Indeed, as if Apple makes a habit of allowing us to customize.
Having said that, the Game Center cannot just be all silver and no motif. Perhaps they'd allow some "skin", which is the extent of iOS freedom you get anyway.
SF not SJ. It's apparent without even talking to him, that his approach is from an engineering (software) mindset, which is his strength (and therefor his weakness.)
The transition to new, simple, innovative is not hard for users. But is very difficult for designers to produce. This difficulty is one reason we see so few innovative products. It's hard. Its much easier to design "looking back" than it is "looking ahead." This is why products so often fall back to trite, "literal" design strategies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
I wouldn't say that SJ didn't understand it. Without knowing him, and speaking to him about it, you can only guess at his understanding and aims.
But moving people off what they know, and moving them into something entirely different is difficult. I know that from my own experiences in designing equipment. Even with engineers, it's tough. When HP came out with the first digital scopes, one of which I bought, they used new concepts in the interface. Gone were all the old knobs, and in we're buttons, and on screen controls that were use centric. This was so difficult for engineers to wrap themselves around, that HP went partially back to the older interface for several years.
You need to bring people around a bit at a time (no pun intended!). They have to feel comfortable. Look at all the critics of Win 8. This may be too much at once. So skeuomorphism is there to help that transition. Over time, it can be dispensed with.
Most people here are too young to remember anything from before OS X, in early 2001. Before that, there were many programs, free, shareware, and commercial, that existed for the sole purpose of allowing people to take Apple's UI and distort it to unrecognizability (not a real word, I know).
We had windows that looked like various woods, stone and even creeping vines. Hi tech looks and low tech looks, fantasy and notwhat. Some made it almost impossible to even make sense of what the screen looked like, but it was considered to be an advantage of Apple's system software, as opposed to that of Microsoft, which allowed very little change. That came to a halt with OS X, to many complaints among users and developers.
Now, we're arguing about minor infractions of some rigid thinking that none of this is correct. Well, just look at the Modern UI of Win 8 to see an extreme of this thinking. Do we want to go there? I hope not!
The leather and stitching in Calendar is not so bad to me, but the torn off paper look is just annoying as hell. I'm sorry, but I would have torn the little pieces off if it were a real calendar and I'm stuck looking at this regardless. I'm probably on the picky side, but the torn paper is the cheesiest part.
Also, the game table look in game center is also just tacky. If you are going to do a game table, at least make it a nice looking game table.
I think it's amusing that making the head of design of physical objects at apple also head of design of graphical objects generates such a negative response.
After all, he arrived at his minimalist design philosophy by consistently asking the question, what is necessary to most effectively fulfill the required function. If the shredder's function in Passbook is to signify that the information has been destroyed, I think that fits the minimalist bill. The Roulette/Card table/Pool/Casino appearance of Game Center is bold in the sense creating a metaphor to "gaming", but I don't know how well that works in its function to advertise the switchboard metaphor to different games
I think Forestall is (perhaps unconsciously) aping his mentor again by getting "fired" at the peak of his career. Remember, Jobs was an abrasive asshole as a young man also. Now Forestall will spend a few years in "exile" doing some other project that won't work out, only to return to Apple after he has matured as a saviour of sorts in 2022 after Tim dies and Schiller has retired to his lazy-boy recliner.
As for skeuomorphism, it gets a bad rap because most of the tech press is, well ... techies. And they have no idea about design or the possible reasons for such skueomorphic designs. True, they have gone a bit too far lately but many of Apple's designs in this category are not only successful and popular, they are necessary.
Think about it. If iBooks wasn't a book shelf but a simple list of titles for example, how does the average user tell the difference between a list of books on their device and a list of items in the store? They *need* two separate metaphors there.
It's also confusing enough for the average person to tell the difference between iTunes the store (on their device) and iTunes the player (on their device). Apple is introducing a whole new group of people to computers for the first time with iOS. People who didn't previously use them because they found the whole deal confusing. Just because a bunch of techies don't like skeuomorphism, doesn't mean that HUGE numbers of average people aren't greatly assisted by the concept.
Try showing Microsoft's "flat" "modern" Metro UI to a bunch of seniors and then come back and tell me how flatter is better and that skeuomorphism isn't needed. Metro just a bunch of pretty squares to most non-computer savy folks and completely unusable.
Now this I agree with. What are you, bipolar on an hourly basis?
The thing Ive brings to his industrial design above all other sensorial aspects is tactility. His stuff is meant to feel good in the hand, or to look like it wants to be touched, like the back of the recent iMacs. This is a very British thing, or more accurately maybe, a Celto-Germanic thing.
Jobs had it too, thus the BMW motorcycle (60s/70s vintage?) that he had enshrined at Apple as a design example. Those were very tactile machines, with their sculpted crankcases and rounded cylinder heads, glowing aliminum and I suppose magnesium.
Ive's Bently is a monument to tactility as is his house.
Skeuomorphic software motifs are intended to add tactility to the interface, along with visual interest. Right-brain guys like Ive and Jobs, don't know about Forstall, are highly tolerant of tactile eye-candy. Left-brain types find it distracting or even painful. Microsoft is dedicated to left-brainism, which is why they're struggling to find something appealing for their interface.
The myth that Ive is opposed to s'morphism (hate the word) is just that, myth, until proved otherwise—the work of one Telegraph journalist and a bunch of unnamed sources. I hope I'm not proved wrong about that, because I like the tactility myself.
Edit: corrected to Aston-Martin below. Don't know the tactility quotient of that car, haven't had the pleasure of examining one.
Right-brain guys like Ive and Jobs, don't know about Forstall, are highly tolerant of tactile eye-candy. Left-brain types find it distracting or even painful. Microsoft is dedicated to left-brainism, which is why they're struggling to find something appealing for their interface.
This is just so wrong (and presumptuous) on so many levels that I don't know yet where to begin to set you straight. Just so wrong.
Now this I agree with. What are you, bipolar on an hourly basis?
The thing Ive brings to his industrial design above all other sensorial aspects is tactility. His stuff is meant to feel good in the hand, or to look like it wants to be touched, like the back of the recent iMacs. This is a very British thing, or more accurately maybe, a Celto-Germanic thing.
Jobs had it too, thus the BMW motorcycle (60s/70s vintage?) that he had enshrined at Apple as a design example. Those were very tactile machines, with their sculpted crankcases and rounded cylinder heads, glowing aliminum and I suppose magnesium.
Ive's Bently is a monument to tactility as is his house. Skeuomorphic software motifs are intended to add tactility to the interface, along with visual interest.
Right-brain guys like Ive and Jobs, don't know about Forstall, are highly tolerant of tactile eye-candy. Left-brain types find it distracting or even painful. Microsoft is dedicated to left-brainism, which is why they're struggling to find something appealing for their interface.
The myth that Ive is opposed to s'morphism (hate the word) is just that, myth, until proved otherwise—the work of one Telegraph journalist and a bunch of unnamed sources. I hope I'm not proved wrong about that, because I like the tactility myself.
Yes. The idea that Ive will design flat, like Win 8 or typical google's skeletal functionalism, is silly. In addition to what you write I would add that Ive brings intelligence and thought. He drives an Aston Martin, apparently, which is a beautifully designed car. I think the present OSX gui is a bit of a mess and is in need of sorting out. Above all Ive will bring intelligence and a sophisticated aesthetic to the platform. To me, the skeuomorphistic designs that everyone hates are just self indulgent and 'dumb' for lack of a better word. The idea that objects on the screen should visually mimic their real life counterpart is nothing but a naive and 'cute' idea. 'Effort' has clearly gone into the creation of these designs, but not that much 'thought'. I rmeber when the present Trash can was introduced with OSX. I remember hating it. It has been improved and I am so used to it by now I don't see it. I just thought it was cheap and tacky. Not substantial. I look forward to see some changes.
Regarding the use of metaphors; perhaps these can be more subtle too. Presumably the whole world is now comfortable with virtual environments and "intuitiveness" can be re-imagined.
Deemphasizing the desktop/office/file/folder metaphor where it's remained stubbornly, overly dominant can't happen soon enough for me. Some of the iOSification of OS X, for better and/or worse, seems like one way Apple's moving more in that direction.
No it isn't. And I could probably say a few more true things that would drive you crazy. But presumptuous, yes, I agree that it is. Correct, though.
I know, the left-brain, right-brain thing is out of fashion. You want to go back to anal-retentive vs. Bohemian?
Yes, you can fabricate things that would drive truly knowledgeable people crazy. But saying it is true does not make it so.
I challenge you to cite peer-reviewed studies demonstrating that majority of left-brained folks find eye-candy painful and that majority of right-brained people are more stimulated by it. In fact, I challenge you to define what a right-brained person is, without looking it up. If you cannot do so within today (which should be doable since you pretend to be so knowledgeable), then please do not post anything again.
Yes it doesn't, but I believe he was using that word to make a point more than being 100% specific about what way things would actually change. I trust Ive's design sensibilities and sensitivities.
Yes it doesn't, but I believe he was using that word to make a point more than being 100% specific about what way things would actually change. I trust Ive's design sensibilities and sensitivities.
Most of the time, I agree. But Ive and Jobs also gave us multiple generations of computer mice that were literally painful to use. Ergonomics is a key part of user experience. The hockey puck mouse and the might mouse were not particularly ergonomic.
Yes, you can fabricate things that would drive truly knowledgeable people crazy. But saying it is true does not make it so.
I challenge you to cite peer-reviewed studies demonstrating that majority of left-brained folks find eye-candy painful and that majority of right-brained people are more stimulated by it. In fact, I challenge you to define what a right-brained person is, without looking it up. If you cannot do so within today (which should be doable since you pretend to be so knowledgeable), then please do not post anything again.
I think Forestall is (perhaps unconsciously) aping his mentor again by getting "fired" at the peak of his career. Remember, Jobs was an abrasive asshole as a young man also. Now Forestall will spend a few years in "exile" doing some other project that won't work out, only to return to Apple after he has matured as a saviour of sorts in 2022 after Tim dies and Schiller has retired to his lazy-boy recliner.
Yes it doesn't, but I believe he was using that word to make a point more than being 100% specific about what way things would actually change. I trust Ive's design sensibilities and sensitivities.
I definitely trust his hardware design instincts. How well that translates into software UI design remains to be seen. As much as I respect his work I'm cautiously optimistic.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloodshotrollin'red
Hate, hate, hate skeuomorphism. Especially that dreadful GameCentre. It is naff.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }I agree, GameCenter is horrible, and reminds one of the salad days of windows 3.1
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger
Indeed, as if Apple makes a habit of allowing us to customize.
Having said that, the Game Center cannot just be all silver and no motif. Perhaps they'd allow some "skin", which is the extent of iOS freedom you get anyway.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }Is there some reason the Game Center exists?
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
SF not SJ. It's apparent without even talking to him, that his approach is from an engineering (software) mindset, which is his strength (and therefor his weakness.)
The transition to new, simple, innovative is not hard for users. But is very difficult for designers to produce. This difficulty is one reason we see so few innovative products. It's hard. Its much easier to design "looking back" than it is "looking ahead." This is why products so often fall back to trite, "literal" design strategies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
I wouldn't say that SJ didn't understand it. Without knowing him, and speaking to him about it, you can only guess at his understanding and aims.
But moving people off what they know, and moving them into something entirely different is difficult. I know that from my own experiences in designing equipment. Even with engineers, it's tough. When HP came out with the first digital scopes, one of which I bought, they used new concepts in the interface. Gone were all the old knobs, and in we're buttons, and on screen controls that were use centric. This was so difficult for engineers to wrap themselves around, that HP went partially back to the older interface for several years.
You need to bring people around a bit at a time (no pun intended!). They have to feel comfortable. Look at all the critics of Win 8. This may be too much at once. So skeuomorphism is there to help that transition. Over time, it can be dispensed with.
Most people here are too young to remember anything from before OS X, in early 2001. Before that, there were many programs, free, shareware, and commercial, that existed for the sole purpose of allowing people to take Apple's UI and distort it to unrecognizability (not a real word, I know).
We had windows that looked like various woods, stone and even creeping vines. Hi tech looks and low tech looks, fantasy and notwhat. Some made it almost impossible to even make sense of what the screen looked like, but it was considered to be an advantage of Apple's system software, as opposed to that of Microsoft, which allowed very little change. That came to a halt with OS X, to many complaints among users and developers.
Now, we're arguing about minor infractions of some rigid thinking that none of this is correct. Well, just look at the Modern UI of Win 8 to see an extreme of this thinking. Do we want to go there? I hope not!
Also, the game table look in game center is also just tacky. If you are going to do a game table, at least make it a nice looking game table.
After all, he arrived at his minimalist design philosophy by consistently asking the question, what is necessary to most effectively fulfill the required function. If the shredder's function in Passbook is to signify that the information has been destroyed, I think that fits the minimalist bill. The Roulette/Card table/Pool/Casino appearance of Game Center is bold in the sense creating a metaphor to "gaming", but I don't know how well that works in its function to advertise the switchboard metaphor to different games
It'll be interesting to watch what'll happen!
Now this I agree with. What are you, bipolar on an hourly basis?
The thing Ive brings to his industrial design above all other sensorial aspects is tactility. His stuff is meant to feel good in the hand, or to look like it wants to be touched, like the back of the recent iMacs. This is a very British thing, or more accurately maybe, a Celto-Germanic thing.
Jobs had it too, thus the BMW motorcycle (60s/70s vintage?) that he had enshrined at Apple as a design example. Those were very tactile machines, with their sculpted crankcases and rounded cylinder heads, glowing aliminum and I suppose magnesium.
Ive's Bently is a monument to tactility as is his house.
Skeuomorphic software motifs are intended to add tactility to the interface, along with visual interest. Right-brain guys like Ive and Jobs, don't know about Forstall, are highly tolerant of tactile eye-candy. Left-brain types find it distracting or even painful. Microsoft is dedicated to left-brainism, which is why they're struggling to find something appealing for their interface.
The myth that Ive is opposed to s'morphism (hate the word) is just that, myth, until proved otherwise—the work of one Telegraph journalist and a bunch of unnamed sources. I hope I'm not proved wrong about that, because I like the tactility myself.
Edit: corrected to Aston-Martin below. Don't know the tactility quotient of that car, haven't had the pleasure of examining one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
Right-brain guys like Ive and Jobs, don't know about Forstall, are highly tolerant of tactile eye-candy. Left-brain types find it distracting or even painful. Microsoft is dedicated to left-brainism, which is why they're struggling to find something appealing for their interface.
This is just so wrong (and presumptuous) on so many levels that I don't know yet where to begin to set you straight. Just so wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
Now this I agree with. What are you, bipolar on an hourly basis?
The thing Ive brings to his industrial design above all other sensorial aspects is tactility. His stuff is meant to feel good in the hand, or to look like it wants to be touched, like the back of the recent iMacs. This is a very British thing, or more accurately maybe, a Celto-Germanic thing.
Jobs had it too, thus the BMW motorcycle (60s/70s vintage?) that he had enshrined at Apple as a design example. Those were very tactile machines, with their sculpted crankcases and rounded cylinder heads, glowing aliminum and I suppose magnesium.
Ive's Bently is a monument to tactility as is his house. Skeuomorphic software motifs are intended to add tactility to the interface, along with visual interest.
Right-brain guys like Ive and Jobs, don't know about Forstall, are highly tolerant of tactile eye-candy. Left-brain types find it distracting or even painful. Microsoft is dedicated to left-brainism, which is why they're struggling to find something appealing for their interface.
The myth that Ive is opposed to s'morphism (hate the word) is just that, myth, until proved otherwise—the work of one Telegraph journalist and a bunch of unnamed sources. I hope I'm not proved wrong about that, because I like the tactility myself.
Yes. The idea that Ive will design flat, like Win 8 or typical google's skeletal functionalism, is silly. In addition to what you write I would add that Ive brings intelligence and thought. He drives an Aston Martin, apparently, which is a beautifully designed car. I think the present OSX gui is a bit of a mess and is in need of sorting out. Above all Ive will bring intelligence and a sophisticated aesthetic to the platform. To me, the skeuomorphistic designs that everyone hates are just self indulgent and 'dumb' for lack of a better word. The idea that objects on the screen should visually mimic their real life counterpart is nothing but a naive and 'cute' idea. 'Effort' has clearly gone into the creation of these designs, but not that much 'thought'. I rmeber when the present Trash can was introduced with OSX. I remember hating it. It has been improved and I am so used to it by now I don't see it. I just thought it was cheap and tacky. Not substantial. I look forward to see some changes.
No it isn't. And I could probably say a few more true things that would drive you crazy. But presumptuous, yes, I agree that it is. Correct, though.
I know, the left-brain, right-brain thing is out of fashion. You want to go back to anal-retentive vs. Bohemian?
I will be sad if EVERY art is removed from Os X and iOS.
gradient is UGLY , metro is boring !
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
No it isn't. And I could probably say a few more true things that would drive you crazy. But presumptuous, yes, I agree that it is. Correct, though.
I know, the left-brain, right-brain thing is out of fashion. You want to go back to anal-retentive vs. Bohemian?
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }I want to go back to big-endian vs little-endian.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
No it isn't. And I could probably say a few more true things that would drive you crazy. But presumptuous, yes, I agree that it is. Correct, though.
I know, the left-brain, right-brain thing is out of fashion. You want to go back to anal-retentive vs. Bohemian?
Yes, you can fabricate things that would drive truly knowledgeable people crazy. But saying it is true does not make it so.
I challenge you to cite peer-reviewed studies demonstrating that majority of left-brained folks find eye-candy painful and that majority of right-brained people are more stimulated by it. In fact, I challenge you to define what a right-brained person is, without looking it up. If you cannot do so within today (which should be doable since you pretend to be so knowledgeable), then please do not post anything again.
Goodbye ;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
"Flat" doesn't sound promising.
Yes it doesn't, but I believe he was using that word to make a point more than being 100% specific about what way things would actually change. I trust Ive's design sensibilities and sensitivities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
Yes it doesn't, but I believe he was using that word to make a point more than being 100% specific about what way things would actually change. I trust Ive's design sensibilities and sensitivities.
Most of the time, I agree. But Ive and Jobs also gave us multiple generations of computer mice that were literally painful to use. Ergonomics is a key part of user experience. The hockey puck mouse and the might mouse were not particularly ergonomic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger
Yes, you can fabricate things that would drive truly knowledgeable people crazy. But saying it is true does not make it so.
I challenge you to cite peer-reviewed studies demonstrating that majority of left-brained folks find eye-candy painful and that majority of right-brained people are more stimulated by it. In fact, I challenge you to define what a right-brained person is, without looking it up. If you cannot do so within today (which should be doable since you pretend to be so knowledgeable), then please do not post anything again.
Goodbye ;-)
Bazinga!
But how will you know he is not looking it up?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
I think Forestall is (perhaps unconsciously) aping his mentor again by getting "fired" at the peak of his career. Remember, Jobs was an abrasive asshole as a young man also. Now Forestall will spend a few years in "exile" doing some other project that won't work out, only to return to Apple after he has matured as a saviour of sorts in 2022 after Tim dies and Schiller has retired to his lazy-boy recliner.
Back in the real world, Forstall isn't Jobs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
Yes it doesn't, but I believe he was using that word to make a point more than being 100% specific about what way things would actually change. I trust Ive's design sensibilities and sensitivities.
I definitely trust his hardware design instincts. How well that translates into software UI design remains to be seen. As much as I respect his work I'm cautiously optimistic.
I suspect that folks thinking he's going to trash everything will be disappointed.