Jony Ive’s vision was killed today

[MrAverigeUser]

Ive left to form his own design firm and Apple is one of his clients. The new iMac is a very Johnny Ive product and the new MBPs look like the Aluminum Powerbooks which were a Johnny Ive product. Be funny if he's still working on all the new Macs.

„He will help us as a very important person and we are proud that he will continue to give us his wonderful advices to *cough* help with his enormous experience….“ „He is searching for new challenges and will found his own enterprise and we wish him all the best…“

Nearly everybody in the top-management in big players which have been fired received these sort of final handshake… If you take this way of communication as the enterprise you can save a lot of money… such nice sentences with a smile given on stage can can be able to reduce the final sum to pay by many million USD… especially if the fired person is a narcissist like Joni …..

It is fact that apple’s design has changed nearly 180 degrees since J.I. has been „left“…
what gives EVIDENCE that apple tries to reorganize their product-line and they try to develop devices and computers that re-start to be a reliable help for their customers- and I felicitate Tim Cook that he activated Jonny’s ejection chair to get out of this enterprise…

As we see now Joni Ive will not longer be the brake and permanent reason for multiple class suite action of angry customers - and so apple is getting better and better and even about to blame Intel…

cheers

 

[darngooddesign]

...It is fact that apple’s design has changed nearly 180 degrees since J.I. has been „left“…

Design-wise the new iMac is basically an iPad Pro, which is an Ive product, with a chin. It was made too thin for a regular plug so Apple had to design a magnetic plug... classic Ive.

 

[Makisupa Policeman]

Surprised this thread is still going but I'll offer up some thoughts. I feel like (and the evidence points toward the idea that) after Steve Job's return, Apple's products were designed by a "team of rivals," and that for many years Ive was perhaps "first among equals," but still had to defer to the boss (Steve) who ultimately mediated between them.

After Steve's death, this model became increasingly untenable and most of Ive's "rivals" were either pushed out of/left Apple or were minimized. This led to some beautiful designs but ultimately put the company at odds with many of its professional and power users.

On the Mac side of the business in particular, Ive's vision was plagued with a distinct lack of follow through, an inability to admit mistakes, and an obsession with form over function that cost the company dearly.
Two particularly egregious examples are:
1. The 2013 "New Mac Pro," a revolutionary design that... painted them into a thermal corner, and had unacceptable levels of failure rates (due to poor thermals) in some professional environments. Instead of addressing the problem head on, by either doubling down on the design and making it work better or releasing something new, Apple just decided not to update/talk about the Mac Pro for 7 years.
2. The 2016 MBP where Apple said the TouchBar/Wireless was the future... and then preceded to basically do nothing with them for the next five years. They also spent three generations, god knows how much money, and a whole lot of customer good will getting the butterfly keyboard "right," before finally realizing the right decision was to scrap it altogether.

That said, Ive's legacy/vision isn't dead, it's just being brought back into balance as one of many (but no longer the only/primary) factors that goes into Apple's industrial design. All you need to do is look at the 24" iMac, a gorgeous (thin) design that pays homage to the OG iMac, to see that Ive's influence is alive and well. I think if anything we're just seeing the return of balance to Apple's lineup. If you want a machine that is thin/light/stylish/form factor first, Apple will have an option for you. But Apple is no longer going to force that on everyone which is a GOOD thing.

Also, I think something that got lost in the "Ive years" was that, during real world use, acoustics matter just as much as (or more than) aesthetics in achieving good industrial design. No one cares how thin, light or attractive your machine is if it sounds like a jet engine taking off when put under load.

As someone who owns a 14" M1 Max I can tell you it is not over engineered thermally (and no I would not have been happy if we'd only had the option for a smaller footprint M1 Pro.) While the 16" chassis has a bit of headroom, it's not as massive as people think, and IMHO that headroom is a good thing as it gives Apple room to push performance in the future without having to constantly adjust the design. As for ports... if you're unhappy with more ports/less wireless/one less TB port... well Apple should've done more to push wireless standards/thunderbolt...

I think that was my fault ?

 

[leman]

It is fact that apple’s design has changed nearly 180 degrees since J.I. has been „left“…

It really didn’t? The only thing that was slightly adjusted was the design balance. E.g. the new MBPs are basically a modernized, more aggressive version of the 2012 MBP design.

 

[iPadified]

The best thing to happen since Ive has "left" is that Apple is slowly moving back to function and form equilibrium. The butterfly keyboard, the lack of ports in macbooks, the lightning port , the removal of magsafe and finally the notch were all the final semblance of Ive design. His control over form was so much there was no one from function side to control him

Now after Ive has left we see

The keyboard is much better
macbook ports are back
ipads start using USB C, perhaps iphone too soon
magsafe is coming back
notch is being removed for pinhole and EVENTUALLY under the screen. I can bet if Jobs was here the notch would have not existed, instead there would be a forehead on top of iPhone with no bezel at bottom

Ive, like Steve, was always pushing the limits and sometimes they failed. Apple is now playing it safe. First step to a decline. The only interesting thing Apple is doing their chip development, which by the way can be seen as a consequence of Ive thrive for thinner products : it triggered a need for low power but high performing chips allowing the computer/iPad/iPhone to "disappear" and be unobtrusive.

You assume that Ive is responsible for everything. He was likely not. There are IPR, engineers, technical limitations and marketing(!!!) that plays much larger role than you think in product development. How do you know Ive did not want what you have on the list?

 

[Basic75]

Design-wise the new iMac is basically an iPad Pro, which is an Ive product, with a chin. It was made too thin for a regular plug so Apple had to design a magnetic plug... classic Ive.

That's fine for a consumer device they sell in seven colours. The target audience likes colours. But for the Pro machines it's the wrong trade-off. And that's why IDGAF that my new 16" M1 isn't quite as good looking as the last generation. I'm a kind of Pro and the computer is a tool that needs to get the job done. There are other thing that make my office look nice.

 

[Abazigal]

Ive, like Steve, was always pushing the limits and sometimes they failed. Apple is now playing it safe. First step to a decline. The only interesting thing Apple is doing their chip development, which by the way can be seen as a consequence of Ive thrive for thinner products : it triggered a need for low power but high performing chips allowing the computer/iPad/iPhone to "disappear" and be unobtrusive.

You assume that Ive is responsible for everything. He was likely not. There are IPR, engineers, technical limitations and marketing(!!!) that plays much larger role than you think in product development. How do you know Ive did not want what you have on the list?

My understanding of Apple is that being a design-led company, it’s the designers who decide on the final experience that they would like users to have. It is then the engineer’s job to see how that experience can be delivered using existing technology, not to say that it cannot be done.

Ive may not have been the only person in charge (he does lead a design team after all), but I dare say he would have been pretty influential, and likely gotten his way more often than not.

This doesn’t mean that Apple is somehow immune to the laws of physics, but it does mean they often push the limits as much as possible. And it sometimes means compromising in certain areas you didn’t think of, all in the name of enabling that one core experience.

An example would be the OG MBA. They basically removed everything possible to make the laptop as thin as possible (to the point of including an iPod drive), but a product concept like this would never have been possible if you had engineers in charge of designing the product (because the idea of removing ports and features would have been heresy back then).

This is what makes Apple so awesome in my eyes. That “courage” to say - “This one thing is worth more than everything else combined”, even if it does result in some really weird product design decisions sometimes.

 

[MrAverigeUser]

It really didn’t? The only thing that was slightly adjusted was the design balance. E.g. the new MBPs are basically a modernized, more aggressive version of the 2012 MBP design.

well…. All Laptops have a keyboard, a screen, power supply and (hopefully) some ports….
you may not believe me, but it was NOT Jini I’ve who invented the wheel (even if he behaved so as this was true) and he did neither invent the laptops.

As I wrote already, at the beginning he was a good designer (look at the MacPro classic, the unibody MBP, the MagSafe system,…) but then he lost contact with real life of the customers.

his only aim was to make things thinner, which is ridiculous if you surpass a certain limit of ergonomy and real-life priorities. Design just for the sake of making things different, but without any benefit, just different… that is NOT good design at all.

to make things too (!) thin he:
- abandoned the wonderful scissor-keyboard and „invented“ the butterfly-keyboard, which was not only unreliable but non-ergonomic -and did cost apple a fortune to repair all the MBPs… and did. cost apple a good part of its reputation.
- abandoned Nearly every port, until there were only two, and both on just one side…. So people had a thin MB, but a big sack of adapters with them… well, if the adapters did not go lost somewhere…

after He „left“ apple..

apple tried to reorganize the chaos he left at apple:
- back to enough ports at both sides (including SD card reader)
- back to MagSafe as the majority of customers wanted since Joni Ive cancelled them..
- back to a keyboard that merits the name keyboard (though IMHO the old keyboard is still a little bit better than that in the new 14“ and 16“)
- apple stopped the ridiculous and catastrophic trash bin MacPro and came back to modular system and a very nice evolution of the old MacPro design which Joni Ive had abandoned instead of further development of his creation..
- apple did a lot to reduce noise of their active cooling which Joni Ive did NOT in all these years
- apple reduced radically power consumption and expanded battery life (instead of just making things always thinner without having any relevant benefit from it)
- and I am sure they even will go back and sell mouses that are usable while charging the or battery… *LOL*

And you claim that there has nothing changed since Joni Ive has been „left“ ? Really?

here a very amusing parody of Joni Ive‘s way to „design“ things.

a Spanish comedian playing a former designer in Joni Ive‘s department…

Cheers

 

[darngooddesign]

That's fine for a consumer device they sell in seven colours. The target audience likes colours. But for the Pro machines it's the wrong trade-off. And that's why IDGAF that my new 16" M1 isn't quite as good looking as the last generation. I'm a kind of Pro and the computer is a tool that needs to get the job done. There are other thing that make my office look nice.

My comment had nothing to do with the iMac's style, and I like the way my new MBP looks.

 

[iPadified]

My understanding of Apple is that being a design-led company, it’s the designers who decide on the final experience that they would like users to have. It is then the engineer’s job to see how that experience can be delivered using existing technology, not to say that it cannot be done.

Ive may not have been the only person in charge (he does lead a design team after all), but I dare say he would have been pretty influential, and likely gotten his way more often than not.

This doesn’t mean that Apple is somehow immune to the laws of physics, but it does mean they often push the limits as much as possible. And it sometimes means compromising in certain areas you didn’t think of, all in the name of enabling that one core experience.

An example would be the OG MBA. They basically removed everything possible to make the laptop as thin as possible (to the point of including an iPod drive), but a product concept like this would never have been possible if you had engineers in charge of designing the product (because the idea of removing ports and features would have been heresy back then).

This is what makes Apple so awesome in my eyes. That “courage” to say - “This one thing is worth more than everything else combined”, even if it does result in some really weird product design decisions sometimes.

I think that is a simplification that Apple is driven by design. Contrary to PC manufacturers, Apple actually care about the design. The story telling is about the design and not performance or features which is unique the PC industry. However, that does not mean they are completely governed but by design, they are not.

Funny that you mention the air. It actually and finally become what is always was meant to be - a fan less thin and light computer. It took the M1 though to reach that. I agree the air is not the general purpose computer thought up be the average engineer oo macrumourist. That was courage that payed off!

 

[Abazigal]

I think that is a simplification that Apple is driven by design. Contrary to PC manufacturers, Apple actually care about the design. The story telling is about the design and not performance or features which is unique the PC industry. However, that does not mean they are completely governed but by design, they are not.

Funny that you mention the air. It actually and finally become what is always was meant to be - a fan less thin and light computer. It took the M1 though to reach that. I agree the air is not the general purpose computer thought up be the average engineer oo macrumourist. That was courage that payed off!

I think you and I have differing interpretations of what design entails.

To me, design is the magic ingredient, with Apple designers calling the shots, and searching for and having technology made to serve the product experience, not engineers excited about about new hot tech and trying to turn it into a product.

The MBA is fascinating because at the time, it took courage to decide what to take out of the laptop. Imagine removing just about every port, at a time when they were considered standard issue. But Apple made the right call in what they believed their target market wanted. Or perhaps the MBA was alluring enough that users were willing to put up with the drawbacks? Either way, it checked (mostly) the right boxes.

However, I think there soon came a time where all the low hanging fruit had been plucked and you can only make a device so thin and light. Any more entails diminishing returns and increasing compromises (as we saw with the Macbook and butterfly keyboard).

It’s a fine line to tread.

 

[spiderman0616]

I think you and I have differing interpretations of what design entails.

To me, design is the magic ingredient, with Apple designers calling the shots, and searching for and having technology made to serve the product experience, not engineers excited about about new hot tech and trying to turn it into a product.

The MBA is fascinating because at the time, it took courage to decide what to take out of the laptop. Imagine removing just about every port, at a time when they were considered standard issue. But Apple made the right call in what they believed their target market wanted. Or perhaps the MBA was alluring enough that users were willing to put up with the drawbacks? Either way, it checked (mostly) the right boxes.

However, I think there soon came a time where all the low hanging fruit had been plucked and you can only make a device so thin and light. Any more entails diminishing returns and increasing compromises (as we saw with the Macbook and butterfly keyboard).

It’s a fine line to tread.

I think this is exactly right. I'll also say that if you're not at least a little bit driven by design, you get a situation like RIM. Their product people got so high on their own supply that they thought consumers were going to shun iPhone and Android because they were so dependent on email and always would be. Everything was in service to email, a physical click of the keyboard, and later, BBM. The devices themselves were utilitarian, rugged, secure, etc., but that's kind of all they were. Later on, they couldn't even keep themselves powered on for a whole day without requiring a reboot because RIM was trying to shoehorn modern smartphone features into their email device. They even went so far as to ignore the success of their mainstream Pearl models and double down on the Storm!

You have to make the device attractive. It has to have fun features. It has to be interactive, even when you just pick it up and look at it. That's the part Apple is good at.

 

[darngooddesign]

...Or perhaps the MBA was alluring enough that users were willing to put up with the drawbacks? Either way, it checked (mostly) the right boxes.

The original Air had these issues:

It ran hot and throttled with anything beyond a basic workload; users resorted to applying different and more thermal paste to try help but the results were mixed and never very good.

It used very slow non-standard platter hard drives.

It only had 2GB RAM.

Relatively few ports.

It was great for writers and people with relatively light workloads, but more demanding people were attracted to the form and they ran into the thermal compromises quickly. But as you said, people put up with the compromises of the Air, just like we did with the Powerbook Duos, Powerbook 2400C, and 12" Powerbook lap-roaster. IMO the 12" MacBook finally solved the issues Apple historically had with its ultraportables, and I think an M1 version of that MacBook would be great and finally feel uncompromised.

 

[Argon_]

If Apple built a 12" Apple Silicon MB with the scissor switch keyboard, it would be a near perfect portable computer.

Basing the size of the laptop around a full size keyboard was a brilliant idea, just a shame they chose the wrong keyboard, then stuck an Intel portable stove into it.

They have all the pieces now to fix every flaw of the 12" MB.

 

[darngooddesign]

If Apple built a 12" Apple Silicon MB with the scissor switch keyboard, it would be a near perfect portable computer.

Basing the size of the laptop around a full size keyboard was a brilliant idea, just a shame they chose the wrong keyboard, then stuck an Intel portable stove into it.

They have all the pieces now to fix every flaw of the 12" MB.

They kept the full-size keyboard back in the 12" PB, and it was nice to have there as well. The only possible remaining flaw would be a single USB-C port.

 

[Argon_]

The remaining question is whether they should replace its headphone jack with a second USB-C port; they could include the headphone adapter in the box.

I'd support that... Out of pure personal bias, as someone who uses Bluetooth headphones.

 

[darngooddesign]

I'd support that... Out of pure personal bias, as someone who uses Bluetooth headphones.

I think it's an acceptable compromise for a thin computer with space for only two ports, but not on the 13" laptops which are wide enough for the extra ports.

 

[SalisburySam]

an Intel portable stove into it.

Love that phrase, thanks for the chuckle this morning.

 

[MrAverigeUser]

If Apple built a 12" Apple Silicon MB with the scissor switch keyboard, it would be a near perfect portable computer.

Basing the size of the laptop around a full size keyboard was a brilliant idea, just a shame they chose the wrong keyboard, then stuck an Intel portable stove into it.

They have all the pieces now to fix every flaw of the 12" MB.

well….

we know that upcoming „new MBA“ will be completely different in design, that apple will abandon the name-suffix „Air“ in combination with the MB - so IMHO the „completely revised MBA“ will be a reborn MB 12“ indeed.

so this will be just a MB 12“ and hopefully customers will understand that this is a perfect machine for light workload but NOT a MB PRO.

I‘d expect it to have the M1-mainboard of the now entry-level MBP 14“ since apple will soon upgrade the M1 entry-level with some more GPU-cores and call this „M2“.

I think this will be a very interesting product for many people and sell every well since its battery-life will be wonderful, it will have a good Keyboard and surely a good screen plus 1-3 ports.

For a price of about 999 USD it will sell like sliced bread and fill a gap in the apple-universe between iPad Pro (plus keyboard) and the MBP 14“ and 16“.


cheers

 

[jjcs]

This is what makes Apple so awesome in my eyes. That “courage” to say - “This one thing is worth more than everything else combined”, even if it does result in some really weird product design decisions sometimes.

As an engineer myself, industrial designers are often viewed as idiots.

This is how many engineers in, at least, my space, view people like Ives: Marketing vs Engineering

I'm glad I don't work for Apple or even in the consumer space at all. Cuts down on the stupid we have to work around. I'm impressed that the actual engineers at Apple have been able to deliver reasonably-performant machines over the years given the restrictions imposed by the art majors like Ives.

 

[russell_314]

I think Jony Ive was holding back the potential of the Mac. Right now it's better than it's been in a long time. I remember when they changed the 13" MacBook "Pro" to only being available with integrated graphics... Removed MagSafe why? It only survived because the Air was even worse with that weak CPU... Other brands were far better with the hardware and it was an embarrassment IMO. Of course if you wanted macOS you had to deal with the hardware that was available.

I'm so grateful that the people at Apple came through and made the Mac so much better! Now we have the smaller MacBook back to its full potential. No longer do you have to choose to carry a larger laptop just to get a basic GPU. I didn't even care about the SD or HDMI ports but it's nice for those who need it.

 

[Abazigal]

As an engineer myself, industrial designers are often viewed as idiots.

This is how many engineers in, at least, my space, view people like Ives: Marketing vs Engineering

I'm glad I don't work for Apple or even in the consumer space at all. Cuts down on the stupid we have to work around. I'm impressed that the actual engineers at Apple have been able to deliver reasonably-performant machines over the years given the restrictions imposed by the art majors like Ives.

Well, that’s what I like about Apple, and it’s one of their biggest contributions to the tech industry - teaching people to care about design and showing that design can matter in the mass market.

Otherwise, tech would be a lot more staid and boring if engineers simply included every feature under the sun instead of actually stopping to think and ask just what people really wanted in a product.

 

[iPadified]

I think you and I have differing interpretations of what design entails.

To me, design is the magic ingredient, with Apple designers calling the shots, and searching for and having technology made to serve the product experience, not engineers excited about about new hot tech and trying to turn it into a product.

The MBA is fascinating because at the time, it took courage to decide what to take out of the laptop. Imagine removing just about every port, at a time when they were considered standard issue. But Apple made the right call in what they believed their target market wanted. Or perhaps the MBA was alluring enough that users were willing to put up with the drawbacks? Either way, it checked (mostly) the right boxes.

However, I think there soon came a time where all the low hanging fruit had been plucked and you can only make a device so thin and light. Any more entails diminishing returns and increasing compromises (as we saw with the Macbook and butterfly keyboard).

It’s a fine line to tread.

Not so far off each other actually. I see the industrial designer creating the shape of the device and the overall vision and that was Ives job. This is then moderated by technical limitations and marketing in form of user feedback which is the responsibility of others. Sometimes the industrial designer has a vision that is not compatible with current engineering and therefore initiate new engineering like the butterfly keyboard and the Touch Bar but also the efficient MX chips. HP, Dell etc do very little in terms of industrial design.

Apple sometimes is too early in the game like the 2013 MP which actually was a reiteration of the Cube. I am quite sure that we will se a Mac Pro mini without arrays of internal hard drives and support for AMD graphics. Possibly there will be a PCI slot for the video/music crowd but that is not cut in stone. It will likely be silent and possibly passively cooled due to the MX chip efficacy. It will thus belong to the same device class as 2013 MP and the Cube - no internal expansion and as unobtrusive as possible. I think that Mac Pro mini will be well received as we have all infrastructure of external expansions available today and we are accustomed to breakout boxes. We were not nearly 10 years ago when the MP 2013 was released. The classical tower will for while be Intel based and I guess that will be fine for that crowd.

 

[jjcs]

Well, that’s what I like about Apple, and it’s one of their biggest contributions to the tech industry - teaching people to care about design and showing that design can matter in the mass market.

Otherwise, tech would be a lot more staid and boring if engineers simply included every feature under the sun instead of actually stopping to think and ask just what people really wanted in a product.

How many people "care about design" vs performance, utility and affordability? As to "include every feature under the sun", that's not how engineers design things.

 

[Abazigal]

How many people "care about design" vs performance, utility and affordability? As to "include every feature under the sun", that's not how engineers design things.

Enough people evidently did to make Apple one of the most successful companies in the world. And we see more companies care about design today than they ever did in the past. Even Microsoft and Samsung. It used to be that PCs were these boring beige boxes running crappy, uninspiring software, because the makers simply didn’t care. Apple totally upended that line of thinking. And we are all better off today for it.

The problem with more “performance, utility and affordability” comes when they don’t give the user more of what they want, but instead gives them more issues to contend with.

An example of design led thinking is the changeable band system of the Apple Watch. Its relative ease of use makes me wonder why the watch industry has stuck with the older, more cumbersome means of replacing bands for so long, and why nobody has ever tried to change that. It’s also a key reason why the Apple Watch is as successful as it is, because it allows users to quickly and easily customise the looks of what is really a very personal device, even though it has nothing to do with the “specs” of the Apple Watch itself, and I doubt it’s something an engineer would have considered a priority.

I probably wouldn’t have gotten an imac form factor either, which is my favourite PC design, simply because of how sleek and compact it is.

I am not trying to put down engineers. I am simply saying I doubt they would have considered making the same sort of tradeoffs in a product that Apple is famous (or infamous) for. And there’s a reason why I am all-in on the Apple ecosystem, because I value what Apple is trying to sell me here.