Slashdot Mirror
Re-Imagining Apple
FirienFirien writes "Business 2.0 has put up a selection of ideas from Pentagram Design, featuring some interesting rumoured ipod innovations, as well as a look at what may be next for Apple. From the article: 'The project was led by Robert Brunner, who was Apple's chief designer from 1989 to 1996, and who oversaw the design of the PowerBook line, among many other hit products.'"
An interesting set of designs, but ones that show that non-steve-approved designers just don't get it.
Those products all look like any old generic electronics product. They entirely lack the current Apple design features of absolute minimalism.
If steve could create a sphere with one single button on the outside, that glowed, and had any realistic expectation that it might sell, he would.
(and the button would be optional)
'The project was led by Robert Brunner, who was Apple's chief designer from 1989 to 1996, and who oversaw the design of the PowerBook line, among many other hit products.'
Perhaps that should read "... chief designer from 1989 to 1996, a period where Apple saw its market share drop to near irrelevance".
Weren't these the same people Steve Jobs saved Apple from?
#DeleteChrome
Apple is the new Sony. Their iPod is this generation's walkman, and Apple is smart enough to leverage that success into other products. Apple has always been good at design. The unix-core of the Tiger OS extends that nice design into the innards.
More food for thought: Paul Graham's essay on Japan vs US design, which gives a nod to Apple as one of the few US companies that get it.
...or are those designs really, really ugly? They bear hardly any resemblance to real Apple products. I'm guessing that's due to the fact that style-man Jobs became CEO in 1997, by which time this designer was gone.
but damn it would be the same size as a chiclet and only cost $75...
Mines on preorder as we speak...
I read slashdot for the sigs...
To paraphrase a wise man, Steve Jobs, Why is it that the people who run the magazine companies just don't get it?
ShortFormBlog: Writing a little. Saying a lot.
Apple settled, which is exactly what I predicted they would do. You can't squeeze blood from a turnip, but you can create enough buzz to make other think twice before doing it again.
I know someone who was sued by microsoft. It was essentially the same thing. Rattle the saber a bit, get some media attention, and settle for peanuts after the story has disappeared from the pages.
He must be a design genius- 89-96 were such wonderful years for Apple!
Pentagram, Apple... they really do like the "Devil's advocate" trappings over in Cupertino.
--
make install -not war
Be sure to make a backup first...
Ahhh, yes, the prime era of Apple. Is this guy responsible for the wonderful internal design of the 8500 and 9500? (note: you had to essentially dismantle the entire machine to add RAM)
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
Anybody remember this? Dood has a great natural feel for products.
The rock, the vulture, and the chain
sed s/^/i/ /usr/share/dict/words
I'll tell you why these are not even close to what may come out of Apple.
Simplicity. I don't think Apple is in the game of mixing functionalities (I think Sony is a better contender for that). That is why there is no FM tuner in iPods.
Watch that plays music? No one wants to do anything except keep time using their watch. I mean no one sensible.
These folks have done some cool work, but they're totally missing the point. Steve Jobs would rather shave with a cheese grater than let these things out into the wild with an Apple logo on them. Take one look at any of these gadgets and my first reaction is, "Huh, I bet that does a lot of cool stuff." But I'm a geek, and these designs are by geeks for geeks, and that's exactly what Apple is trying to avoid.
That silly-looking wirless iPod necklace thing -- what's with the bevelled see-through skeleton around it? How does that make it work better? The skeleton around the iPodWatch -- what does it add?
Apple succeeds because they hide the complexity, not because they call attention to it. Flashy complicated designs advertise internal complexity. While a geek sees power in complexity, most people see added cognitive burden. "Oh, shit, I bet that thing has a million features that I'll never figure out."
This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
Someone should string FirienFirien and Zonk up by their editorial tonsils. We can't RTFA unless we shell out money. There is no option to register for free or view advertising in exchange for a subscription. Since when did Slashdot becaome a digital country club where one has no option but to pay to play? Oh, I forgot. 90% of Slashdot doesn't ever bother to RTFA.
That said, I think the most interesting element about this article (of which I could read two paragraphs in addition to its headline) is that a major business news publication is engaging in rumor-mongering just like the fan-based Apple sites. It looks like even the mainstream media has begun imbibing Jobs' Purple Kool-Aid.
Not that I'm complaining. (Just check out mistersquid's profile on http://discussions.info.apple.com/ if you don't believe me). I just find it interesting that mood of Apple's fan-base is starting to be reflected in major media channels.
blog
They're still coming up with great new ideas. In the meantime, we have this article under discussion involving ideas from people who do NOT work at Apple, so why are you complaining about Apple?
The single button mouse is a GREAT design. Just try teaching someone who has never used a computer before to use a two button mouse. It also forces intelligent design on software developers. Very few applications have (or should have) the level of feature complexity that would require contextual menus for basic functionality, and multiple mouse buttons should rightly be viewed as an optional enhancement rather than an interface essential.
If you don't like it, do what I did, and get a $10 logitech wheelmouse. OS X supports it just fine.
In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
Well, those upset mac faithful should get over it. And I say that as mac user for the past 15 years.
Sure, so Apple's kicking some ass with the ipod/iTMS. They're also giving us constant updates to OSX, lots of fun to play with consumer software, a solid lineup of hardware, and with the mac mini, a cheapo machine that everyone's been clamoring for for years.
Part of being the mac faithful is a belief that the average person would be much better off with a mac than a windows machine. Apple's finally making some progress in reaching those average people, and providing them with a cheap computer. What more could we reasonably ask from them? They're not perfect, but I don't think their success in music is causing any big problems.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
It might help if the blurb linked to the right part of the story (which is reg free).
Link
Thinkin' Lincoln - a web comic of presidential proportions
Having supported some of the Power Computing machines, I'll vouch for Rebeka. Many of those machines were absolute crap.
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
they are rapidly turning into a consumer electronics company And so are Dell and Gateway... hmm, I wonder why? Could it be that computers are now commodities with razor-thin profit margins, while consumer electronics can still be sold for several times their actual worth? Business is all about margins, and you don't get good margins by competing directly with Asian manufacturers. Someday even HP might figure that out...
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Was the iPhone and maybe the video iPod, though I think the flap idea is just bad.
For a movie iPod, take the current device, make the screen longer for 16x9. Now if you want to watch a movie, turn it on its side and use the wheel to move forward or back.
For the iPhone, let you side the top half sideways so you could hold the phone while revealing a keypad - great for finding/entering contact information, notes, text messaging, etc.
But I'm not sold that Apple will go this route. I think they see the iPod as a hub to the computer - insert music into computer, get music onto iPod. Insert movies onto computer, get DVD's or (in time) movies onto the iPod. Record messages to the iPod, and back to the computer.
So most - if not all - of what they do is still geared towards the computer. And I think most people in this generation can live with that.
Extend the idea further. Apple is using the iPod as a hub of its own - recording messages, storing contacts, etc. I can see a time when you buy a digital iCamera, and instead of accepting tapes it just uses an iPod for storage. Plug it into the digital camera or camcorder, take your pictures (with 4,000 picture storage space at incredibly high quality, or with 40 GB of storage space, that's what - around 40 hours of video at MPEG-4 for normal TV rates, different for HDTV? I'm just guessing, so I'm sure someone who knows more about video compression will know).
Cars, like GM, are making "iPod plugs" so you can charge up. Look at the third party iPod market - at least 3 manufacturers are creating car stereos to let you view and select playlists from your iPod.
Expect to see the iPod become more of a "hub" in this fashion - and, of course, still come back to the PC. Maybe it will get Bluetooth in the future so can "walk into the house, sync and go". But several of the ideas (such as the "Wireless iPod you hang around your neck") won't happen because doesn't use the computer as a hub - but as a streamer. Apple knows people want to sync and go.
One last thought - the one thing that I'd like to see in future versions of iTunes is a group/family system. I have music, my wife has music, my kids have music, all shared on a Mac Mini. I have a family user just for that reason, but I can see the first time my daughter does a User Switch to herself and doesn't unplug Daddy's iPod, then starts putting *her* music onto just her user - now duplicating storage.
I'd like to see a version of iTunes which takes this into account, and lets you say "I'm a member of an iTunes share - point me here". Granted, there is the DRM angle where you'll have to have a "family user" to play Audible/iTunes store purchased songs (fine by me, since I just either buy CD's or JHymn the music once I buy it online) instead of every person using their own - but an iTunes family system would be a great. Only 4 more years until my daughter turns 10, and I think the system should be in place by then when she *really* starts getting into her own music.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
"I've never had a living, breathing music executive come to Apple."
Kinda makes ya wonder what's hidden in that closet in the corner of Steve's office, doesn't it?
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
"If Apple actually sold computers again. Seriously, they are rapidly turning into a consumer electronics companies and selling computers are becoming more and more of an afterthought."
Turning into a consumer electronics company? If you recall, way back when Steve introduced iTunes to the masses, his plan was to make people want the iPod, which would make people want Macs. His plan is working perfectly. While other PC companies are predicted to have slowdowns in units shipped, Apple is actually expected to sell MORE computers in the near future. Not only is Apple selling computers...they are selling MORE computers than before. Making a nice chunk of profit from the product that is helping the computer-base grow is simply gravy.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
OK, you better sit down. It's even scarier than that.
.
Darwin's mascot has a pitchfork, horns, and a . . .
BILL!
Proof that MS is the Devil, if you were ever in any doubt.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
I was a big user of Power Computing clones back in the day - they had features I couldn't get in Apple kit, had good prices, and you could do BTO without a problem. The reliability was only so-so, but their support was always good and they were quick about getting me parts if I needed them.
Apple's reliability was also crap during that era, too - and their prices were a lot higher.
When it became obvious that MacOS 8 was really just being targeted at shutting down the cloners (at the time, most of the clone companies only had license rights up through 7.x, because 8 was originally supposed to be Copland) and that Apple was going to refuse all the license renewals, I wrote Steve Jobs a snippy e-mail complaining about it and telling him I expected to see their lunch eaten by NT.
A day later, he sent me an e-mail back explaining his rationale in what he was doing, and we agreed to disagree. You know, I'd say he was probably right after all...
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
Do you imagine for a second that a public company would tolerate a CEO who "does whatever he wants, whenever he wants, and when he does, he makes you want it too, regardless of the reality of the situation" if he wasn't making them as much money as they've ever seen?
Now, leaving everything in the hands of such a person is inherently risky. They are capable of great success because they can brush aside all opposition, but they are also capable of spectacular failures for the same reason. But Steve Jobs is a success today mainly because he made Apple build and sell what people want to buy.