Jony Ive's departure follows years of dissatisfaction and absenteeism

2456789

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 161
    fred1fred1 Posts: 331member
    Jony Ive designed Apple Park? That bit of news is going to come as a big surprise to Norman Foster and his firm, who actually designed it. Jony may have had input, but I don’t see Lord Norman being one to listen well to others. When are people going to start giving credit where credit is due, and not where it isn’t? 
    It’s the same with the Apple Store on Park Avenue, New York. Steve Jobs did not design this! It was the firm of Bohlin, Cywinski, Jackson. 
    Get your facts straight people!
    Sanctum1972dysamoriachemengin1
  • Reply 22 of 161
    I find it hard to believe that Cook not visiting the design studio as often as Jobs would be "dispiriting" to Ive. It seems more likely that Ive just missed having Jobs provide his own specific input. It's not like Ive isn't smart enough to understand that Cook isn't going to be a clone of Jobs and may not believe he has as much to offer when it comes to providing critiques of the designs. That's not actually a standard skill for business executives.
    edited July 1 radarthekatfastasleep
  • Reply 23 of 161
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,957member
    I do not find this surprising at all -- and that is NOT to trash Cook & crew.
    Rather, inspired design, the kind that keeps you up all night -- not to meet a deadline but because you are excited about what you are doing -- comes from within.   It is not a conscious effort as in "I think I will design a great product today".  But, although that creativity, initiative and drive come from within, it is spawned by a nurturing environment that Steve understood -- probably because he felt it too.  That is one of the main reasons why Steve pushed for the new Apple Park -- to help create that environment.

    A corporate environment simply can't create that environment.
    I think Tim knows that and he supported Ives as best he was able.   But, he couldn't replace the design environment that Ives needed.  Tim has maintained many of the principles and values that Apple was built on, but this one was a miss.

    But, i think there was another factor at work here too:   Apple (whether it was Apple or Ives) had become stuck in the 'thin, light, minimalist' design ideology.  That, and the counter pull to make 'great products', likely bothered Ives a great deal because ideology is always the enemy of creativity.  
    knowitallravnorodomSanctum1972
  • Reply 24 of 161
    matrix077matrix077 Posts: 729member
    I find it hard to believe that Cook not visiting the design studio as often as Jobs would be "dispiriting" to Ive. It seems more likely that Ive just missed having Jobs provide his own specific input. It's not like Ive isn't smart enough to understand that Cook isn't going to be a clone of Jobs and may not believe he has as much to offer when it comes to providing critiques of the designs. That's not actually a standard skill for business executives.
    Exactly. If Cook, who’s not design-savvy, visiting the studio as often as Jobs it will be more harmful than beneficial, or at best just pointless. We operate best when we operate on what we know best. 

    And Ive wouldn’t listen to Cook’s input on design anyway so what’s the point?
    edited July 1 knowitallradarthekat
  • Reply 25 of 161
    tommikeletommikele Posts: 265member
    Watch 4 comes in a paper envelope, without case and with 70 cm charging cable unexpectedly short causing the Watch to slip from the hand and drop.
    They must have singled you out for second class packaging. Neither of the two we bought came that wat and no one else we know got it your way either.
  • Reply 26 of 161
    matrix077 said: We operate best when we operate on what we know best. 
    IMO, it sounds like Cook wanted Ive to inherit the "shot caller" role for design that Jobs had previously held and perhaps Ive wasn't comfortable with that at Apple. The story (if true) about Ive being presented with 20 different design briefs and then not providing a clear response would be an example of that. Ive may have been out of his comfort zone with that role, similar to Cook perhaps not wanting to try and emulate Jobs when it came to design decisions. 
    dysamoria
  • Reply 27 of 161
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 1,767member
    It is unbelievable that Apple couldn’t sell that Edition watch. Apple might sell it if they wanted that. While it is also true that the industry cannot tolerate such niche products, the Edition is only a fraction of Apple’s business and with such a power Apple could succeed with the Edition and obviously not go out of business like Vertu. There are a lot of VIPs in the world that would crave for such a watch. Apparently Ive has been left alone on the Marketing issues regarding Edition. The first Watch came in a luxurious box, with 2 m charging cable and a very high quality polycarbonate case. Watch 4 comes in a paper envelope, without case and with 70 cm charging cable unexpectedly short causing the Watch to slip from the hand and drop. The rationale of the Edition was not wrong, that spot on the wrist is very special and there are a lot of people that would decorate themselves on that spot with luxurious things. From high to low that would create demand for the less expensive variants as well.

    Ive’s departure is a loss for Apple.
    Most people saw that the first Gen watch was an overrated product with a bad UI experience.    That's why the Edition didn't sell.
    canukstorm80s_Apple_Guydysamoriachemengin1
  • Reply 28 of 161
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,888member
    I do not find this surprising at all -- and that is NOT to trash Cook & crew.
    Rather, inspired design, the kind that keeps you up all night -- not to meet a deadline but because you are excited about what you are doing -- comes from within.   It is not a conscious effort as in "I think I will design a great product today".  But, although that creativity, initiative and drive come from within, it is spawned by a nurturing environment that Steve understood -- probably because he felt it too.  That is one of the main reasons why Steve pushed for the new Apple Park -- to help create that environment.

    A corporate environment simply can't create that environment.
    I think Tim knows that and he supported Ives as best he was able.   But, he couldn't replace the design environment that Ives needed.  Tim has maintained many of the principles and values that Apple was built on, but this one was a miss.

    But, i think there was another factor at work here too:   Apple (whether it was Apple or Ives) had become stuck in the 'thin, light, minimalist' design ideology.  That, and the counter pull to make 'great products', likely bothered Ives a great deal because ideology market ideology is always the enemy of creativity.  
    There, I fixed it for you.

    There is no such thing as “thin, light, minimalist design ideology” in Apple. This is an urban legend, get over it. The Watch is not thin, the Pencil is not thin, the cheese grater Mac Pro was not thin as well as the new Mac Pro, the HomePod is not thin. The AirPods are not thin, as far as your ears allow. The MacBook Pros are not thin, they have just adequate volume to dissipate heat faster, as well as the iMacs. In contrast the iPad, the Retina MacBook are thin because this is what is expected of them. The iPhones are thin for handling: thick and less manageable with more battery cannot be preferred to thin and more manageable with adequate battery, more battery won’t save you when you drop it. Yet they even have that wireless charging weirdness that makes them even thicker and heavier.
    neilmfastasleepurahara
  • Reply 29 of 161
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 1,767member
    If someone at his age and experience needs a mentor coddling him and encouraging him by challenging his work along the entire process from design to finished product you have to wonder how much he really did and how much was Steve cracking the whip constantly.

    He would have hated working for Steve at NeXT because 95% of the time was spent at PIXAR the last three years before we at NeXT merged with Apple.
    I've long thought that Software and to a less degree Hardware has been under-resourced at Apple for quite a while.   I see the same-ish AR game played at WWDC each year and get board.      Cook hasn't put enough money into hiring people in order to keep the profits up.
    dysamoria
  • Reply 30 of 161
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 988member
    It is unbelievable that Apple couldn’t sell that Edition watch. Apple might sell it if they wanted that. While it is also true that the industry cannot tolerate such niche products, the Edition is only a fraction of Apple’s business and with such a power Apple could succeed with the Edition and obviously not go out of business like Vertu. There are a lot of VIPs in the world that would crave for such a watch. Apparently Ive has been left alone on the Marketing issues regarding Edition. The first Watch came in a luxurious box, with 2 m charging cable and a very high quality polycarbonate case. Watch 4 comes in a paper envelope, without case and with 70 cm charging cable unexpectedly short causing the Watch to slip from the hand and drop. The rationale of the Edition was not wrong, that spot on the wrist is very special and there are a lot of people that would decorate themselves on that spot with luxurious things. From high to low that would create demand for the less expensive variants as well.

    Ive’s departure is a loss for Apple.
    No it's not. They were $10,000 and with no prospect of upgrading the CPU, so it was well known it'd be outdated in a year. $10,000 non-smart watches don't get outdated in a year. The lack of interest shown was proven by the number of celebrities who were given an Edition Watch only to wear it with the pairing screen still showing...

    I agree somewhat with the packaging, it's certainly less premium feeling now but the original box with the watch housed in a thick plastic case inside another cardboard box was unnecessarily wasteful for something that's going to go straight in the bin. I was disappointed to find the short charging cable too, it meant I had to get an extension cable to use it was I was before. More nickel and diming from Cook & co.
    dysamoriachemengin1
  • Reply 31 of 161
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,888member
    k2kw said:
    It is unbelievable that Apple couldn’t sell that Edition watch. Apple might sell it if they wanted that. While it is also true that the industry cannot tolerate such niche products, the Edition is only a fraction of Apple’s business and with such a power Apple could succeed with the Edition and obviously not go out of business like Vertu. There are a lot of VIPs in the world that would crave for such a watch. Apparently Ive has been left alone on the Marketing issues regarding Edition. The first Watch came in a luxurious box, with 2 m charging cable and a very high quality polycarbonate case. Watch 4 comes in a paper envelope, without case and with 70 cm charging cable unexpectedly short causing the Watch to slip from the hand and drop. The rationale of the Edition was not wrong, that spot on the wrist is very special and there are a lot of people that would decorate themselves on that spot with luxurious things. From high to low that would create demand for the less expensive variants as well.

    Ive’s departure is a loss for Apple.
    Most people saw that the first Gen watch was an overrated product with a bad UI experience.    That's why the Edition didn't sell.
    I agree with the bad UI, most probably because that was assigned to a wrong person. But I don’t think the buyers of the Edition would care much about the UI to the point of rejecting it just because of this.
  • Reply 32 of 161
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 988member
    The apathy from Cook toward Ive's design department just shows how Cook doesn't value the most important employees, and hasn't a clue how to keep them motivated. Maybe Cook was annoyed that Jobs gave Ive more power than himself. Jobs was obviously excited to see what new designes Ive had created, but Cook doesn't seem to care. He's more concerned about the next event where he can push his political agenda. Cook is a poor CEO, he doesn't deserve the credit he gets over the increase in Apple's value nor the products since Steve's death, as it is well known there were lots of products in the pipeline before his death.Is anyone surprised that having an operations guy at the helm results in a focus on operations and profits? Unfortunately Cook isn't leading, he's not a leader; he just keeps things ticking over.
    edited July 1 kestralchemengin1
  • Reply 33 of 161
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,888member

    tommikele said:
    Watch 4 comes in a paper envelope, without case and with 70 cm charging cable unexpectedly short causing the Watch to slip from the hand and drop.
    They must have singled you out for second class packaging. Neither of the two we bought came that wat and no one else we know got it your way either.
    Both are purchased from European Apple Stores. Wanna photos?

    No, there it is:
    https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-watch-series-4-unboxing-whats-in-the-box/
    edited July 1
  • Reply 34 of 161
    toysandmetoysandme Posts: 215member

    Fortunately, Apple didn’t lose $10,000 per watch.  I’d be shocked if they cost 1/10 of that.  I never understood spending car money on a watch you don’t need...

    At least a large number of people bought in to the cheaper version...
    Who would want to blow 10 grand on a watch guaranteed to be obsolete a year later?
    dysamoriachemengin1
  • Reply 35 of 161
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,888member
    elijahg said:
    It is unbelievable that Apple couldn’t sell that Edition watch. Apple might sell it if they wanted that. While it is also true that the industry cannot tolerate such niche products, the Edition is only a fraction of Apple’s business and with such a power Apple could succeed with the Edition and obviously not go out of business like Vertu. There are a lot of VIPs in the world that would crave for such a watch. Apparently Ive has been left alone on the Marketing issues regarding Edition. The first Watch came in a luxurious box, with 2 m charging cable and a very high quality polycarbonate case. Watch 4 comes in a paper envelope, without case and with 70 cm charging cable unexpectedly short causing the Watch to slip from the hand and drop. The rationale of the Edition was not wrong, that spot on the wrist is very special and there are a lot of people that would decorate themselves on that spot with luxurious things. From high to low that would create demand for the less expensive variants as well.

    Ive’s departure is a loss for Apple.
    No it's not. They were $10,000 and with no prospect of upgrading the CPU, so it was well known it'd be outdated in a year. $10,000 non-smart watches don't get outdated in a year. The lack of interest shown was proven by the number of celebrities who were given an Edition Watch only to wear it with the pairing screen still showing...

    I agree somewhat with the packaging, it's certainly less premium feeling now but the original box with the watch housed in a thick plastic case inside another cardboard box was unnecessarily wasteful for something that's going to go straight in the bin. I was disappointed to find the short charging cable too, it meant I had to get an extension cable to use it was I was before. More nickel and diming from Cook & co.
    No prospect of upgrading the CPU? They would just exchange with the new model at the expense of internal cost. They manage millions of trade-ins each year, couldn’t they manage the trade in of $10.000 item?
  • Reply 36 of 161
    john f.john f. Posts: 91member
    Maybe Ive wanted to move faster into bringing products, and 1.0 stuff, to market. Apple is getting very slow at getting things out, it seems. It used to be that every year I was excited about new versions of the existing lines. That's gone. Now it's: New version? Nope. Wait 5 years. That must be hard for Ive too, to not have that regular product excitement anymore. Apple keeps hanging on onto old models for far too long. And there's price too. I remember when Jobs introduced the iPad. He had on that slide $999 as the price that everybody thought it would be. Then boom: $499. He said at $499, everyone could afford to get one. And that's what we need. Steve really wanted to push not just innovation, but hit the right price target while developing things. Yes, iPads are now cheaper than ever, but I always thought that the $499 price point should give us the chance to get the newest and most exciting things as well. Now every exciting product is simply out of my reach.
    kestraldysamoria
  • Reply 37 of 161
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 988member
    I do not find this surprising at all -- and that is NOT to trash Cook & crew.
    Rather, inspired design, the kind that keeps you up all night -- not to meet a deadline but because you are excited about what you are doing -- comes from within.   It is not a conscious effort as in "I think I will design a great product today".  But, although that creativity, initiative and drive come from within, it is spawned by a nurturing environment that Steve understood -- probably because he felt it too.  That is one of the main reasons why Steve pushed for the new Apple Park -- to help create that environment.

    A corporate environment simply can't create that environment.
    I think Tim knows that and he supported Ives as best he was able.   But, he couldn't replace the design environment that Ives needed.  Tim has maintained many of the principles and values that Apple was built on, but this one was a miss.

    But, i think there was another factor at work here too:   Apple (whether it was Apple or Ives) had become stuck in the 'thin, light, minimalist' design ideology.  That, and the counter pull to make 'great products', likely bothered Ives a great deal because ideology market ideology is always the enemy of creativity.  
    There, I fixed it for you.

    There is no such thing as “thin, light, minimalist design ideology” in Apple. This is an urban legend, get over it. The Watch is not thin, the Pencil is not thin, the cheese grater Mac Pro was not thin as well as the new Mac Pro, the HomePod is not thin. The AirPods are not thin, as far as your ears allow. The MacBook Pros are not thin, they have just adequate volume to dissipate heat faster, as well as the iMacs. In contrast the iPad, the Retina MacBook are thin because this is what is expected of them. The iPhones are thin for handling: thick and less manageable with more battery cannot be preferred to thin and more manageable with adequate battery, more battery won’t save you when you drop it. Yet they even have that wireless charging weirdness that makes them even thicker and heavier.
    The watch is as thin as it can be to still be functional. The pencil is the same. The Mac Pro also can't be thinner otherwise PCIe cards wouldn't fit and it'd overheat. They made the trashcan MP as compact as possible and compromised it so much it didn't sell. The MacBooks are as thin as possible. The iMac is as thin as possible. The iMac Pro is thin as possible. The phones are as thin as possible, compromising battery life. Even the AppleTV remote is so thin and minimalist it’s awkward to use. 

    Apple is well known to compromise designs for thinness. You claiming otherwise is wrong, and doesn't change that fact. 
    edited July 1 dysamoriaGeorgeBMac
  • Reply 38 of 161
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,358member
    I am for one am not shocked that Apple is left with a lot of Apple Watch $10,000 models, I assume they are the first generation.  I get Jony wanting to build a really cool, high-end version of the Apple Watch but unlike a Rolex, it isn't a thing that has much longevity. Not due to built-in obsolescence as with so many things rather because of the incredible pace of technical progress and innovation we have in the tech sector. The Apple Watch like all Apple's other products begs to be replaced with a newer version by anyone who is a tech enthusiast every few years. At least his Campus creation will be a monument and testimony to his genius that will last without being replaced by a new version in a year.
    edited July 1 AI_liaselijahgdysamoria
  • Reply 39 of 161
    Cook is a bean counter and that comes across in Apple's products and services offering which are about as interesting as one of his keynotes.

    Cook is a less crude version of Ballmer instead of getting sweaty running around like an idiot shouting 'developers, developers, developers', Cook would meekly stand around saying, 'investors, investors, investors.'

    It won't be until learn from Microsoft and point Cook at the exit and get a new CEO who thinks 'customers, customers, customers' that Apple will have a stab at the future. At the moment Cook is leading Apple down a cul-de-sac where their whole existence depends on a tiny portfolio of products which are not that special.
    Sanctum1972elijahgkestral
  • Reply 40 of 161
    john f. said:
    Maybe Ive wanted to move faster into bringing products, and 1.0 stuff, to market. 
    It sounds like the opposite to me. Ive's new company with Newson sounds like it will be primarily passion projects and some consulting work. In other words, Ive won't be dealing with that annual crunch with set product lines and tight turnaround times. 
Sign In or Register to comment.