i fail to see "lack of thought". if it was popular, Apple wouldn't have killed it. what evidence do you have to show that it is popular
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Announces Upcoming Departure of Lead Product Designer Evans Hankey
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
i fail to see "lack of thought". if it was popular, Apple wouldn't have killed it. what evidence do you have to show that it is popular
Sure, using Steve’s innovations and strategy, and by financially engineering the stock price while growth has gone from tripe digits 10 years ago to mid single digits this year and most likely negative growth next year. And Tim can thank MS and Google for being even more incompetent than he is for his “success.”
The Force Touch Trackpad was also added to the MBP at the same time as the MB. The new things it alone introduced was the terraced battery (not used any any subsequent MacBooks), the butterfly keyboard (scrapped after many iterations), the lack of MagSafe charging in favor of a single USB-C, and the lack of a light-up Apple logo. The fanless design and thin displays were already there in the iPad Airs to some degree at that point. By and large it was simply a thinner 11" MBA, and I wouldn't say it introduced a lot of significant user experience upgrades or aesthetic changes over the existing MBs at the time that endures to this day. As a MBA user at the time I appreciated what it aspired to be even though it failed to deliver on that vision due Intel's failings and the lack of hardware maturity.
The comment I was replying was indicating that Ive had a kind of vision that the design team after him did not, and they only iterated on his designs. I was just saying that even though the AS MacBook design from the new design team is somewhat of a rehash of the old iBook/PowerBook designs it doesn't really show a lack of vision. Ive was also not really introducing many new design concepts each generation after establishing a design language, choosing instead to iterate by making things thinner and iterating on minor things (which is not at all a bad thing).
1. The only issue that you raised that can be attributed to the design team and not the engineering team is the position of the hole. The hole isn't visible in normal use because the visual perspective is slightly higher than what the product image shows when we are actually sitting in front of it, looking more like this. The hole also can't be much higher because the monitor also has to accommodate the tilt and height stand while having the same power outlet position on the back.
2. Personally I like it somewhat more than the old design. The feet stand a little taller than the wedge and the bottom is flat so it didn't feel all that much harder to pick up. The old tapered design was great, but I always felt it was a bit of a lie with the thickness because the bottom has a bulge that extends a lot lower than the wedge.
3. Not a design issue but a decision made by how well it sold. Bigger phones are more popular these days even outside the U.S. especially the Asian market since people are increasingly doing more on it than before.
4. The Mac mini/studio is supposed to be an understated and minimalist design that fades into the background compared to the Mac Pro which is a lot more present in a room or desk which is why it has more visual panache. While not an very innovative design by any means, I think it's a sensible iteration of the mini's timeless design.
What on earth does point 3 have to do with the design team? They don’t make business decisions.
whatever change the silly and useless aspect ratios on iPads. No movies of stils are made in those aspect ratios, what you get is black bars!
As someone who has worked alongside wonderfully talented designers that weren’t empowered or given the support to do their best work, it pains me that everyone here continues this Jony vs Evans debate. If you truly think that the bland designs and lack of innovation is coming from anywhere other than the change from a design-first company to an operations-first company, you’re blind.
If you’re upset that Apple hasn’t been pushing their designs, I can tell with you a lot of confidence that is not the ID’s fault.
If you’re going to pull out examples like the Magic Mouse charging or the Apple Pencil 1 charging, look no further than the limitations set by the higher ups.
Steve’s Apple would invest whatever it took to make the greatest thing they could. The products were the product, and it showed. Every detail was thought through from the user’s perspective, and it didn’t matter how much it cost to get it right.
Today’s Apple is run by the bean counters that don’t care about the subtle difference between x and z and don’t want to spend $y per unit more to go with z when they think x will lead to higher margins and more bottom line. The customers are now the product - just look at the services and, more recently, the Ads push. This is not Steve’s Apple.
So if you have a problem with stale, recycled designs - guess what? Clearly Evans does too because she’s leaving what used to be the most desirable job in the entire product design universe. That should tell you all you need to know about what’s going on inside of the company, and why we are stuck with the same slabs of slightly different shades year after year.
Your beef is not with the head of the design group, no matter who it is. Jony left for the same exact reasons. Think deeper people. The magic is dead inside Apple and the shift from design-lead to operations-lead is complete. We will see more talent leave.
If you’re upset that Apple hasn’t been pushing their designs, I can tell with you a lot of confidence that is not the ID’s fault.
If you’re going to pull out examples like the Magic Mouse charging or the Apple Pencil 1 charging, look no further than the limitations set by the higher ups.
Steve’s Apple would invest whatever it took to make the greatest thing they could. The products were the product, and it showed. Every detail was thought through from the user’s perspective, and it didn’t matter how much it cost to get it right.
Today’s Apple is run by the bean counters that don’t care about the subtle difference between x and z and don’t want to spend $y per unit more to go with z when they think x will lead to higher margins and more bottom line. The customers are now the product - just look at the services and, more recently, the Ads push. This is not Steve’s Apple.
So if you have a problem with stale, recycled designs - guess what? Clearly Evans does too because she’s leaving what used to be the most desirable job in the entire product design universe. That should tell you all you need to know about what’s going on inside of the company, and why we are stuck with the same slabs of slightly different shades year after year.
Your beef is not with the head of the design group, no matter who it is. Jony left for the same exact reasons. Think deeper people. The magic is dead inside Apple and the shift from design-lead to operations-lead is complete. We will see more talent leave.
From the stuff they produce now it looks like the design department answers to the accountancy department
How things change … not always for the better
How things change … not always for the better
No it doesn't. The stuff they produce now is smart and sleek looking. Yes things change...sometimes for the better.*
*Different strokes for different folks. Personally -- if I had some of the same criticism as some who have posted, there would be no way I would buy an Apple product.
Great leaving now. Will get a phone that can lay flat.
Apple's vice president of industrial design Evans Hankey plans to leave the company next year, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. Apple confirmed the report in a statement, but her successor has not been named yet.
Apple's hardware design lead Evans Hankey (left) and software design lead Alan Dye (right)
"Apple's design team brings together expert creatives from around the world and across many disciplines to imagine products that are undeniably Apple," an Apple spokesperson said in a statement shared with Bloomberg today. "The senior design team has strong leaders with decades of experience. Evans plans to stay on as we work through the transition, and we'd like to thank her for her leadership and contributions."
Hankey succeeded Jony Ive as Apple's de-facto design chief after he left the company in 2019, reporting to Apple's operations chief Jeff Williams. She will remain at Apple for at least the next six months, and Apple's software design lead Alan Dye is also staying at Apple and will continue to report to Williams, according to the report.
Article Link: Apple Announces Upcoming Departure of Lead Product Designer Evans Hankey
Tim Cook is a very different CEO than Steve Jobs. Jobs ran a smaller company and micromanaged everything. I suspect Cook is less focused on managing everything Apple, but he’s an amazing supply chain guy who is also running a ~2.4T company. Making sure the board and shareholders are happy is his job description. I seriously doubt he’s as design focused as his predecessor.
Last edited:
Since we're being pedantic and avoiding the actual point that was raised, which is that the Apple USB "puck" mouse was designed with a rounded shape to fit the hand, and yet it was a flop...
You understand that "circle" is a description of a two-dimensional shape, and that you used examples such as doorknobs and steering wheels when describing "rounded" right? Just like the Apple USB "puck" mouse. Which is why I described it as being "rounded."
Also you said the iPhone is "square," which likewise is a description across two dimensions. It is clearly not. And even if you said it was "square-shaped" you would be incorrect since the iPhone is not a square across any dimensions. Its faces are rectangular in basic shape, and it is a cuboid shape when described in three dimensions. Not square.
I mean. if we're being pedantic and all. Lmao
I’ve bought Apple products since they were a utility-first company, making functional computers "for the rest of us".
The design focus was introduced when their products were otherwise uncompetitive, it brought attention to them, and was a way to signal identity.
Today I’d agree that they are a stock-price first company, but my tell tale sign is the otherwise pointless crippling of their products - such as disabling ProRAW on the regular iPhones, actively blocking SSD upgrades on the Mac Studio et cetera - where they actively make their products worse, for the sake of trying to eke out a bit more profit (and it’s not even certain that they get the desired result).
On the contrary, we've seen an improvement in the products since Ive and his obsessiveness for thin products left.
It takes years for a product to go from design to reality.You won't see any products she has taken part in until a few years in the future. The current ones, including the m1 Macs, are thanks to her and her team.
Do you not know what a rounded object looks like? You apparently don’t know the definitions and the differences between them and geometric shapes.
The iPhone is square. Do you know what a square edge means? You wouldn’t be good at construction or engineering if you don’t know how to square something. ‘Having or in the form or two right angles’
Ever hear of a square jaw?
Lmao. Try harder buddy. You failed
A change is never easy. But yeah, some customers and some employees can pound sand.
Agree completely. Apple has always historically offered “a bit more for a bit more” but today’s Apple feels more user hostile about it. It’s mainly because the product lines are messy and the clear lines between good/better/best are getting blurrier by the day (and by the number of iPad smart magic folio keyboard accessories).
The product matrix used to be simple, but I think choice is great. It’s just that the lines between the choices aren’t obvious enough.
We went through the complete mess that was the Mac lineup between 2016-2019 and now that they got the Mac under control, it’s like the mess needed to be transferred somewhere and has nested in the iPad lineup. Hopefully it all shakes itself out soon, but right now it’s not great. Too many products with too few differences between them.