Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I know everybody's using the excuse that with a full screen there aren't many options, but what I don't get is, what's up with the space on the front that isn't taken up by the screen? Why didn't they do something more interesting with that? Something to remind us it's still an iPod. The "home" button looks like it could have come from any non-Apple generic electronics product, it's really.. blah. A small faux-click wheel lookin' thing (a la Shuffle, or Apple Remote), or even just the Apple logo (a la iMac) would have been preferable.

Also, there seems to be too *much* empty space on the front. Maybe that was necessary for mechanical reasons, but I think it really detracts from the overall look. Hopefully the widescreen video iPod (an inevitability, I should think), which will not require a home button or motion sensor, will be able to dispense with that empty space.

I'm also not too crazy about the way the side is shaped. Everything else in their product line, including iPods, has been moving more and more towards clean, simple lines, but this is all weirdly curved like something from the G4 era. I would have preferred the "big candy bar" look of the 1G nano or 5G iPod, only with a full-coverage touch screen.
 
Not simple?? IT HAS 1 BUTTON!!! HOW MANY OTHER SMART PHONES HAVE ONLY 1 BUTTON!! It is simple and plain. They were trying to keep the size down so they couldn't make it look like anything crazy. Elegence? It looks like a wide screen ipod. That is what it should look like. It is branded modeling. It doesn't flip or open or slip, that is simple. And the screen on it is nice and elegant. I don't understand where you are coming from at all. They went with what they know works. It is the first model they weren't going to make anything crazy. They had to pack a lot of stuff into it with a big screen so no matter what it isn't going to look much different.

I like it.

You post gets a thumbs down from me.

The Stig

:p

I'm talking about the design/styling, rather than the number of buttons. The iPod Nano (for example) is just one solid colour/material in a clean design and as a result looks stunning, IMO. The iPhone on the other hand is glossy black, silver, matt black and chrome. Blech..

My problem has a current smartphone (don't know the model) with virtually an identical face, round cornered design with a large screen, black glossy face and a chrome bevel, and one button in the centre under the screen, you could easily mistake the two from a distance.

The iPhone's design isn't original or unique - that's strange enough for Apple. Furthermore, considering we won't see the iPhone for another 10 months here it's going to be a year-old design by the time it debuts here. In consumer electronics terms, that's a long time.
 
:Furthermore, considering we won't see the iPhone for another 10 months here it's going to be a year-old design by the time it debuts here. In consumer electronics terms, that's a long time.

Ummm, how is June 2007 10 months away? By my count it's less than 5 months.
 
The feature list has been argued to death, but what do people think of the actual look of the iPhone?

Personally, I think it's very ordinary, not even remotely up to Apple's (/Ives') usual standards of simplicity and elegence. And if you watch the keynote, the reaction from the audience when it first appears is a deafening "Meh..".

It's not at all original (several current phones have the glossy black with chrome bezel look), and with the back being different it's just too fussy with it's various materials (black glossy, chrome, matt black and silver on the back).

how would your version of the iPhone look like?
 
what could possibly be nicer about it? black & silver are the epitome of style? I wish macs would get that treatment. that grated brushed aluminum idea is terrible. That's grilled G5 tower is one of apples worst design decisions ever:mad:

i believe, the original G5's design has less to do with design, but more with functionality.
 
the GUI is alright, but i would think again ... there is this huge screen area which is being covered by blown up graphics and huge icons ...

because the iPhones does not use a stylus, the icons had to be huge, so our fingers could "touch" it. if the icons were smaller, the spacing would be smaller and it would not be cool for a big guy to use the iPhone. the guy would be pressing 3 icons in your theory.
 
how would your version of the iPhone look like?

Well, the size of the screen limits the size and shape of the device to a degree.

Personally, I'd go for a design with slightly less rounded edges (more like the existing iPod designs), but that's just personal preference.

I certainly wouldn't use more than two different materials in the exterior case. Perhaps an attractive glossy (or chrome, or..) material for the front fact, with a complementary matt material & colour for the sides (where you grip the device - no finger smudges) and back. I wouldn't go for the contrast between the front (glossy black) and back (matt silver) of the current design.
 
i believe, the original G5's design has less to do with design, but more with functionality.
I actually rather like the G5 tower's design. It's manly and mechanical looking, and yes, functional as well. My biggest gripe with it is that the case is just freakin' huge, and still only accomodates two hard drives internally (in the original design). I think the perforated aluminum texture was a real innovative material to use, and internally the layout is a work of (engineering) art.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.