I personally have no issue with plastic phones, as long as the plastics used are of high quality. While I think the original iPhone was the best combination of beauty and durability, and the iPhone 4/4S is the most beautiful, the iPhone 3G/3GS probably, ironically, was the most durable when it came to drops and accidents. The metal of the original iPhone would get dented pretty bad when dropped, and the iPhone 4/4S, well, simply shatters, my 3GS took an unfortunate trip down a flight of stairs on its own and came out of it with one fairly noticeable nick on the corner, but otherwise was perfect.
Most people I know who owned a 3GS ended up getting cracks in the plastic, right around the dock connector. Mine would also creak if I squeezed it.
Ironically, my "fragile" iPhone 4, which has seen its share of abuse, held up far better.
Goes to show you, each fall is different. A slightly different angle can mean the difference between a scratch and shatter.
For me the question is, when they've produced a dud (and they will at some point) who will have the power like Jobs did to put the breaks on and stop release, regardless of cost impact.
It isn't easy to criticize Apple's designs when they are as commercially successful as they are.
But commercial success does not equate to objective superiority. Particularly when commercial success is dictated more by form than by function.
The debate will rage over whether Apple's products have lost sight of functionality, and whether functionality has been pushed so far to the back, in deference to form, that Apple's products are significantly flawed as a consequence.
The most definitive example of this, from my perspective at least, is the present batch of keyboards that Apple makes. When the aluminum slab keyboards first arrived I was attracted by the clean design and bought one to use with my MacBook Pro. I kept it for a couple of weeks, at which point it was obvious to me that I would never adapt to it. From a functional standpoint, it is just a lousy keyboard. The stroke is much too short, the tactile sensation is lousy, and the upper surface of the keys is practically a smooth plane. There isn't even any scallop on the tops of the keys. By any objective standards, they are decidedly lousy keyboards. The idea that when you buy a new computer from the world's premiere personal computer company that you have to go searching for a keyboard that you can stand to use is just not right. But this is how it is, and it has been this way for several years now, and there is no indication that Apple is going to return to making functional keyboards. There is no option, i.e., no personal choice. The only keyboards that Apple makes are the ones that Jobs and Ive liked and decided that people who use Apple computers should use. Why couldn't they do that and still make functional keyboards as an option for people who don't care about slick and sexy but who care about the functional quality of the keyboard? What is so wrong with letting individuals have it their way, as opposed to everyone having it the Jobs way?
A few years ago when a new generation of MacBook Pro was introduced, people who preferred non-reflective screens for functional reasons were at first denied the ability to buy them that way. Of course that eventually was corrected, but why was it that way in the first place?
Many people like the Apple mice, but there are lots of people who can't don't like them at all. Why can't Apple make and offer a more conventional mouse for people who prefer that sort of mouse, thereby sparing people from having to pay for an expensive mouse that they don't like and then having to go immediately to another store to buy an inexpensive mouse that they like?
The question remains: Will Apple ever resume production of fully functional keyboards where every consideration of functionality has not been tossed aside in favor of form?
I think it's a great thing. There's a great team in place there, but of them all, Jony's the one with the vision that Steve had. It's his vision that will keep Apple making great products that people fall in love with. Scott's work on the software is great, too, but it's the hardware designs that draw people in first. I hope Jony's well compensated and stays at Apple until he retires!
I don't know much about Ive, but everything I've ever read about him suggests that he is an unassuming, almost shy, personality that is unlikely to let the power go to his head. He seems the type that loves what he does to the extent that he doesn't really know he is working, and is therefore very likely continue along the trajectory he has established - very good news for those of us who love beautiful and minimalistic Apple products!
Ive doing fantastic design work for Steve Jobs, and not trying to run the company, reminded me of this interview with Woz, who did the fantastic engineering work that is the whole basis of Apple:
I personally have no issue with plastic phones, as long as the plastics used are of high quality. While I think the original iPhone was the best combination of beauty and durability, and the iPhone 4/4S is the most beautiful, the iPhone 3G/3GS probably, ironically, was the most durable when it came to drops and accidents. The metal of the original iPhone would get dented pretty bad when dropped, and the iPhone 4/4S, well, simply shatters, my 3GS took an unfortunate trip down a flight of stairs on its own and came out of it with one fairly noticeable nick on the corner, but otherwise was perfect.
I'm going to reveal my shallow side and state that I would not have upgraded my original iphone if the 4 was not released in the form factor it has. I was really disappointed in the plastic backing of the 3G/S. Also, I loathe cases and have never used them. I fully admit though that I am OCD and go to great lengths to make sure the phone doesn't get damaged so even though I might not have problems with a glass phone, many people would.
Apple's widely praised design chief Jonathan Ive has no true boss who can tell him what to do at the company, a distinction put in place by Steve Jobs himself.
Isn't that true of all department heads in big organizations? They answer only to the CEO?
Who did Cook answer to when Jobs was CEO?
Isn't there, for example, a CTO at Apple who answers only to the CEO? Who's the guy in charge of iOS development, for example? Who does he answer to? Beside the CEO?
The glass back on the iphone 4 is a poor design and an example of form over function. It is slippery on any surface ( other than the hand). And simply put, it breaks.
Kind of ironic that all the people that talk ill of plastic phones end up putting plastic bumpers and cases on their ip4's.
Not really - the rubber type cases don't scratch - but would lack rigidity - thats why they are a cover. The hard plastic - sure it protects the glass, and yes it gets scratched - and is SO EASILY REPLACED.
I don't use any covers on 4S, Pad2, they are thin, and i don't want to fatten them up
The article is a tad inaccurate because Ive likely did have to answer to Steve and now Tim, but it is still very powerful to not have to answer to anyone below the CEO. Ive makes the designs and the COO etc do what is needed to make them happen cost etc wise. Ive more than anyone is probably well trained in the way that Steve thought about products so yes he'll likely be the one to carry on "The Steve Way"
Don't forget that Tim Cook has a degree in industrial engineering. He isn't just a bean counter.
Isn't that true of all department heads in big organizations? They answer only to the CEO?
Who did Cook answer to when Jobs was CEO?
Isn't there, for example, a CTO at Apple who answers only to the CEO? Who's the guy in charge of iOS development, for example? Who does he answer to? Beside the CEO?
The difference between (the new, post 1997) Apple and the rest has been that design has taken precedence to function. It seems to me that the ideas started with "a device that is about this big, weighs this much, looks like this, and is able to do..." and didn't get out the door until Steve was happy that it was close enough, with the emphasis in that order. The rest of the industry tries to fit (cram!) as much engineering into a given form factor with the form factor losing if push comes to shove...
...and hence it only makes sense to leave Jony Ive in a position of autonomy and authority.
Not all of the Apple's design choices have been home runs...but I can think of very few times has design suffered to accommodate function...
I agree with the comments above about the keyboards and rodents...but then I suspect that Steve saw them as necessary evils...hence the magic trackpad and iPhones and iPads without them...and now Siri...as much as I am glad I learned to touch-type so many years ago, it is clear that (Steve's vision of) the future is keyboard-less!
Isn't that true of all department heads in big organizations? They answer only to the CEO?
Who did Cook answer to when Jobs was CEO?
Isn't there, for example, a CTO at Apple who answers only to the CEO? Who's the guy in charge of iOS development, for example? Who does he answer to? Beside the CEO?
I think you'd be hard pressed to find another industrial designer at a consumer electronics company who answers only to the CEO. Generally they'd be much lower down the ranks. Actually, most industrial design is outsourced entirely and it'd be the product group who'd liaise with the design firm.
Comments
I personally have no issue with plastic phones, as long as the plastics used are of high quality. While I think the original iPhone was the best combination of beauty and durability, and the iPhone 4/4S is the most beautiful, the iPhone 3G/3GS probably, ironically, was the most durable when it came to drops and accidents. The metal of the original iPhone would get dented pretty bad when dropped, and the iPhone 4/4S, well, simply shatters, my 3GS took an unfortunate trip down a flight of stairs on its own and came out of it with one fairly noticeable nick on the corner, but otherwise was perfect.
Most people I know who owned a 3GS ended up getting cracks in the plastic, right around the dock connector. Mine would also creak if I squeezed it.
Ironically, my "fragile" iPhone 4, which has seen its share of abuse, held up far better.
Goes to show you, each fall is different. A slightly different angle can mean the difference between a scratch and shatter.
For me the question is, when they've produced a dud (and they will at some point) who will have the power like Jobs did to put the breaks on and stop release, regardless of cost impact.
It'll have to be one person; you're right.
And likely it'll be Ive, Forstall, or even Cook.
But commercial success does not equate to objective superiority. Particularly when commercial success is dictated more by form than by function.
The debate will rage over whether Apple's products have lost sight of functionality, and whether functionality has been pushed so far to the back, in deference to form, that Apple's products are significantly flawed as a consequence.
The most definitive example of this, from my perspective at least, is the present batch of keyboards that Apple makes. When the aluminum slab keyboards first arrived I was attracted by the clean design and bought one to use with my MacBook Pro. I kept it for a couple of weeks, at which point it was obvious to me that I would never adapt to it. From a functional standpoint, it is just a lousy keyboard. The stroke is much too short, the tactile sensation is lousy, and the upper surface of the keys is practically a smooth plane. There isn't even any scallop on the tops of the keys. By any objective standards, they are decidedly lousy keyboards. The idea that when you buy a new computer from the world's premiere personal computer company that you have to go searching for a keyboard that you can stand to use is just not right. But this is how it is, and it has been this way for several years now, and there is no indication that Apple is going to return to making functional keyboards. There is no option, i.e., no personal choice. The only keyboards that Apple makes are the ones that Jobs and Ive liked and decided that people who use Apple computers should use. Why couldn't they do that and still make functional keyboards as an option for people who don't care about slick and sexy but who care about the functional quality of the keyboard? What is so wrong with letting individuals have it their way, as opposed to everyone having it the Jobs way?
A few years ago when a new generation of MacBook Pro was introduced, people who preferred non-reflective screens for functional reasons were at first denied the ability to buy them that way. Of course that eventually was corrected, but why was it that way in the first place?
Many people like the Apple mice, but there are lots of people who can't don't like them at all. Why can't Apple make and offer a more conventional mouse for people who prefer that sort of mouse, thereby sparing people from having to pay for an expensive mouse that they don't like and then having to go immediately to another store to buy an inexpensive mouse that they like?
The question remains: Will Apple ever resume production of fully functional keyboards where every consideration of functionality has not been tossed aside in favor of form?
That's probably a good thing.
I think it's a great thing. There's a great team in place there, but of them all, Jony's the one with the vision that Steve had. It's his vision that will keep Apple making great products that people fall in love with. Scott's work on the software is great, too, but it's the hardware designs that draw people in first. I hope Jony's well compensated and stays at Apple until he retires!
I don't know much about Ive, but everything I've ever read about him suggests that he is an unassuming, almost shy, personality that is unlikely to let the power go to his head. He seems the type that loves what he does to the extent that he doesn't really know he is working, and is therefore very likely continue along the trajectory he has established - very good news for those of us who love beautiful and minimalistic Apple products!
Ive doing fantastic design work for Steve Jobs, and not trying to run the company, reminded me of this interview with Woz, who did the fantastic engineering work that is the whole basis of Apple:
http://realdanlyons.com/blog/2011/10...tion-with-woz/
Yes, I know, it's an article by THAT Dan Lyons, aka Fake Steve, who actually hated Jobs. But it's a great interview.
Woz had no great ambition except to be seen as the very best at his kind of engineering. Jobs made that happen for him, and what more could he ask?
I personally have no issue with plastic phones, as long as the plastics used are of high quality. While I think the original iPhone was the best combination of beauty and durability, and the iPhone 4/4S is the most beautiful, the iPhone 3G/3GS probably, ironically, was the most durable when it came to drops and accidents. The metal of the original iPhone would get dented pretty bad when dropped, and the iPhone 4/4S, well, simply shatters, my 3GS took an unfortunate trip down a flight of stairs on its own and came out of it with one fairly noticeable nick on the corner, but otherwise was perfect.
I'm going to reveal my shallow side and state that I would not have upgraded my original iphone if the 4 was not released in the form factor it has. I was really disappointed in the plastic backing of the 3G/S. Also, I loathe cases and have never used them. I fully admit though that I am OCD and go to great lengths to make sure the phone doesn't get damaged so even though I might not have problems with a glass phone, many people would.
Apple's widely praised design chief Jonathan Ive has no true boss who can tell him what to do at the company, a distinction put in place by Steve Jobs himself.
Isn't that true of all department heads in big organizations? They answer only to the CEO?
Who did Cook answer to when Jobs was CEO?
Isn't there, for example, a CTO at Apple who answers only to the CEO? Who's the guy in charge of iOS development, for example? Who does he answer to? Beside the CEO?
one of the main reasons i'm not concerned about apple without jobs is ive's
the suspense is killing me.
The glass back on the iphone 4 is a poor design and an example of form over function. It is slippery on any surface ( other than the hand). And simply put, it breaks.
Kind of ironic that all the people that talk ill of plastic phones end up putting plastic bumpers and cases on their ip4's.
Not really - the rubber type cases don't scratch - but would lack rigidity - thats why they are a cover. The hard plastic - sure it protects the glass, and yes it gets scratched - and is SO EASILY REPLACED.
I don't use any covers on 4S, Pad2, they are thin, and i don't want to fatten them up
The article is a tad inaccurate because Ive likely did have to answer to Steve and now Tim, but it is still very powerful to not have to answer to anyone below the CEO. Ive makes the designs and the COO etc do what is needed to make them happen cost etc wise. Ive more than anyone is probably well trained in the way that Steve thought about products so yes he'll likely be the one to carry on "The Steve Way"
Don't forget that Tim Cook has a degree in industrial engineering. He isn't just a bean counter.
... Can you imagine an accountant telling Ivy how to design? ...
This is done all the time in the industry.
It's called "The Microsoft Way."
The glass back on the iphone 4 is a poor design and an example of form over function. ...
It's clear to me that you wouldn't know good design even if you held it in the palm of your hand.
the suspense is killing me.
Isn't that true of all department heads in big organizations? They answer only to the CEO?
Who did Cook answer to when Jobs was CEO?
Isn't there, for example, a CTO at Apple who answers only to the CEO? Who's the guy in charge of iOS development, for example? Who does he answer to? Beside the CEO?
Don't you know how companies work?
Do I have to draw you a picture?
The difference between (the new, post 1997) Apple and the rest has been that design has taken precedence to function. It seems to me that the ideas started with "a device that is about this big, weighs this much, looks like this, and is able to do..." and didn't get out the door until Steve was happy that it was close enough, with the emphasis in that order. The rest of the industry tries to fit (cram!) as much engineering into a given form factor with the form factor losing if push comes to shove...
...and hence it only makes sense to leave Jony Ive in a position of autonomy and authority.
Not all of the Apple's design choices have been home runs...but I can think of very few times has design suffered to accommodate function...
I agree with the comments above about the keyboards and rodents...but then I suspect that Steve saw them as necessary evils...hence the magic trackpad and iPhones and iPads without them...and now Siri...as much as I am glad I learned to touch-type so many years ago, it is clear that (Steve's vision of) the future is keyboard-less!
Isn't that true of all department heads in big organizations? They answer only to the CEO?
Who did Cook answer to when Jobs was CEO?
Isn't there, for example, a CTO at Apple who answers only to the CEO? Who's the guy in charge of iOS development, for example? Who does he answer to? Beside the CEO?
I think you'd be hard pressed to find another industrial designer at a consumer electronics company who answers only to the CEO. Generally they'd be much lower down the ranks. Actually, most industrial design is outsourced entirely and it'd be the product group who'd liaise with the design firm.