Apple design guru honored

[clusterfuq]

that guy deserves it!

just got a new ipod the other day - such amazing design. not to mention me darling ibook

wonder if the new imac's will look as dated as the old ones do now in 10 years. cant wait to see the next design

[Signal2Noise]

Yup. Mac is definitely cutting edge when it comes to design by this guy. Excellent news.:thumbsup:

[red_oddity]

Too bad their beauty is only skindeep...
Still, they are the best designed machines around when it comes to stylish looks (i'm not counting those butt ugly G4 machines though)

[Lockstar]

Skin Deep? what does this mean?

Have you looked inside an Apple computer? some of the finest computer engineering I have ever seen i.e Power book size, Cube size and with no fan. What do you mean by G4? iMac, EMac, Powerbooks or Towers? they all have G4 chips. Skin Deep?, at the heart of Apple tech is the PPC (Arguably the finest chip architecture around).

I think your skin deep statement perhaps refers to speed (we are afterall in a wintel centric 3d forum). Apple have been somewhat crippled by their reliance in Motorolla. Yes the G4 is slower than most Pentiums, AMD etc double the speed infact. The G4 is 1.4ghz do you expect it to keep up with a Pentium 3ghz. Step up IBM. WWDC will bring a brand new 64Bit IBM PPC 970 (hopefully dual or quad) as well as a 64Bit OSX aka Panther. Things will level out again.

I don't get the amount of bitchin on this forum. Life is just to short. I use x86 and Macs. I know one thing though (referring to the subject) if Apple died, it would be a sad day for computing, lets face it, love them or hate them, Apple design priciples shape and steer the industry.

Credit where credit is due.

[Signal2Noise]

Totally agree, Lockstar:thumbsup:

And 90% of the time in 'making of' or 'behind-the-scenes' documentaries for movies and such you can usually see a Mac (or many) sitting around in the CG dept. They are still highly used and highly regarded by the CG industry.

[Thalaxis]

Originally posted by Lockstar
Skin Deep?, at the heart of Apple tech is the PPC (Arguably the finest chip architecture around).


1) PPC is not an architecture, it is an instruction set.
2) The finest chip architecture around is the deceased Alpha (killed by massive mismanagement for the most part, being sold to Intel was just the last blow).
3) Compare the Canterwood or Springdale (i875 and i865) chipsets to Apple's sometime. While the first two are showcases of engineering prowess, the latter is a showcase in mediocrity.


Step up IBM. WWDC will bring a brand new 64Bit IBM PPC 970 (hopefully dual or quad) as well as a 64Bit OSX aka Panther. Things will level out again.[/q]

You're quite optimistic.

[b]
I don't get the amount of bitchin on this forum. Life is just to short. I use x86 and Macs. I know one thing though (referring to the subject) if Apple died, it would be a sad day for computing, lets face it, love them or hate them, Apple design priciples shape and steer the industry.


What Apple is good at is taking other people's good ideas for ergonomics (e.g. the mouse and the GUI) and industrial design (e.g. SGI's workstation designs) and marketing them and making them popular.

I do agree that they did a good job with OSX, though.

[DaveW]

Originally posted by Lockstar
Skin Deep? what does this mean?

Have you looked inside an Apple computer? some of the finest computer engineering I have ever seen i.e Power book size, Cube size and with no fan. What do you mean by G4? iMac, EMac, Powerbooks or Towers? they all have G4 chips. Skin Deep?, at the heart of Apple tech is the PPC (Arguably the finest chip architecture around).

Powerbook size is impressive. Cube stuff has been done before, no big deal there. Powerbook cases are ok looking, the door is really cool, but I've had trouble adding/replacing CD/DVD drives because of the location of the power supply. It makes it really difficult to plug/unplug the IDE and power cables. That is bad design. I doubt either of us know enough about processor design to say that PPC chips are better than any other chip. I do know that my AthlonXP smokes any G4 out there. I don't care if it's not "elegant design". It's cheap as hell and bloody fast. That's what I would call good architecture.


I don't get the amount of bitchin on this forum. Life is just to short. I use x86 and Macs. I know one thing though (referring to the subject) if Apple died, it would be a sad day for computing, lets face it, love them or hate them, Apple design priciples shape and steer the industry.

What design principles from Apple shape and steer the industry? Don't get me wrong, I like Apple a lot but I think diehards like to give them more credit than they deserve.

[Saurus]

Powerbook is one awesome machine, but them tupperware looking monitors didn't make the test of time. I do agree apple design is cutting edge (sometimes), but their ergonomic needs working. Their keyboard is too small and their mouse needs more buttons...especially for us 3d and gamers. Almost everybody I talked to who owns an ipod bought a new headphone cuz the one apple provides hurts their ear. You figure a gadget costing between 300 to 500 dollars can at least have a comfortable ear piece.

[red_oddity]

Uh oh...i started a flame war again...

Let's just focus on the design alone right now...okay...
I'll start another flame war in a couple of days again when i'm pulling my hair out of my head again when working towards a deadline and vent my frustrations on the board :scream:

[Lockstar]

An instruction set. slightly pedantic, if IBM, Sun etc refer to chip architectures, then this is good enough for me.

as does this RISC/ CISC debate

http://www.arstechnica.com/cpu/4q99/risc-cisc/rvc-1.html

I was also referring to chip peers i.e competitors chips that are in production. and have some relevance. (arguably the finest chip architecture around). as you have said the deceased Alpha. Obviously the Canterwood and Springdale are next gen, If you want to get into another pointless benchmark muscle test, then at least compare them to their next gen equivalent i.e Power 4/5 and derivative PPC970, lets keep this discussion a little more objective. Thats why I said Arguably.

And thank you Thalaxis, I pride myself on my optimistic outlook. :p

Now onto important stuff.


What Apple is good at is taking other people's good ideas for ergonomics (e.g. the mouse and the GUI) and industrial design (e.g. SGI's workstation designs) and marketing them and making them popular.

Agreed, is this not the principle of design?. There are no original ideas, only variations which sample and progress on the theme.
This is Corbusiers Object type theory of a thing attaining design fruition. Once its optimum functional shape has been determined, only variations will follow. The essence of good design is to take an idea and re-interpret it, to add ones personality i.e. a progression and to hopefully fuel a negative or positive reaction.

This is what Apple excels at, this is what Meta, UNA, Gert dumbar, Paul Rand, Adran Frutiger, Didot all excel at, this is what Walt Disney, Pixar etc, Ludwig Mies Van Der Rohe and Herzog & De Meuron, Salinger, Jean Paul Satre, Michael Moore, Stanley Kubrick, Pablo Picasso, George Brach, Andy Warhol (getting carried away here and have not even scratched the surface, but you get the general idea).

"God is in the detail", just about sums up successful design to me

And of course Design is Highly subjective, but the principles and rules are not.

I'm not attacking anyone in my previous post, I refuse to get into a futile which is better debate, I've got too much work to do. We all use different tools for different reasons, I personally like choice and strive to understand and respect other peoples choice. I'm more interested in seeing the work that's produced on them. :beer:

The point is Apples is what 3% of desktop space, and yet they still create lively debate. This to me suggests that there DESIGN is suceeding in many ways.

[Thalaxis]

Originally posted by Lockstar
An instruction set. slightly pedantic, if IBM, Sun etc refer to chip architectures, then this is good enough for me.


Well, it shouldn't be; the PPC970 has a radically different architecture than the G4 does.


I was also referring to chip peers i.e competitors chips that are in production. and have some relevance. (arguably the finest chip architecture around). as you have said the deceased Alpha. Obviously the Canterwood and Springdale are next gen, If you want to get into another pointless benchmark muscle test, then at least compare them to their next gen equivalent i.e Power 4/5 and derivative PPC970, lets keep this discussion a little more objective. Thats why I said Arguably.


You're still arguably wrong. For one thing, Canterwood and Springdaly are currently available, and for another they are chipsets, not processors.

And in any case, the PPC processors currently available from Moto are embedded cores, the primary design goal for which is performance per watt, and in that they can't even match the embedded designs from MIPS, MIPS licensees, and ironically Intel (XScale).

So if you want to base your claims on something like reality, you're still wrong.


And thank you Thalaxis, I pride myself on my optimistic outlook. :p
[quote]

Optimism is a good thing... as long as one stays away from fanaticism.

[quote]
Agreed, is this not the principle of design?. There are no original ideas, only variations which sample and progress on the theme.
This is Corbusiers Object type theory of a thing attaining design fruition. Once its optimum functional shape has been determined, only variations will follow. The essence of good design is to take an idea and re-interpret it, to add ones personality i.e. a progression and to hopefully fuel a negative or positive reaction.


That was why I brought it up. They are terrible at designing hardware for performance, and they are great at marketing, but that's not all they are good at. While history belies claims that Apple is an innovator, they are at least good at something besides marketing.



The point is Apples is what 3% of desktop space, and yet they still create lively debate. This to me suggests that there DESIGN is suceeding in many ways.

The catch is that Apple is relying on being a vertical monopoly in order to be competitive. As a result, the x86 market which is driven by heavy competition on all fronts is getting ahead of Apple at Apple's own game, which means that they have the option of rethinking their business model or getting steamrolled by the technical superiority of what is driving the x86 market, in which case they basically become a consumer electronics company or go under entirely. As long as they continue to charge a price premium for inferior performance, they'll never grow -- espcially when even 64-bit support won't be an edge, due to AMD
(and you can no longer claim that the Hammer is a future product, since they are also now shipping).

I refer spefically to technical superiority here because that is a matter of irrefutable fact, no matter what the mac/win fanatics believe. Apple's advantages are elsewhere. My point is not to imply that those advantages do not exist, but rather to point out that competition is causing the x86 market to get ahead of them, and that they are fading, which is part of what has brought Apple to the situation that they are in now. By making themselves a vertical monopoly, they are discouraging competition on the software side and completely preventing it on the hardware side, and it's hurting them.

[Lockstar]

Phone rings.

Hello, is that Mr Ive?

Yes.

I'm terribly sorry old chap, but wer'e going to have to take back the award and the £25,000. I'm afraid that it's been brought to our attention that your design work is in fact shit, sorry bye.

Phone hangs.

[sasquatch]

I have an Ipod. It looks pretty. It does what I want it to do. I don't know exactly how it works, but it works well.

I own Vice City. It looks pretty. It does what I want it to do. I don't know exactly how it works, but it works well.

They were both up for the same award. Why? Because they look pretty and they work well and you don't have to know why. That's great design. Simplistic maybe, but in the context of the award given, adequate. All the nominees were on show in the Design Museum in London in a public exhibition. The public were asked to vote for their choice. They chose. And I'l bet 90% of them couldn't tell chip architecture from Gaudi.

[Signal2Noise]

Sasquatch, how did you change your Bio Fields to Habitat, etc.?

You a hacker? ;)

[sasquatch]

Yes. ph33r me 4 i am l33t (ouch, I feel like somebody's dad trying to be 'street').

It's all in the sentence length. It wraps.

[Signal2Noise]

Ah! Very cool.:thumbsup:

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.