Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Arise SIR Jonathan Ive

Posted by timothy on from the there's-a-sword-for-that dept.

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."

27 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. Design Matters by InterestingFella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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!

    1. Re:Design Matters by gl4ss · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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...

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:Design Matters by Ynot_82 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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

    3. Re:Design Matters by pinkeen · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

    4. Re:Design Matters by Stormthirst · · Score: 2

      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.

    5. Re:Design Matters by Gordonjcp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

    6. Re:Design Matters by InterestingFella · · Score: 2

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

    7. Re:Design Matters by beelsebob · · Score: 2

      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.

    8. Re:Design Matters by Ramin_HAL9001 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

    9. Re:Design Matters by icebraining · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      Dilbert RSS feed
    10. Re:Design Matters by PhunkySchtuff · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

      --
      Specialist Mac support for creative pros, Melbourne
  2. On a sidenote: by Qbertino · · Score: 2, Funny

    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.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:On a sidenote: by bfandreas · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
  3. Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple! by improfane · · Score: 5, Informative

    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?

    --
    Slashdot needs Geekcode | Can anyone recommend any good SCIFI? My tastes: Foundation, Startide Rising, CITY, Ringworld,
    1. Re:Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Its Sir John, not Sir Ive

      (ie the Sir goes with the given name).

    2. Re:Thanks Mr Ive, Nothanks Apple! by shilly · · Score: 2

      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.

  4. Proper use of "sir" by tverbeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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".

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    1. Re:Proper use of "sir" by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Funny

      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.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:Proper use of "sir" by colinrichardday · · Score: 2

      people with social skills

      This is slashdot.

  5. Sounds like a backroom deal . . . by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Funny

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

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

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  6. "Arise Sir Jonathan Ive"? by Sc4Freak · · Score: 4, Informative

    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

  7. Dieter Rams by A+Friendly+Troll · · Score: 2

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

    1. Re:Dieter Rams by gnasher719 · · Score: 4, Informative

      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.

  8. Sir Jonathan Ive is ABOVE Paul McCartney by Saphati · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:Sir Jonathan Ive is ABOVE Paul McCartney by jeremyp · · Score: 5, Informative

      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....

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  9. Archaic medieval honors by mbone · · Score: 2

    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."

  10. We got rid of the aristocracy by Atmchicago · · Score: 2

    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.).

    --

    You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.