Dear Ricardo,
I have to start with the fact in the presentation, that the main heading
"ten reasons why its bad for design" has little to do with several points
mentioned within.
By interpreting their design achievements superficially makes one only look
at superficial design elements. For instance, "design thinking in business"
is a new buzzword, and when innovations try to get institutionalized they
want a simple ten step formula of why certain things work. If designers,
marketeers, or whoever decide to believe that is then the "magic door" to
innovation is obviously not looking deep enough.
I am not sure why I should leave out engineered anticipation, innovating on
inventions, or even "playing out" with stereotypes as acts divorced from
design. Design isn't supposed to solve every problem but I assume it cannot
leave out anticipation, marketing or the other "foreign" territories from
its ecosystem.
Here is a link from Edward Tufte on Windows within it is also a link to a
video about iphone UI design.
http://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0003cy
As for co-creation and participatory methods, I am all for it and hope that
is the future. But at same time, there is too much noise to signal in that
case to design a consistent complex hardware/software product. I think
sometimes design as a tool helps to overcome that by being empathetic to
users needs and designers.
The presentation is no doubt touching something along the edges, some
products they have might be "marketed" from superficial aspects. However,
at least my "delusion" says that there is plenty of design to enjoy and
experience and most importantly learn from.
Apple's real "darkside is the way they have used design, resulting in a
monopoly that lies in building on top of the open web with free software,
destroying open source modularity, etc. But given the track record of
major corporations, if the fruit was visible before, most companies would
jump at the chance to do this anyway. Monopoly is the dearest bedfellow of
capitalism.
cheers
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 5:59 AM, Keith Russell <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear Ricardo,
>
> I just got myself a NEW iPad (I have and iPad 1 as well).
>
> After ten minutes of downloading the same apps I have on my old one, I got
> bored. The NEW iPad is just as boring as the old one. Sure I like the
> retina display but after my eyes adjusted it was no big thing.
>
> I am, however, enjoying my Mac Mini which has all the "normal" kind of
> ports that a person needs - that is, I can use it as I want.
>
> Both objects have design lumps and bumps, like all apple products.
>
> Meanwhile I am mucking around with half a dozen android devices (including
> a watch) and also with a Raspberry Pi (Linux) and several Windows boxes.
>
> I agree with all TEN problems with Apple design as a thing called DESIGN.
>
> cheers
>
> keith
>
>
>
> >>> Ricardo Sosa <[log in to unmask]> 08/31/12 11:45 AM >>>
> I know this may upset a few, naturally it is meant as a provocation and
> hopefully may spark some thinking:
>
> 10 reasons why Apple is bad for design
> http://www.slideshare.net/rsm/10-reasons-why-apple-is-bad-for-design
>
> Rgds,
>
> Ricardo Sosa, PhD
> Assistant Professor
> Singapore University of Technology and Design
> 20 Dover Drive
> Singapore 138682
> http://www.sutd.edu.sg/faculty/ricardo
> http://sutd.academia.edu/Sosa
>
>
>
> The above message may contain confidential and/or proprietary information
> that is exempt from disclosure under applicable law and is intended for
> receipt and use solely by the addressee(s) named above. If you are not the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,
> distribution, or copying of this message, or any attachment, is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please inform the
> sender immediately by reply e-mail or telephone, reversing the charge if
> necessary. Please delete the message thereafter. Thank you.
>
--
Ranjit Menon
TAIK Helsinki
|