Arise SIR Jonathan Ive

mariocki writes "Steve Jobs' go-to design man Jonathan Ive, the creator of modern computer design classics such as the iMac, MacBook Pro and iPod/iPhone/iPad, has been awarded a knighthood in the New Year's Honours list, taking him from plain old 'Mr' straight to 'Sir' in one fell swoop. This now puts him in the same league as Paul McCartney, Michael Caine, Bob Geldof and Bill Gates. Ive said 'I discovered at an early age that all I've ever wanted to do is design' and even for Apple haters his designs have done more for personal computer design than the mainstream PC manufacturers could imagine, taking the PC from the geek den into the living room of even the most painfully trendy fashionista."

Comments

Design Matters

[InterestingFella]

As much as geeks don't like to admit it, design and user interfaces matter. It matters to them too. Just look at the backlash new Gnome UI and Firefox have got recently. Even more so, casual people care a lot about design and easy of use. So do people when they get older and don't have the time to tinker with everything.

It's also why Linux will always fail - the whole principle of Linux is that there's no unified look and team that discusses, chooses and implements good UI and terms. In Linux world everyone just does whatever they want, often ignoring what or how others do it.

Good example of this is the linux shell. It still acts like it's from the 90's because people don't work together to bring it together. It's still based on text output because everyone does things differently. Compare this to PowerShell which passes objects between programs. This allows different pieces of programs to work much better together, without need to define rules on how to parse some other programs output (which also usually fails in less used cases).

Both Apple and Microsoft have got this. I hate to admit it but Windows 7 is the most beautiful Windows to date from Microsoft. So is Apple's OSX. If it wasn't for the games and some Windows only -apps I would use OSX because it is just much nicer to use. But there is no way in hell I would use Linux now. That might had been the case in 2005, but why would I do that? On top of polished interface and good design, OSX offers all the underlying tools that also make Linux powerful. And on Windows world there's PowerShell, which is much more powerful than GNU toolset has to offer.

Sorry, but apart from server world Linux just isn't going anywhere. No one really cares about the open part. They care about what they can do, and how easily they can do that. By far, Windows and OSX both offer those things and much better than Linux.

So good day Sir Ive!

Re:Design Matters

[gl4ss]

yeah, design matters. that's how current macbook pro sucks. metallic 90 degree angles right where you rest your hands!

win7 rocks. the more I use osx the more I understand that and this isn't just trolling, it's a usability thing on large screens(or small screens with high dpi. osx sucks soooo hard on this, that's the reason they're shipping 1280x800 screens, up to fullhd resolution on 13" and it's unusable and unlike windows you just can't put high dpi mode that actually worked on), having multiple windows open and so forth. many of the mac choices and limitations just aren't good there and if they go more ipadishy on the desktop then it's just going to get worse and worse.

anyone know any alternate shells for osx? like litestep for windows, not terminal emulators.. but something that would take the menu bar and attach it to the window/program it's controlling, proper taskbar etc...

Re:Design Matters

[Ynot_82]

What a load of tosh....
Apple designer gets an award, you go off on an anti-linux rant
anyway...

As much as geeks don't like to admit it, design and user interfaces matter. It matters to them too. Just look at the backlash new Gnome UI and Firefox have got recently.

The "backlash" to Gnome3, Unity and a few other projects that have rev'd their UI designs has not come from "casual people"
It's come from geeks / power users
They're complaining that design and overt snazzyness is detracting from the core usability
Casual users love it, though - stick an average user in front of Gnome3 or Unity and the first thing they comment on is how they really like the visual look and feel

It's also why Linux will always fail

On the desktop, I presume you mean

the whole principle of Linux is that there's no unified look and team that discusses, chooses and implements good UI and terms. In Linux world everyone just does whatever they want, often ignoring what or how others do it.

Same for any system that gives developers choice over the look and feel of their programs UI
When I was a windows user, I remember a music program called "Winamp" (quick google says the project's still going)
It's main selling point was it discarded the cluttered UI and overly large buttons and borders of the "standard winows UI", and used it's own custom design
This cut down the screen wastage, and made the program non-intrusive

You really want a system that's so rigid and inflexible that you /have/ to conform to a set way of doing things?

Good example of this is the linux shell.

No, that's a terrible example

It still acts like it's from the 90's because people don't work together to bring it together. It's still based on text output because everyone does things differently.

A shell is supposed to provide direct access, text-only, to the OS and it's core programs for easy scripting and administration

Compare this to PowerShell which passes objects between programs. This allows different pieces of programs to work much better together, without need to define rules on how to parse some other programs output (which also usually fails in less used cases).

No idea what powershell is, so can't comment

Re:Design Matters

[brillow]

I don't think any geek in the past decade has said that design doesn't matter.

Re:Design Matters

[InterestingFella]

It still acts like it's from the 90's because people don't work together to bring it together. It's still based on text output because everyone does things differently.

A shell is supposed to provide direct access, text-only, to the OS and it's core programs for easy scripting and administration

Compare this to PowerShell which passes objects between programs. This allows different pieces of programs to work much better together, without need to define rules on how to parse some other programs output (which also usually fails in less used cases).

No idea what powershell is, so can't comment

So basically you don't know what you're commenting on? There is nothing that prevents PowerShell being used in text mode. It is. But it doesn't only output as text, it passes objects. This means that if you pipe commands the other programs down the line get them as object, not as text that they need to parse and which can easily change. It works much better together.

Re:Design Matters

[pinkeen]

Agreed. I installed MacOS on my 15.6" laptop with high density (1920x1200) screen and it sucked. MacOS just isn't designed for high density screens, there's no way to change DPI, and even if there was no good is gonna come out of this because no app is designed with this in mind.

Re:Design Matters

[Stormthirst]

Winamp is still going. I still use it as my main mp3 player on my Windows box, because of the UI being small (though I might need to get new glasses soon). Now when you install it, you can choose the classic, small, uncluttered UI, or you can go for a large button clunky piece of crap. Unfortunately the default option is the large buttoned cluttered piece of crap. I choose the classic design every time.

Re:Design Matters

[Gordonjcp]

I can't really agree with you there. The whole point of the Unix shell is to provide a textual interface to various things. If you want something more complex, use something more complex.

I also don't see what's so great about Mac OSX or Windows 7. They're confusing and cluttered, and just look like a random mishmash of different widgets and design elements. There's no thought been put into the design, and it shows. Nothing is intuitive. Nothing is clear.

Re:Design Matters

[InterestingFella]

Geeks and Linux users constantly do. It's like with those gamers who say that graphics doesn't matter. They just cant comprehend that good graphics/UI and good gameplay/functionality can work together.

Re:Design Matters

[InterestingFella]

PowerShell supports text output too. But between apps it passes things in objects.

Re:Design Matters

[beelsebob]

It still acts like it's from the 90's because people don't work together to bring it together. It's still based on text output because everyone does things differently.

A shell is supposed to provide direct access, text-only, to the OS and it's core programs for easy scripting and administration

Well done for missing the point. Your kernel doesn't use strings all over the place, it uses data structures, same for your userland – they're not busy parsing strings and manipulating them internally, they're passing data structures around. Using a text interface onto it is a reasonable approach, it allows the user to easily interact –but... It also requires silly amounts of parsing and writing out in the programs, which can be unreliable. Passing data structures around, and having standardised methods of parsing and unparsing them allows program code to be much simpler, and more reliable. I commend MS for writing their shell this way – I really hope someone attacks this problem for UNIXes too.

Re:Design Matters

[Ramin_HAL9001]

It's also why Linux will always fail - the whole principle of Linux is that there's no unified look and team that discusses, chooses and implements good UI and terms. In Linux world everyone just does whatever they want, often ignoring what or how others do it.

Yeah, like Android and their interface: totally not unified, not polished, impossible to use... wait a minute, what the fuck are you talking about?! Linux is a kernel, the rest is up to you. That's why geeks love it, it gives you choice for everything, and if you don't want choice, go with a professional distribution, like Android, or Ubuntu, or Mint.

Good example of this is the linux shell. It still acts like it's from the 90's because people don't work together to bring it together. It's still based on text output because everyone does things differently. Compare this to PowerShell which passes objects between programs. This allows different pieces of programs to work much better together, without need to define rules on how to parse some other programs output (which also usually fails in less used cases).

If you don't like the "Linux Shell" (it's called "Bash", learn what it is you are criticizing), then use some other shell that CAN pass objects between programs, like Python. Python allows you to easily serialize almost any object and pass it between programs using ordinary file descriptors. Any language that can serialize objects can pass objects between programs in Linux. The kernel itself simply provides the mechanism to do this, and you can then install the protocol of your choice to pass actual objects, unlike in Windows, which forces you to use their built-in mechanisms. Why would you want intentionally limit your options? Oh that's right, because you don't know how to use anything else.

Sorry, but apart from server world Linux just isn't going anywhere. No one really cares about the open part. They care about what they can do, and how easily they can do that. By far, Windows and OSX both offer those things and much better than Linux.

So obviously, you don't know hardly anything about Linux, which is why you hate it. And if you knew anything about computers, you would know why open source is important.

Re:Design Matters

[Gordonjcp]

There's nothing to stop you serialising objects and passing them between Unix apps if you wanted - this is maybe what Powershell does, without you seeing it - but I still don't know why you'd want to.

Re:Design Matters

[Ramin_HAL9001]

So basically you don't know what you're commenting on? There is nothing that prevents PowerShell being used in text mode. It is. But it doesn't only output as text, it passes objects. This means that if you pipe commands the other programs down the line get them as object, not as text that they need to parse and which can easily change. It works much better together.

Linux only provides the mechanism, but not the protocol, to pass objects between programs. The mechanisms are file descriptors, and sockets. To pass actual objects through those pipes or sockets, just install the protocol of your choice. XML perhaps? Or some binary format? Whatever you want.

Python, for example, can be used as a shell and allows simple serialization of objects, so you can easily pass objects between programs using Python on Linux. Most other shell-like languages also let you do this on Linux, like Perl, and Haskell. Bash doesn't have built-in capabilities to pass objects, but in Linux you don't have to use Bash for anything if you don't want to. Or you can install "DBus" and use the dbus command line tools to do object passing in Bash.

PowerShell forces you to use Microsoft's built-in object-passing mechanism. That's all well and good, but the reason people like Linux is that it gives you a choice. In Linux, you choose the right tool for the right purpose, unlike Microsoft's "use a hammer for everthing" approach.

Re:Design Matters

[Anonymous Coward]

OSX has been prepping developers for High DPI screens since 10.4 and in 10.7 all of the UI assets are higher rez. Ready for the upcoming Mac Retina Displays.

So basically you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Re:Design Matters

[InterestingFella]

There's nothing to stop you serialising objects and passing them between Unix apps if you wanted - this is maybe what Powershell does, without you seeing it - but I still don't know why you'd want to.

Except the "little" fact that zero other commands and programs on linux would support it.

Re:Design Matters

[InterestingFella]

Python is not a shell. Besides, serializing your output does nothing as other commands and programs cannot parse those under Linux.

Re:Design Matters

[BasilBrush]

Same for any system that gives developers choice over the look and feel of their programs UI
When I was a windows user, I remember a music program called "Winamp" (quick google says the project's still going)
It's main selling point was it discarded the cluttered UI and overly large buttons and borders of the "standard winows UI", and used it's own custom design
This cut down the screen wastage, and made the program non-intrusive
You really want a system that's so rigid and inflexible that you /have/ to conform to a set way of doing things?

I don't know of any general purpose OS that's "so rigid and inflexible that you /have/ to conform to a set way of doing things". They all have games for example that invariably have unique UIs.

The point is that it's good to have a central set of UI paradigms that are used unless there's a good reason not to, such that users know what to expect. It can take the form of a document, or it can be implicit in the design of the applications that ship with the OS. Linux doesn't really have that. There's a big variety of different paradigms, none with any particular authority.

Re:Design Matters

[tepples]

Gamers who say graphics don't matter probably want good-enough graphics and good gameplay because good-enough graphics are cheaper to produce (and, in the copyright business model, cheaper to buy) than stunning graphics.

Re:Design Matters

[BasilBrush]

That's all well and good, but the reason people like Linux is that it gives you a choice.

Every general purpose OS has a "choice". With this the difference between the two is Linux (and other Unix like OSs) use unstructured text for communicating between console programs, and Windows Powershell uses objects.

Re:Design Matters

[tepples]

the whole principle of Linux is that there's no unified look and [feel] team

You haven't heard of Gnome or KDE?

Since when have GNOME and KDE unified their look and feel?

Re:Design Matters

[Ramin_HAL9001]

Python is not a shell.

No, you are totally wrong. Python is a language, but it also has an official interactive shell, so yes it is a shell (it can be used as a shell language). Open a Terminal in Mac OS X, or in Linux, and type "python". Ta-da, you are using Python as a shell. If you want a more feature-rich python shell, just Google "python shell", you'll find more advanced shells with fancy graphical interfaces.

Besides, serializing your output does nothing as other commands and programs cannot parse those under Linux.

Also wrong. Other programs can parse serialized python objects, so long as those programs are also Python programs, or as long as those other programs link to the python runtime library to make use of native serialization methods. Software with support for python objects is becoming increasingly common in Linux.

So PowerShell is almost exactly like Python in many ways, just the language is syntactically completely different. And Python is quickly becoming a unifying force in Linux, and many large applications now support Python object serialization and scripting. Best of all, Python is not your only choice, other competing languages offer similar functionality. My favorite is Haskell, I just wish someone would re-write Blender in Haskell instead of Python.

Re:Design Matters

[Ramin_HAL9001]

Every general purpose OS has a "choice". With this the difference between the two is Linux (and other Unix like OSs) use unstructured text for communicating between console programs, and Windows Powershell uses objects.

No, you get unstructured text only if you use old-fashioned programs like Bash, Grep, Find, Awk, Sed, and so on. But you don't have to use these programs, you can use Perl or Python which allows you to serialize objects and pass them between programs.

I don't know how PowerShell passes objects under the hood, but it has to be in one of two ways: (1) serialization and passing through pipes, sockets, or temporary files, or (2) shared memory. In other words, exactly like how every other modern OS does it. The difference is the language used. So you use PowerShell, you get transparent object passing. If you want that in Linux, use Python or Perl which also provides transparent object passing mechanisms.

Just because you don't know how to do object-passing it in Linux doesn't mean it is impossible.

Re:Design Matters

[jonbryce]

In Powershell you can write scripts that access and manipulate those objects. You can't do that in Bash.

Re:Design Matters

[InterestingFella]

Please get this already. Python and Perl ARE NOT shells.

Passing objects via shared memory is 1) more convenient 2) hell of a lot faster and better. And it works in every program the same way.

Re:Design Matters

[InterestingFella]

Also wrong. Other programs can parse serialized python objects, so long as those programs are also Python programs

So, in practical sense, again none.

Re:Design Matters

[InterestingFella]

Want to see "consumers"?? http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/photos/

Wow, you take a mockery said and somehow establish that there's connection with every non-geek? That's quite low just to establish your own "superiority" to other people.

Re:Design Matters

[icebraining]

I think that's because plenty of them view "design" as "prettiness", not because they actually think design doesn't matter.

Design matters. Flashy translucent gradients don't.

Re:Design Matters

[Nemyst]

I don't know on what planet you're living, but the Windows 7 I use is rather spartian in its look and feel. You have the Start menu, a paradigm around since the early 90s, perhaps earlier (I wasn't really aware of such things back then...) and a series of docked programs.

Then the desktop, another decades-old convention, with desktop icons on it.

So far I see nothing confusing or cluttered. It's clean, efficient, and in fact it's perhaps the best desktop UI I've used to date. It certainly beats Unity or GNOME 3.

Re:Design Matters

[icebraining]

I disagree. The Linux desktop has plenty of examples of great design. The problem is that they're directed at a completely different target audience.

Apple, particularly with iOS, designs towards being pleasant to the eye and immediately approachable by a new user. The Desktop Linux projects that try to do the same have much weaker designs, yes.

Where Desktop Linux does have good design is when they target a different set of users, and try to accomplish different goals, particularly speed of usage. High information levels, fast control schemes, lack of visual cues that can slow down the UI, etc.

Why are these designs good? Because these applications are usually being developed and iteratively improved by their own users, who can identify the pain points and try different approaches without having to study design.

Of course, ignorant people who think design is eye candy think Desktop Linux doesn't have good design. It's completely false. The problem is that it's only targeted at a very small number of users.

Re:Design Matters

[icebraining]

And this is why InterestingFella claims (Desktop) Linux users say design doesn't matter.

Functionality, performance and simplicity are part of the design. Just because some particular designers haven't achieved (or even try to) those goals doesn't mean it isn't design.

Re:Design Matters

[DarwinSurvivor]

Passing objects via shared memory is 1) more convenient 2) hell of a lot faster and better. And it works in every program the same way.

As long as you're only working on 1 machine.Try implementing shared memory between 2 computers and let me know how that works. Also, the linux shell is NOT restricted to text, lots of gnu utilities (found in 99.9% of default linux installations) either accept or work solely with binary data. rsync, cp, dd, tar, gzip and ssh just to name a few all use binary data and work beautifully together. In fact, you can even combine them to do something like "ssh remote_machine 'dd if=/dev/sr0 | gzip -c' | gzip -d | image.iso", which copies the a cd from a remote machine, compresses it, transfers it over the network, decompresses it and saves it as an iso file without using ANY plaintext between them.

In linux you are only restricted to plain text if you restrict yourself to tools that only use plain text.

Re:Design Matters

[Ramin_HAL9001]

Please get this already. Python and Perl ARE NOT shells.

Python and Perl HAVE INTERACTIVE SHELLS, a shell is a program where you issue commands line by line, and every command produces some change in the state of the system while returning some text output and error messages. That exactly what the interactive Python shell does. The Python shell comes standard in most installations. A Perl shell can be installed from CPAN. Look it up on Google.

Passing objects via shared memory is 1) more convenient 2) hell of a lot faster and better. And it works in every program the same way.

Sure, it works in every program the same way, as long as all programs are using the .NET framework. It is possible in Linux too, so long as both of your communicating applications are using the same object passing library, whether it is the Python native methods, or something else (Python binding to Qt, or Gtk, for example). The only difference between Linux and Windows regarding shell scripting capabilities is Windows has more software consistently using .NET, and Linux is more chaotic.

If you like the consistency provided by Windows, by all means use that. The advantages of Linux is not consistency, it is openness.

Re:Design Matters

[Ramin_HAL9001]

Here is the Perl shell documentation

Here is the documentation for Python's interactive shell

And let's not argue that there is a difference between a "shell" and an "interactive command-line interpreter".

Re:Design Matters

[BasilBrush]

Then all you need to do is write all the OS utilities al over again to use Perl and Python objects. And then you'll be using Linux officially because the kernel is the same. But the console UI won't be like anyone else's Linux.

Basically it's a nonsense. The Linux console COULD be written to pass objects between standard OS programs, but it was not. Linux has the UNIX paradigm of piping arbitrary ASCII streams between programs. And the presence of Python and Perl (as on every OS) doesn't change that.

Re:Design Matters

[Ramin_HAL9001]

The Linux console COULD be written to pass objects between standard OS programs, but it was not. Linux has the UNIX paradigm of piping arbitrary ASCII streams between programs. And the presence of Python and Perl (as on every OS) doesn't change that.

You don't need to write everything yourself. Proper objects simply doesn't need to be part of the OS. In Windows, they do everything for you, so object passing is (in a sense) part of the OS.

In Linux, you just have a kernel and you can install Windows-like object passing on top of it. If you don't want to use pipes and Python serialization then use some other shared libraries that provide that functionality. Install Gtk+ or Qt, which provide Windows-like object passing. You can even use Mono which an attempt at an open source version of .NET. Then just use shared memory to pass objects between programs, and use Python bindings to these libraries do shell scripting.

So sharing objects between applications is not integrated into the Linux OS, but that means you have a choice of how to do it. However, the trade-off is a less consistent universe of application software.

The result is, in Windows, you are stuck with the Windows graphical interface, but in Linux, you can change freely between KDE, Gnome, Xfce, or anything, without even restarting. That is a triumph of modularity, if not consistency.

Re:Design Matters

[RocketRabbit]

A minor point, but the Unix pipe is capable of passing any kind of data, not just text.

Powershell is OK but let's not kid ourselves about it being "object oriented" - that's just marketing speak.

Re:Design Matters

[Skuld-Chan]

Another thing about the MacBook is its teflon coating - I've dropped it off my lap at least 3 times because of this.

Sure looks cool, but is impractical for a laptop.

Re:Design Matters

[PhunkySchtuff]

Whilst the foundations for higher DPI displays have been in OS X for many years now, the fact remains that there is no vendor-supported method for a user to turn on high DPI mode at present, even through some of Apple's displays are quite high resolution.

Re:Design Matters

[digitig]

Good example of this is the linux shell. It still acts like it's from the 90's because people don't work together to bring it together. It's still based on text output because everyone does things differently. Compare this to PowerShell which passes objects between programs. This allows different pieces of programs to work much better together, without need to define rules on how to parse some other programs output (which also usually fails in less used cases).

And yet on Windows I often find myself powering up Cygwin, because some things are actually easier with the gnu toolset. For scripting I'd sooner use a scripting language than bash or PowerShell, and if I need to pass objects between programs then I'll either use COM or package the object in XML. Are there any PowerShell based tools out there that I might be passing objects to? No, I didn't think so, because PowerShell is solving a problem that was never actually there.

Re:Design Matters

[Sosarian Avatar]

While I agree with you otherwise, this part is way off.

The "backlash" to Gnome3, Unity and a few other projects that have rev'd their UI designs has not come from "casual people" ... Casual users love it, though - stick an average user in front of Gnome3 or Unity and the first thing they comment on is how they really like the visual look and feel

There are three specific crowds that love GNOME3/Unity and overlap (but don't come close to eclipsing) the geek/casual communities:
1. Hardcore GNOME/Ubuntu fans that will cheer on anything "their" team produces
2. People that feel strongly driven towards anything "new" or that are averse to anything non-new
3. People that for various reasons adore Apple-style interfaces
Quite a few people that weren't happy with GNOME 3 or Unity have tested the new interface on friends/family that are in the casual end, and while some of the users commented on it looking nice, virtually all of the users went on to essentially say it's broken. At the same time, all of the "eek it's the best thing evar" commentary I've seen has come from hardcore Linux users that write for well-known 'zines/blogs.

Re:Design Matters

[wisty]

And how many Windows apps correctly use powershell objects?

Pretty much every stack on Linux supports cTypes and/or XML and/or JSON and/or Google's protocols, and stuff used to support CORBA. This is an old problem. The solution isn't in the protocol. If you want to pass an array or dictionary, it's easy. If you want "live" objects, with rich abilities, you are almost certainly fucked, as everything in your stack has to understand how to deal with exceptions.

Re:Design Matters

[PiSkyHi]

I'm using KDE4 because believe it or not, to really have your nose high in the air about a quality user interface attached to a strong underlying OS you can delve into with ease, you need to be able to tie the process of building the interface to the ease of the interface and not be tied down the licencing. This is why Windows will always be virtualised into my Linux Desktop - despite WIndows 7 being the best Windows so far - many of the objects you may want to pass may not be reversibility in any form, as in text based system configuration. If you want to make it into simpler objects, nothing is stopping you. I don't want a uniform desktop designed for me, I want options, finesse, control, and usability that no consumer driven product will ever possess. As for Apple, they still need to do a lot of catch up work to be in the same usability ballpark as Linux/KDE. Maybe we just see as far as you know and we both know differently.

Re:Design Matters

[dbIII]

Can we please have a 4th option for "paid astroturf stirrer" on the friend/neutral/foe list?
This article has NOTHING to do with linux anyway.

Re:Design Matters

[jo42]

Windows 7 is the most beautiful Windows to date from Microsoft

Only if your idea of 'beauty' is a hideous default color scheme and putting as much disjointed crap on the screen as you can at one time.

OS X is clean and elegant, Windows 7 is a jumbled mess of rancid dog crap.

Re:Design Matters

[JohnnyMindcrime]

So the point of your posting is precisely what? To talk about good design or to diss Linux?

Sure, I fully accept that the majority of people out there want neat and easy to use devices without caring about the underlying operating system and I have no problem with that - these days it's ALL about the applications and the underlying OS is becoming less important. In other words, most of those same people don't care whether it's running OS X, Windows or even Linux.

On top of that, unless you ever used a UNIX shell properly, then you don't know what you are talking about - so stop right there. No, text shells are not for the general populace but they are for power users that want to get things done quickly, especially automated and repetitive tasks. The fact that command shells have existed for about 40 years is a testament to good design. I work with UNIX, Linux and shells every day of my life and in my company people see me as someone who comes up with solutions when it comes to auditing and securing servers, and most of the time I'm doing what I do with shell scripts. The fact that you talk about shells being "from the 90's" illustrates your lack of technical understanding, in reality they originated in the 1970's, slightly sooner if you bring it what DEC were doing on PDP systems from the late 1960s.

You are entitled to your opinions but what you are arguing is entirely subjective. My prime concern for any computing device is how it functions as a tool and how much I can customise it to make it work the way I needed to. How it looks is of minimal importance and, naturally, I won't pay a premium price just because something looks nice. It will therefore come as no shock to you to learn that in 30+ years of being around computers, I've never once felt the need to buy anything by Apple because, in my opinion, nothing they've ever made has been good enough or cheap enough to replace anything that I currently use.

As for Windows, whilst being mainly a Linux user these days, I really like XP with the Classic interface, any GUIs Microsoft have done after that point are cluttered eye candy that burn CPU cycles unnecessarily - whether or not Windows 7 is a better operating system underneath.

As for the"open part", more people need to recognise that Open Standards are the reason why the Internet exploded in the first place, the TCP/IP stack on which everything we now communicate on is open by design. Had that not been the case, then we would not be enjoying cheap and fast Internet because vendors like IBM, Honeywell Novell and Microsoft would still be arguing about who's proprietary networking protocols was best and how much of a license fee they could charge for them. Again, someone who understood this as a fact would realise that he/she is able to do things like Facebook and posting on Slashdot BECAUSE of open standards.

Anyone who SERIOUSLY believes that Linux is a threat to their closed proprietary desktop systems is deluded - there is no "Linux vs. Everyone Else" war so take a deep breath and calm down. It's already here and in daily use in billions of embedded devices from routers to cars, NAS drives, music players, TVs, etc. etc. It's there because anyone can take it, adapt it, scale it up or down, and do neat things with it. It also means that any company that uses it isn't hampered by paying license extortion fees to some big company every time they use. Even Android is outselling iOS by far on a device-by-device basis...

So by all means, go off and enjoy your computing experience and buy what you like from who you like because that's the nice thing about living in a capitalist society. But PLEASE don't base your comments from what "the man in the pub" told you - take this from an expert because most of what you believe is wrong, and when you strip away the untruths, all that's left is a little man who is terrified he might have to turn in his pretty electronic jewelry because of this onslaught by Linux, that scares him so much.

Re:Design Matters

[eionmac]

It is "Sir Jonathen", knights never are addressed by their surnames.

Re:Design Matters

[gl4ss]

Looks fine to me. I also run two 24" monitors at work off my MBP (with the help of a USB adapter) and it looks fantastic. Did you install this on a hackintosh? Somehow I think you are being less than truthful.

to this and the 17" inch guy: yes. they work fine when you don't need HIGH DOTS PER INCH mode by using a bigger monitor, which is why apples current displays which are high resolution are big. high dpi is not the same as high resolution. the point is that the menubar gets too small when you have high dpi and you can't increase the size of the menubar.

Re:Design Matters

[lsatenstein]

I am the other baby boomers care about their wallets. Linux will succeed because it is affordable for desktop use. Most probably you will begin to find a myriads of linux based appliances. These will be more affordable than ones built with proprietary software.

Re:Design Matters

[um... Lucas]

I dunno. I have a win7 pc hooked up to my tv to a ct as a media server, and while I was able to modify the windows theme to make it legible from the couch, while still playing 1080p media in all it's glory, the interface does look horrible. Legible, yes. Done gracefully? No at all.

Re:Design Matters

[gl4ss]

and if you had osx, it wouldn't be legible at all.
but then you'd be told that you should have bought aTV.

now about windows:
and I never thought of turning the high dpi mode, which is adjustable, as modifying the theme. one thing to look out is to configure it so that it doesn't use the double-pixeling for some apps it thinks are legacy, because that messes up things more often than it helps.

Re:Design Matters

[antdude]

So, what is your favorite GUI OS then?

Re:Design Matters

[Gordonjcp]

OpenSTEP.

These days I quite like Haiku though.

Re:Design Matters

[antdude]

Wow, I think I used it back in the 1990s/90s in computer science labs in Slackware and Red Hat Linux. Not much has changed (still ugly). :D

Re:Design Matters

[bill_mcgonigle]

Just to disambiguate: he's probably talking about the NeXT implementation of OpenStep (NeXTStep) and you're probably talking about the GNUStep implementation, which was never as good. Well, at least since I used it last.

I did prefer it to the other alternatives on Linux in the 90's though.

On a sidenote:

[Qbertino]

He was knighted with a sword made of translucent acryl.

*Tadum* *Crash* *Thud*

Thank you, thank you, I'm here all week.
Tip your waiter and try the fish.

Re:On a sidenote:

[bfandreas]

Terry Prachett made his own sword from a meteorite when he received his honours.
That's as wonderful as owning a pet elephant.
And I say this not in disrespect of Sir Jon. Design does matter. Usability helps with the potential usefulness of an item. In fact, bad usability marrs the usefulness of an item more than anything else. Apple understood this and slashed features for sake of usability.
Take for instance a door handle. It serves one purpose and one alone. Ornaments should not get in the way of that. It does not need self-lighting features, WiFi connection to indicate wether the door is closed or not. It needs no rumble pack, expansion slots, self heating, a cup holder,...
Door handles are easy but when it comes to general purpose items like computers then it becomes a lot harder. Recognizing that for the things you design it for places it into an exposed position in the household which adds aesthetical requirements it didn't have before is a now obvious strike of genious. Excersizing the design with that in mind and such consitency is high craftmannship.
If you carry a device at all times then it doesn't only have to look neat but also feel pleasing to the touch.
I don't own iDevices because I don't like paying for a company's cash register which seems to be the primary business model of Apple. I don't like being dictated how I use stuff nor do I like being prevented to be tinker with it. These preferences are mine and possibly that iStuff may be for you. That's a reason for why the devices are so successfull and trend setting.The clarity of focus does make them a piece of art.
The choice to include him in the New Years Honours List is justified. He did something and wasn't merely born to it. Outdated or no, it is a way of our civilisation to honour those thad furthered it. Well done.

Re:On a sidenote:

[Ramin_HAL9001]

taking him from plain old 'Mr' straight to 'Sir' in one fell swoop

Is that why they use a sword? So that can make you a knight in one fell swoop?

Whatever. The British peers system is totally worthless anymore. Sure, congratulations are in order, but... why?

Re:On a sidenote:

[eionmac]

[My english is better than most other people's german, so please point out mistakes politely. Thank you.]
should read as:
[My English is better than most other people's German, so please point out mistakes politely. Thank you.]
While English does not Capitalise many Nouns as German does, it retains initial capital letters for Countries, Languages and proper names,
  {Großbuchstaben für Länder, Sprachen und Eigennamen}

Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple!

[improfane]

Thank you Johnathan Ives,

I commend the design of Apple products.

I might strongly dislike Apple but I know a good design and I thank Sir Ive but not Steve Jobs as it influences the rest of the industry. Ive has done more for us than Steve Jobs. The thing I hate is the business practices with the walled garden and arrogance over my 'user experience'. (This probably comes from Steve Job)

Thank god we now have Rounded Corners(tm).

Offtopic: Hey GP, Are you InsightIn140Bytes =P?

Re:Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple!

[gnasher719]

Thank god we now have Rounded Corners(tm).

Rounded corners since 1984. Unlike X Windows. Long time before Ives. Thanks, Bill Atkinson.

If your actual intent was to make some snide remarks about things that you are clueless about, you should post what you mean so that your arguments can be taken apart.

Re:Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm pretty sure InsightIn140Bytes == InterestingFella. Close UID, same writing style, same opinions, both usernames use moderation names from /. My only real issue is him having arrogant usernames that declare him to be "insightful" or "interesting".

Re:Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple!

[Haxagon]

It was probably a joke about Apple's aggressive and frivolous design lawsuits in order to hurt competition.

Re:Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple!

[Anonymous Coward]

Its Sir John, not Sir Ive

(ie the Sir goes with the given name).

Re:Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple!

[improfane]

Oh that never occurred to me. I assumed it was like a normal title like Mr, Miss or Mrs.

Thanks!

Re:Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple!

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, while there is no doubt about talents of Sir Jonathan Ive, it takes far more than him to get good design out of the door. It takes a corporate culture that nurtures and values design, whether industrial or some other field. That's simply not present in most companies. Do remember, Ive was at Apple long before Jobs came out and how well did that go?

Re:Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple!

[hairyfeet]

Actually I think his snide remark was more placed at the fact that "interestingfella" and " InsightIn140Bytes" are actually sock puppets of one guy, ala old twitter. Personally I LIKE Windows 7 and this is from a person that fricking hated the Mickey mouse UI of XP and thought Vista was more like XP with a black themepack. breadcrumbs? Rock. Taskbar jumplists? How in the hell did we live without those? it makes jumping to the folder i was working on yesterday as easy as 'right click and launch".

as for TFA I doubt you'll find anybody but a troll that won't admit Apple has always had top notch designers. i may not like Apple's prices or policies but i'll be the first to give credit where credit is due and Apple under Steve ALWAYS had top notch designs. Funny how you could tell just by looking at the things when Steve wasn't head of Apple huh? I mean does anybody remember the fugly as hell crap put out under the Pepsi guy? You won't be seeing any of those things being placed in museums under great design. hell I have an Apple B&W G3 with Panther on it given to me that won't work with my PS2 KVM but I just don't have the heart to throw it out because its just so damned nice to look at. Apple may go a little TOO far for fashion occasionally (The Apple unit you had to drop to reseat the chips because Jobs hated fan noise and the Cube come to mind) but give 'em credit they always looked damned nice.

Re:Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple!

[am 2k]

Do remember, Ive was at Apple long before Jobs came out and how well did that go?

Yes, Steve Jobs' biography implies that the most important change Steve Jobs implemented when he came back to Apple (except for getting himself to the top) was to move Ive up to the top of the corporate food chain (only Jobs himself was above him, and he didn't hinder Ive at all), so he had free reign to get his ideas implemented, no matter how nutty they were (like the handle on the original iMac, which didn't serve any physical purpose and was very expensive).

Steve Jobs was the facilitator, but the real mastermind behind all the hardware is Ive.

Re:Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple!

[dwater]

It's "It's", not "Its", unless you're referring to Sir John as an 'it', which I think would be a little rude.

Re:Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple!

[shilly]

what kind of fuckwit mods this drivel insightful?

who has ever complained that they find an ipad hard to hold, for god's sake?
who has ever said that the Air is too sharp??
and who really believes that the decision about how many buttons is made *only* on aesthetic grounds, when it has been made clear ad nauseam that it is a decision about *usability* -- keep things simple to minimise cognitive load -- and *durability* -- the fewer moving parts, the longer the MTBF.

why don't you enlighten us with your list of the top ten computers and devices that are better designed than Apple products. Be sure to explain how they make better tradeoff decisions, while you're at it. But a warning: if you put a ThinkPad on the list, I will personally come round to your house and shove my shitty shitty work laptop where the sun don't shine, as I am sick to fucking death of its broken mechanical latch that means it routinely opens itself in my bag and discharges the battery, the crappy plastic that has cracked and flexes alarmingly if I pick it up with one hand, the tiny trackpad, the enormous but shortlived battery that sticks out at the back and means it doesn't fit in a laptop sleeve or my cycle bag, the ridiculous peanut light that doesn't illuminate the screen enough to be useful, the idiotic screen brightness increments (0, then 4, then 7, I mean WTF? with completely random jumps in brightness that bear no relation to these numbers), the pathetic tinny speakers that can barely be heard, etc et fucking cetera.

Re:Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple!

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

So the only way to compete with Apple is to copy them.

Proper use of "sir"

[tverbeek]

The first comment already got this wrong, so a quick primer on how to use the title "sir".
He can be referred to as simply "Jonathan Ive", or "Jonathan", or "Jony" or whatever; you don't have to use the title.
You can call him "Sir Jonathan Ive" or "Sir Jonathan".
However, "Sir Ive" is not correct; honorifics of this sort don't work like "doctor" or "president". It'd be like calling the current monarch "Queen Windsor".
For women who are knighted, you'd simply substitute "Dame".

Re:Proper use of "sir"

[PolygamousRanchKid]

You can call him "Sir Jonathan Ive" or "Sir Jonathan".

"Now you can call me Ray, or you can call me J, or you can call me Johnny, or you can call me Sonny, or you can call me Junie, or you can call me Junior; now you can call me Ray J, or you can call me RJ, or you can call me RJJ, or you can call me RJJ Jr." ultimately ending with, "but you doesn't hasta call me Johnson!" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_J._Johnson"

Despite whatever titles granted to him by watery tarts hurling scimitars, I guess folks will just call him whatever they like.

Re:Proper use of "sir"

[gnasher719]

Proper use of Sir: "The queen is a wrinkled old bag and you are all tools for listening to her, Sirrahs." Seriously, who cares about the proper use of Sir? Nobody in the USA, where we don't have kings, queens, knights... or heroes.

From the Americans that I know, quite a few do. .

And Martin Luther King's family would disagree, as would the residents of Queens, New York, and all Batman fans on two grounds :-)

Re:Proper use of "sir"

[colinrichardday]

people with social skills

This is slashdot.

Re:Proper use of "sir"

[colinrichardday]

No. I am not a teenager, nor do I desire an iPhone.

Sounds like a backroom deal . . .

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Apple gives Britain an iPad app to run the country . . . Britain gives Apple a Knighthood . . .

. . . this was obviously an arranged exchange . . .

"Arise Sir Jonathan Ive"?

[Sc4Freak]

In ceremony of knighting, the knight-elect kneels on a knighting-stool in front of The Queen, who then lays the sword blade on the knight's right and then left shoulder.

After he has been dubbed, the new knight stands up, and The Queen invests the knight with the insignia of the Order to which he has been appointed, or the Badge of a Knight Bachelor.

Contrary to popular belief, the words 'Arise, Sir ...' are not used.

Source: royal.gov.uk

What a surprise!

[Anonymous Coward]

A rich, connected man gets a knighthood. How delightfully unexpected!

Dieter Rams

[A Friendly Troll]

Why not Sir Dieter Rams? I mean, the designs are basically his...

Re:Dieter Rams

[gnasher719]

Why not Sir Dieter Rams? I mean, the designs are basically his...

First, what you are saying "the designs ares basically his" is nonsense. Second, there are many more iPods and iPhones sold than Braun radios. Third, he is German and lived and worked in German, so he is way down on the Queen's list. Fourth, he's got the Commanders Cross of the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany, which Jony Ive has very little chance to get, for about the same reason.

Re:Dieter Rams

[RocketRabbit]

In case you didn't know, the Queen mis German and one of the top things that soured Britain's view of Anazi Germany was their elimination of the aristocracy. In fact, that and the very effective and clever Nazi banking reforms are the primary reasons for the British anti-Nazi attitude.

Re:Dieter Rams

[dwater]

The Queen is German? Er, I think not. She is English, of course. You probably meant something else...(heritage perhaps?).

Oh, I see you said 'mis German'...perhaps I misunderstood...

Re:Dieter Rams

[dbIII]

The Queen of England is no more German than George W. Bush is (not that it really matters anyway). As for the other bit, invading Poland really topped the list.

Sir Jonathan Ive is ABOVE Paul McCartney

[Saphati]

Sir Jonathan Ive is a KBE. To be exact, in the order of precedence, he is above Sir Paul McCarthney (who is an MBE) and Sir Michael Caine (who is a CBE), and Bill Gates (is only an honorary knight. He cannot use the title. If he were British, he would be a KBE). He ranks equally with Sir Bob Geldof who is also a KBE. The whole Order of Precedence (in England and Whales) is very complicated, and to an American, a bit silly.

Re:Sir Jonathan Ive is ABOVE Paul McCartney

[Anonymous Coward]

Sir Paul McCartney ranks as a Knight Bachelor, as does Sir Michael Caine. While lower than a KBE, it is still higher than an MBE or CBE.

Bob Geldoff is not a UK citizen as Ireland is no longer a part of the UK. He cannot use the title either.

If you want to be exact, you should at least be closer to being correct.

Re:Sir Jonathan Ive is ABOVE Paul McCartney

[Anonymous Coward]

The western part of the UK of which Charles is the Prince of is called Wales.

Whales are the large sea mammals that are nearly extinct.

Re:Sir Jonathan Ive is ABOVE Paul McCartney

[jeremyp]

Sir Jonathan Ive is a KBE.
To be exact, in the order of precedence, he is above Sir Paul McCarthney (who is an MBE)

Paul McCartney received the MBE along with the other Beatles in 1964. The MBE does not entitle the holder to call himself "Sir". McCartney was upgraded to full knighthood in 1996. McCartney and Michael Caine are actually knights bachelor which ranks above KBE. The confusion arises because they were both awarded non knight honours earlier.

The whole Order of Precedence (in England and Whales) is very complicated, and to an American, a bit silly.

The order of precedence in whales is blue, sperm, humpback....

Re:Sir Jonathan Ive is ABOVE Paul McCartney

[moreati]

The whole Order of Precedence (in England and Whales) is very complicated, and to an American, a bit silly.

It's silly to us as well.
Regards, A Brit

Re:Sir Jonathan Ive is ABOVE Paul McCartney

[Saphati]

Good call on the whales. :) My spelling is horrible. According to Debretts, knights bachelor is the lowest of the knights. All other knights rank above. http://www.debretts.com/forms-of-address/hierarchies/table-of-precedence-gentlemen.aspx

Re:Sir Jonathan Ive is ABOVE Paul McCartney

[maroberts]

The entire idea of a royal family is, to put it lightly, a bit silly. Perhaps you guys should come out of the middle ages...

It seems that the US has its own set of "Royal" families - Bush, Kennedy....

Re:Sir Jonathan Ive is ABOVE Paul McCartney

[bWareiWare.co.uk]

A KBE is a knight of an order of chivalry (the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire), and so out ranks all Knights Bachelor even when they additionally hold junior ranks in an order (such as MBE or CBE).
In fact Jonathan Ive like Paul McCartney already had an MBE.

The deuce you say!

[Gravis Zero]

Mr Ive was "hurt" by Mr Jobs taking credit for innovations that came from the design team.

wait, you mean Jobs isnt the angelic being everyone has made him out to be?

Re:The deuce you say!

[Haxagon]

If that's true, I want those flowers I sent to to the Apple store back! You're right, though, the whole cult of personality that surrounded his death was sickening.

Re:Tim Berners-Lee

[GameboyRMH]

Many people would have been.

It gives you 10 incompatible choices

[tepples]

Python, for example, can be used as a shell and allows simple serialization of objects, so you can easily pass objects between programs using Python on Linux. Most other shell-like languages also let you do this on Linux, like Perl, and Haskell.

So how do you pass objects between Python and Perl? Or between either and Haskell? "It gives you a choice" doesn't help when developers of different components that you're trying to make work together make incompatible choices.

Re:It gives you 10 incompatible choices

[Ramin_HAL9001]

So how do you pass objects between Python and Perl? Or between either and Haskell? "It gives you a choice" doesn't help when developers of different components that you're trying to make work together make incompatible choices.

In Linux, you are right, things are more disorganized, so trying to make two programs work together who are using different components won't be easy, but you have the same problem in Windows only less so because Microsoft keeps developers on the same page. This is both an advantage and a disadvantage of Windows (or any proprietary solution): more strict, but more uniform.

But recently, more and more software is providing support for Python objects and scripting. If you want to pass objects between Python-compatible programs, use the built-in serialization or an XML library, and send the serialized (or XML) data through a pipe or socket. The receiving program must then un-serialize the data. You could also use DBus bindings to send arbitrary data between desktop applications.

Re:It gives you 10 incompatible choices

[InterestingFella]

In Linux, you are right, things are more disorganized, so trying to make two programs work together who are using different components won't be easy, but you have the same problem in Windows only less so because Microsoft keeps developers on the same page. This is both an advantage and a disadvantage of Windows (or any proprietary solution): more strict, but more uniform.

So you are saying that you have the same problem in Windows, but significantly less so? Because different Windows programs work good together. Especially those that have been made to use PowerShell and its object passing. There is also OLE (which goes back 90's), dll's and similar technologies. Windows has *always* thought more about interoperability than Linux. In Linux you only pass text strings and it is let to every program to parse them correctly. How convenient, not.

Re:It gives you 10 incompatible choices

[Ramin_HAL9001]

So you are saying that you have the same problem in Windows, but significantly less so? Because different Windows programs work good together. Especially those that have been made to use PowerShell and its object passing. There is also OLE (which goes back 90's), dll's and similar technologies. Windows has *always* thought more about interoperability than Linux. In Linux you only pass text strings and it is let to every program to parse them correctly. How convenient, not.

You are right, Linux is less convenient than Windows in interlopability, because there is no one corporation controlling the user-interface for Linux. It is a trade-off between strict control over developers and more consistency in object passing, or more freedom to developers but more chaos with all the different choices. I prefer more choice in my day-to-day tasks.

The point I was trying to make is that Linux doesn't just pass unstructured text, it passes ANYTHING: unstructured text or structured objects. What you pass depends on your design choice. In PowerShell, you must use .NET object serialization to pass objects, in Linux you have a choice of your serialization strategy, Python probably being the most popular choice. A great many applications provide support for Python object passing and scripting, so in that sense python is THE PowerShell of Linux, and as time goes on, more applications will support object passing via Python serialization.

By the way, OLE is similar to TkTcl in Linux, and DLL's are exactly the same concept as Linux ".so" files.

Re:It gives you 10 incompatible choices

[colinrichardday]

the same concept as Linux ".so" files.

Unix *.so files.

Re:It gives you 10 incompatible choices

[BasilBrush]

Choice isn't necessarily a good thing. And in this case it isn't a goo thing. Here, a standard way is far more useful than a choice.

Of course ALL general purpose OSs do give a choice: you can do something other than the standard if you need to. But having one paradigm is far more useful than having several different and incompatible ones. And the better that paradigm is... um... the better.

Re:It gives you 10 incompatible choices

[Ramin_HAL9001]

Of course ALL general purpose OSs do give a choice: you can do something other than the standard if you need to. But having one paradigm is far more useful than having several different and incompatible ones. And the better that paradigm is... um... the better.

What you said here is really the heart of the proprietary-vs-free software debate. You may think less choice is good because there is more consistency and interlopability, and a better user experience, for developers and end-users alike. This is a very good point.

But I simply don't agree. I prefer more choices, and openness, and the right to modify the code of the software I use. I think if more developers agreed with me, you would see a Linux OS with a superior user experience to that of even Apple's OS's.

Re:It gives you 10 incompatible choices

[phantomfive]

So how do you pass objects between Python and Perl? Or between either and Haskell? "It gives you a choice" doesn't help when developers of different components that you're trying to make work together make incompatible choices.

Do people actually use the object passing feature of powershell? I remember when the feature came out, I thought it was interesting, but do people actually use it? I haven't heard of anyone doing so, but it would be interesting to know about.

Re:It gives you 10 incompatible choices

[SharkLaser]

Yes, all of our win server sysadmins use those in their scripts, and they're really handy.

Re:It gives you 10 incompatible choices

[phantomfive]

How do they use them? I'm really curious.

Re:It gives you 10 incompatible choices

[rubycodez]

you have unusual windows admins then, the many-years certified admins at my employer can't do a damn thing with powershell. A good unix admin can get shit done with the text shells.....

Just use JSON.

[tepples]

Passing data structures around, and having standardised methods of parsing and unparsing them allows program code to be much simpler, and more reliable.

So what's the difference between "pass binary copies of data structures around" and "pass JSON representations of data structures around"? The latter can be used even between machines of different word sizes and byte orders. If you try to make a word-size- and byte-order-independent binary data interchange language, that's almost the same as just using JSON.

Re:Just use JSON.

[beelsebob]

Agreed, that's pretty useful too... But that's not what UNIX programs do, they provide human-readable output, and expect that when you pipe this human readable output into another process, that other process will just suck it up and deal with it. Separating the human-readable part from the sending data structures (via json if you like) between programs as power shell does is what's necessary.

Serialized objects

[tepples]

Every web browser for Linux accepts serialized objects. The DOM is an object; it is serialized into HTML. Look at it this way: if no programs for Linux supported serialized objects over character streams, then why would there be so many libraries for parsing XML and JSON?

Archaic medieval honors

[mbone]

I would have been more impressed if he had turned it down.

"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government."

Re:Archaic medieval honors

[mbone]

Oh, am I sure that they do inquire first. It is intended as an honor and if by some chance I was offered one I would certainly turn it down politely and quietly. But, still, it is an archaic way to organize a system of government.

Yeah Thanks...

[Haedrian]

"taking the PC from the geek den into the living room of even the most painfully trendy fashionista.""

Yeah thanks.

But, but...

[ChunderDownunder]

I thought Ian Maxtone Jones invented the iPod. ;-)

Kinghts aren't rare

[DerekLyons]

There persists the impression that Kinghthood is some rare and impressive award - it isn't. Between the Birthday and New Years lists, a couple of thousand Knights are created each year, many for rather minor things. (Like 'services to the youth of Manchester' for a charity official.)
 
You can read more about the system, and download recent lists, here.

Re:Kinghts aren't rare

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

Employee of the month happens every month but when you or your friends nab it it's nice.

Re:Kinghts aren't rare

[shilly]

You have confused the number of people who get an honour with the number who are made knights. In the NY list just published, 983 people got an honour of some sort; only 27 were made knights bachelor (the most common type of knight). Jony Ive was one of only two people made a KBE.

In addition, being made even an OBE is a pretty uncommon thing -- there are a couple of thousand awards each year, yes, but there are at least 40m people in the UK who are potentially capable of receiving an award, so the rate of award is something like 0.005%.

Don't quite get the picture

[__aaltlg1547]

Does it seem to anybody else that a Knighthood is not the appropriate award for one who distinguishes himself in the area of product design or any such very non-military achievement? I assume it's the Order of the British Empire he's joining, but still: One shudders to think of Sir Jonathan Ive leading a charge in combat, let alone Sir Elton John doing so.

Re:Don't quite get the picture

[wdef]

... leading a charge in combat, let alone Sir Elton John doing so.

I am galvanized by the image of a horde of effeminate young men in paste-emblazoned oversized glasses mincing their way into battle to the tune of "Benny and the Jets".

Re:Don't quite get the picture

[__aaltlg1547]

Isn't Benny flying one of those jets? I like to imagine so.

We got rid of the aristocracy

[Atmchicago]

In the US, we threw out the whole notion of titles a few hundred years ago. Of course, that doesn't stop people from reverting to their instinctual need to kow-tow to authority. Why do Americans care about the British royal wedding (but no other)? Were I ever to meet Jonathan Ive, or any of the other "knights," I would call him Mr., lest he have a higher degree (MD, PhD, etc.).

Re:We got rid of the aristocracy

[tverbeek]

In the US, we threw out the whole notion of titles a few hundred years ago.

We did? Then why are there four unemployed men wandering the country being addressed as "President _____"? And countless retired "Governor"s and "Senator"s and "General"s and "Admiral"s? While almost every university graduation ceremony involves someone walking away with the title "Doctor" despite never practicing medicine or pursuing grad-school studies? Just because they aren't assigned by order of a monarch doesn't mean these aren't honorific titles for life.

"Were I ever to meet Jonathan Ive, or any of the other "knights," I would call him Mr., lest he have a higher degree (MD, PhD, etc.).

And no one would bat an eye at that. As I explained, you can call him whatever you want. But if you choose to use his title, and call him "Sir Ive", you're doing it wrong. That isn't his name.

Re:We got rid of the aristocracy

[eionmac]

Knights (Sir XXXX) are NOT and never were aristcrats, Very basic mistake. USA President and members of Congress ARE aristocrats (words means 'those who rule!)

Intermediate representations

[tepples]

That is, if you can convince the upstream author to support exposing things in YAML, JSON, or XML, as opposed to leaving the data structures subject to change in future versions and subject to the restrictions of copyleft. In fact, the GCC team has in the past rejected specific optimizations on the grounds that the intermediate representation that the optimization uses would leave GCC more open to interacting with GPL-incompatible modules over a pipe.

A bit pretentious....

[Zaiff Urgulbunger]

Ive said 'I discovered at an early age that all I've ever wanted to do is design'

Bit pretentious talking about himself in the third person though... wonder why he called himself "Ive" though and not "Jonathan"?! ;)

Arise, Sir Loin of Beef!

[OsamaBinStreisand]

Arise, Earl of Cloves! Arise, Duke of Brittingham! Arise Baron of Münchhausen! Arise, Essence of Myrrh! Milk of Magnesia Quarter of Ten!

relevant US law

[KingAlanI]

Geldof is an Irishman, but as for Gates being a USian:

Article 1 section 9 clause 8 says officeholders can't accept foreign gifts without permission from Congress. However, Gates is not an officeholder.

Regular US immigration law (specifically 8 USC section 1448, http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1448.shtml) requires that naturalized citizens give up titles of nobility. However, Gates was born in the US

Knights aren't part of UK government...

[Sosarian Avatar]

Knights aren't part of the British government except by coincidence. The UK has the monarch as a figurehead, the House of Commons (elected by regular people) and House of Lords (a mix of non-partisan religious leaders, people elected by the political parties, plus a small percentage of people that were allowed to keep inherited seats when hereditary rule ended).

Dieter Rams and Ives were quite different.

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

Ives may have listed Rams as an influence, but Rams never ever put for before function.

I'ves did (or was pressured to)

Re:Dieter Rams and Ives were quite different.

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

Wow! Check out the number of really stupid grammatical & punctuation mistakes WMF made here.

What a fucking idiot (or perhaps still under the influence of various NYE delights)

Re:your point is what exactly?

[DrgnDancer]

To be fair, no one not a British Citizen can get a "real" knighthood. It's not like they slighted Bill giving him inferior honors, all Americans who've been knighted have "honorary knighthoods". It wouldn't due to let Americans vote in your House of Lords as just one example of why.

No Excuses Either

[bill_mcgonigle]

I sat in on a talk at WWDC '98 about resolution-independent GUI's by the NeXT guys and it was going into OSX in the next release as far as they were concerned.

They've had the technology but while Apple was all about killing with the best technology and driving towards openness at that time, by 2004 it was all about glam, fashion, proprietary, and consumer appeal.

It's been good for profits, but if they now find themselves being left behind because they've neglected the technology - well, now at least new leadership has the chance to change course before it's too late.