with only 2 areas to break up the texture. That's minimalism, that's simplicity. That's clean design. I wouldn't say art deco, more contemporary industrialism.
White is clean. White with minimalism and simplicity evokes members of 2001. Visions of a smooth clean futuristic formula. Besides, grey, tan, blue and black have all been done before. Only in the movies had you before seen a white slick computer. Not to mention the iBook and iPod were all following that same white-consumer trend for Apple.
Originally posted by Res
and I would have greatly preferred Apple to have used different color.
...such as?
Originally posted by Res
Regarding the G5 - I'm sorry, but with the superfluous feet and handles, and the cheese greater mesh, the towers are not minimalist -- they might not exactly fit into art deco, but that's what came to mind when I first was a row of them at the apple store.
The handles are designed to lift the case and the mesh is designed to permit air to flow freely through the case.
Perhaps you are right afterall, this stuff is superfluous.
Originally posted by KidRed
Well considering how many iPods were sold, I guess you are in the minority concerning the iPod's appearance. As for the iMac, I've seen it in more movies then any PC, and it's always in high end contemporary type spaces.
just because you don't like white, or contemporary pieces, I guess just means Apple design isn't for you. But given the awards they've racked up over the past years, the amount of fever the 3 generations of iPod and now iPod mini have caused, I think it's safe to say that your opinion doesn't stack up to the rest of the world.
I don't think I am in the minority opinion on the iPods appearance. Look at how well the iPod mini is taking off -- even though you get a lot less for your money then you would with the iPod -- it shows that a lot of other people like colors other then white. (I'd bet that if the iPod originally came out with a choice of black or white, the black model would have outsold the white one by about a two to one ratio).
I like contemporary pieces and I don't really dislike the color white ( I always paint my walls and ceiling white, and I've had a white car). I just find white unappealing as a color for my computers (and come to think about it just about any other electronics or furnishings).
Jonathan Ive is a great designer. He has been designing for Apple since 1998 (and wining prestigious designs awards for his work). I love many of his designs: the Powerbook G3, the original iMac, the Titanium Powerbook, the G4 Cube - all of them great designs. He also did the iBook and iPod, which I like except for the color.
Now the flat-panel iMac, which he also designed, is a wonder of engineering, but it has some problems (besides the color, which by now you know I will not like). The main problem is that the hemispherical shape of the base, while aesthetically pleasing, is not well suited to computer components, making the insides very cramped and expensive to manufacture (cooling is also a problem). This is why we haven't seen a G5 iMac yet.
The powermac G5 is very pretty and is also a wonder of engineering (with its multiple thermal zones and dedicated low speed fans, etc.). That being said, it is a very poor design for a pro- level computer, and I am far form the only one who has complained of its short comings (the lack of room for more drives, only having one removable media drive, handles that get in the way of stacking drives or other things on top of the case, etc,). The case of my old Powermac 9600 is by far better for a pro level computer than the current G5 tower.
Now I fully admit that color is just a matter of taste, and apple started going with the all white theme for branding purposes, so it can be forgiven. The flat-panel iMac and G5 tower are another matter. They almost seem to be made by a team that is more concerned with wining awards for aesthetics rather than making insanely great computers for the rest of us.
I hope that the Apple design team will come up with something great for the next revisions, but judging by some of there recent offerings, my expectations are not as high as they once were.
I think Apple had a very different idea in mind than an ATX-style box when they designed the G5 case. It might be wise for Apple to consider something else if it's really not what the majority of their customers are willing to buy. If it would increase sales enough, they might introduce some sort of shell to stuff with third party items, though I don't think Apple has really ever catered to that segment of the buying public, even with heavy-duty pro users. Having said that, I see more people talk about the potential of expansion and upgrades, both on the Mac side and the PC side than do it, and that definitely includes pros, who want the latest hardware in all respects all the time. Those people just buy new machines with new technology all around. Those who just want the extra storage in those bays usually end up with external storage anyway, either remote of localized via Firewire, SCSI or whatever. I mean, this is only anecdotal evidence, but with the most serious pros I know, I either see them replace their Macs every year like clockwork and give their old ones to the finance department or else they're running Quark 3 on beige G3s running OS 9 and littered with all sorts of drives (and manuals) around them. Again, this is only my experience, and I don't mean to speak for others. The only thing I would add is that Apple has always been about close integration and control of the hardware top to bottom. The 960 was an aberration historically. It was done when Apple was quite desperate and could not differentiate itself from other computer makers. In that sense, the 960 and its ilk have only hurt Apple by not being anything special enough, not like the G5 which is really a workstation with a more targeted audience. The 960 tried to speak to everyone and, in another way, no one.
Originally posted by Res
I don't think I am in the minority opinion on the iPods appearance. Look at how well the iPod mini is taking off -- even though you get a lot less for your money then you would with the iPod -- it shows that a lot of other people like colors other then white. (I'd bet that if the iPod originally came out with a choice of black or white, the black model would have outsold the white one by about a two to one ratio).
While I enjoyed your post, I have to disagree with this first paragraph. In the last quarter, Apple sold nearly a million iPods. About 100,000 of them were minis. People are buying the minis for various reasons; because they're cute and tiny, the size of a business card; because there is a choice of colors, which itself appeals to some people; and because they're $50 cheaper than other iPods. I don't believe for a second that a lot of people dislike the G1, G2, and G3 ipods because they're white. If so, Apple wouldn't have sold three million of them.
You can see plenty of examples of bad functional design all around you, and plenty of exmaples of non functional design. If you look at older mac designs you will see more non-functional elements in them. The iMac in front of me has white vertical lines impressed in its plastic. The G3 powermacs are blue and white. The G4's have the lines.
Those machines have dated. The current round of designs have all the hall marks of classics, they wont date, they will keep on looking great.
Certainly, there are users who want functionality that isnt present in the machines ( eg: multiple optical drives in the G5 ). But a lot of that is compromise. There is plenty of wasted space round the PCI slots, would you prefer to have to compromise there? At least you can add firewire drives, and conveniently put them on your desk.
On the colour front, white goes with a lot more decor than red, or yellow. Any gray between black and white is alright. I think this is really more of a cost issue than anything. Apple sell enough mini ipods that they can make a few colours ( and this is proven to them by the success of the ipod ). But the same doesnt really hold for computers. They dont have the volumes required to be putting cases through different colouring processes. Should they get market share back up it'll change. The original iMac demonstrated this perfectly. How many other Macs came in five colours? White is a compromise.
Originally posted by iDave
While I enjoyed your post, I have to disagree with this first paragraph. In the last quarter, Apple sold nearly a million iPods. About 100,000 of them were minis. People are buying the minis for various reasons; because they're cute and tiny, the size of a business card; because there is a choice of colors, which itself appeals to some people; and because they're $50 cheaper than other iPods. I don't believe for a second that a lot of people dislike the G1, G2, and G3 ipods because they're white. If so, Apple wouldn't have sold three million of them.
I know quite a few people who don't like the color of the iPod, but we all buy them anyway because it is by far the best player out there. The dissatisfaction with Apples choice of white has contributed greatly to the growth of after-market coloring companies like ColorWare and color case makers like iSkin
I've never said that people would not buy an Apple product because of its color, only that when offered a choice of colors most people would choose something other than white.
Originally posted by 1337_5L4Xx0R
I totally agree. But I'd have to say that that was the highest compliment you can pay. Clockwork Orange? Tron? Manhunter (not sci-fi, but absolutely gorgeous to look at)? Blade Runner? Brazil? Yeah, baby. That's my fav. era/genre combo.
Just a small little quibble... A Clockwork Orange is an early 70's movie - not early 80's.