Apple Designing More Functional Products Since Jony Ive's Departure, Argues Bloomberg Reporter

[Scoob Redux]

mmm…

in order for humanity to progress we end up doing things we don’t actually need to do to discover new things that we end up needing to do.

There is no real reason to climb a mountain, or there wasn’t much reason to sail across the Atlantic initially. I’m sure people thought it was madness. But ultimately that’s how we discover what we are capable of and how we achieve new things.

without apples obsession with thiness they wouldn’t have created smaller chipsets, better laminated glass, better fan technology etc.. that’s why jobs and Ive continued to push the boundaries, because there is often gold at the end of that rainbow.

Nothing wrong with thinness when it is in service of a quantifiable improvement in product performance, user experience, etc. Not only did no one ask for an ultra-thin desktop computer, but it is counter-productive to the usability of the device. A thin laptop? great. A thin mobile phone? cool. A desktop computer doesn't move around or have a need to be 11.5mm thin. Especially when it comes at the cost of features.

however, sometimes you go to the edge and it doesn’t work well so you retreat. That is humanity. It’s a process.

you seem to dismiss the many amazing things that come around via wireless communication. There are literally billions of people that would never go back to a wired headphoned world. there are so many benefits.

I don't dismiss wireless at all. Wireless enables many great things. It's not as robust, fast, or error-free as wired, but the benefits usually outweigh those drawbacks. I would never blindly embrace all things wireless as being "better" - they just enable certain flexibility that makes the tradeoffs often worth it. To claim that the tradeoffs are ALWAYS worth it, and wireless is always better, would be to ignore reality.

what you describe generally are edge cases, that will get ironed out because that is the process. It’s not a bad thing to try and fail. It’s not a bad thing to try and retreat. However, It’s a terrible thing to never try. Apple tries. That’s the difference.

The last gen iMacs were pretty thin...getting thinner with the new 24" didn't achieve any particular functional goal other than to show that Apple can do it. What was lost were significant features. The whole point of an all-in-one was to simplify and integrate all the features users need into an elegant package. With the new iMac, Apple literally took the internal power supply out and put it on the user's desk or floor, just to achieve thinness of the display. That's the difference. Pushing the bounds of tech is great, but it has to be in pursuit of a useful goal.

 

[Scoob Redux]

At the same time, Apple envisions people using iMacs in places where they can be seen (evidenced by the variety of colours, the thinness and the choice of screen size) rather than just on a desk with the back facing a wall).

I think if "being seen" is anywhere on your list of considerations in a computer, we're in a different conversation. ?

 

[makitango]

*) It caters to TVs, projectors and office monitors, thus 2.1 is simply not needed. Also bandwitch limitations simply doesn't allow more. If you want 120Hz, use one of your 3 TB ports, volia.

It caters to the ones who want 120Hz over HDMI. You'd want to save those TB ports for devices which need the TB throughput for other devices. I know, hard to imagine outside the "Pro" scope of things.
I guess the device is too cheap to up-pay for the 2.1 controller update as in $0.02.

And those noobs complaining about that notch, you still didn't get that it enables extra screen estate rather than 'taking anything away'. Did you even watch the keynote? You get extra 74 vertical pixels. Disable that area = black pixels and you're back to the standard 16:10 display with the old bezel. It isn't the most beautiful solution but in technical aspects the best and most flexible one, to maximize screen space combined with a good 1080p camera.

I wish more people would actually think first or do some research before posting their silly rants or smileys.

You can see people trying make the most of their system by hiding the dock and the menu bar, rescaling the dock and have more screen real estate. Even if you wouldn't hide the menu bar, you are not getting additional pixels.
Even if you have "non-pros" just just casually play games, watch art films or old tv shows, they just keep on losing screen space because of the notch, and the fact that you don't see or understand that doesn't change it.

It would be more "noob" to actually have the bar and/or the dock to actually click them. Using your mouse always means losing time when you can seamlessly just use your keyboard, and time is money.

I wish more people would actually think first or do some research before posting their silly rants or smileys.

Indeed.

 

[threesixty360]

Nothing wrong with thinness when it is in service of a quantifiable improvement in product performance, user experience, etc. Not only did no one ask for an ultra-thin desktop computer, but it is counter-productive to the usability of the device. A thin laptop? great. A thin mobile phone? cool. A desktop computer doesn't move around or have a need to be 11.5mm thin. Especially when it comes at the cost of features.

I don't dismiss wireless at all. Wireless enables many great things. It's not as robust, fast, or error-free as wired, but the benefits usually outweigh those drawbacks. I would never blindly embrace all things wireless as being "better" - they just enable certain flexibility that makes the tradeoffs often worth it. To claim that the tradeoffs are ALWAYS worth it, and wireless is always better, would be to ignore reality.

The last gen iMacs were pretty thin...getting thinner with the new 24" didn't achieve any particular functional goal other than to show that Apple can do it. What was lost were significant features. The whole point of an all-in-one was to simplify and integrate all the features users need into an elegant package. With the new iMac, Apple literally took the internal power supply out and put it on the user's desk or floor, just to achieve thinness of the display. That's the difference. Pushing the bounds of tech is great, but it has to be in pursuit of a useful goal.

The iMac is and has been for about a decade, a laptop with a huge monitor attached. It's not a real desktop and hasn't been for a while. Therefore all the parts and design ethos are pretty much shared between whatever Apple is doing with laptop technology with the added benefit of better heat handling and fixed power.

Obviously when they moved the laptops to m1 and basically turned their laptops into mobile phones / iPads, they weren't going to start making them thicker. Where would be the benefits in that for them? You make your margins by reusing design across different product lines. I kind of think you hear the word "desktop" and think that iMac is a real desktop. It isn't.

Also, looking at the emphasis on colours, its not as if this is designed for pro's is it? 95% of iMac buyers will want a general purpose computer than looks nice in their home or office and that's about it. And so how it looks is paramount, hence its thin and nice looking, because that's what the public who buy these products value.

Having an external power supply is not the worst thing in the world, it sits on the floor away from view. It also allows for ethernet connection without the dodgy cable looping over the desk, so its really not bad.

Anyway, your missing my original point. Spending energy pushing boundaries may not have the desired effect for some pro's. But its not wasted energy. A lot of what they found will be used in other products.

Finally, having good looking products that are not slaves to functionality is exactly why Apple is successful. That's literally Steve Jobs' mantra. Let everyone else do the bulky, million ports, replaceable everything designs like they used to do, and let apple design for people who compromise for the aesthetic. Design in general, whether its clothes, houses, whatever is full of non practical choices because they look good. Because that's how a lot of humans are. Apple just reflects that part of humanity.

 

[threesixty360]

It caters to the ones who want 120Hz over HDMI. You'd want to save those TB ports for devices which need the TB throughput for other devices. I know, hard to imagine outside the "Pro" scope of things.
I guess the device is too cheap to up-pay for the 2.1 controller update as in $0.02.

You really think Apple would do that to make 2 pence on a 2 grand machine?
Are you crazy?

The usual explanation is generally something technical like the boards they use dont have the correct chipset to decode 2.1 or something. And they could have waited to get new boards or whatever, but everyone on the team would rather ship in October than next year.

Its usually mundane reasons rather than penny pinching.

You also need the correct cables for 2.1 as its pretty fussy as well. Maybe that fed into it. But if your a high end gamer needing 120khz to play COD or something, I doubt you're buying a MacBook are you?

 

[ToomeyND]

You also need the correct cables for 2.1 as its pretty fussy as well. Maybe that fed into it. But if your a high end gamer needing 120khz to play COD or something, I doubt you're buying a MacBook are you?

I feel personally attacked. ? I was legit hoping that Apple was going to announce something during the event that allowed for PC games to play on the Mac.....specifically for COD (for me). hahaha. Bought the mac. Will keep my playstation.

 

[Yr Blues]

Apple lost its vision and innovation. It's over unless they can get Jony back.

 

[phantom13]

The Mustang II was Ford's answer to what customers wanted.

You can make something customers want without them knowing they want it. I forgot the average customer is a phone engineer and software designer how silly of me.

 

[usagora]

Good Riddance Jony Ive.

I must admit this one still grinds my gears.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

No, I think you’ll find the 16 replaced the 15. The same 15 that hasn’t been sold in years since the 16 was released to replace it. The 14 is an upgrade to the 13. And, I guess, by your math, the 13 screen is larger than the 14 screen?

They still have a 13” and now a 14” inch and 16” model.

The 16” is more a successor of the 17” MacBook Pro

Now we have a 13.2” MacBook Pro and a 14.2”
Are Quite literally almost the same size
8mm with and 9mm depth is all that differs.

Actually I will go to the local apple store and measure if the MacBook Pro 13.2 in could become a 14in by removing the black borders

 

[Unregistered 4U]

The 16” is more a successor of the 17” MacBook Pro

Heh… ok A successor to a LONG DEAD laptop rather than an upgrade to a recently discontinued 15”. I mean no one can say you’re wrong, but it IS a bit of a stretch.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Heh… ok A successor to a LONG DEAD laptop rather than an upgrade to a recently discontinued 15”. I mean no one can say you’re wrong, but it IS a bit of a stretch.

Well. I just think it makes more sense to upgrade a 13.2” to 14 by removing the bezel and almost keeping the exact same physical dimension.

And remove the bezel on the 15.2” to 16”.

And reintroduce the 12.2in MacBook instead.

Introduce a MacBook Air 11” and 13” to be as thin as possible

 

[Tozovac]

Many will hate this statement but I prefer function over design any ol'day of the year. Thank you.

I think it's more accurate to say that people appreciate design when the functional compromises it entails doesn't affect that particular end user in any meaningful way. Which again, is going to vary from person to person.

I feel like you two are saying the same thing but with different words.

Take the 2011 MBA for example. To some people, it technically lost functionality when Apple removed all the display ports and required you to use an adaptor if you wanted to connect it to a VGA, HDMI or DVI port. But people generally didn't mind because that resulted in a significantly thinner and lighter laptop, which benefited them as well, because it was easier to bring around with you.

As someone who complains about the gimped MBA/MBP’s of the last 5 years this might surprise you but I feel if Apple had kept the Air focused on the minimalist transportability convenience aspect, say for the person constantly on the go who might specifically want a lightweight/thin laptop for medium/light duty work, then it’d be fair to state that the Air’s “functionality” as far as ports should hardly be questioned. Or better yet, it could truly be called as being designed for function-first since the design intent is hyper-focused on portability.

But as the MBA started getting kitchen sinked with features inching it closer to the MBP, how could one not start looking for MBP-like functionality and convenience such as more power, more ports, etc. It’s maybe just human nature (or Marketing madness) to keep adding, similar to how compact economy cars seem to grow in size and features each year to where, after a decade or so, automakers have to introduce a new smaller model to replace the plumped-up model. Think: GM’s Saturn that started out as a plastic econo-box then got muddied with luxury upgrades. Or Cooper Minis that now aren’t very mini. Or Honda Accords of the 90’s that are smaller than today’s Civics. Or Apple introducing MacBooks (Airs ver. 2). That I guess tanked? So maybe there really wasn’t a market for hyper-minimalist MacBooks?

With regards to the new MBPs, I won't be surprised if there are people who end up never using the HDMI port on their new MBPs, because it doesn't support the 4k monitors on their desk, or they already have a 5K LG display from earlier. It's there really for conference room meetings. Or maybe their laptop is already charging via the LG display or a thunderbolt hub and they rarely ever need the fast charging that MagSafe provides, and the longer battery life means they don't have to plug in their laptop as often.

Agree !

At the same time, I was never into photography, and I have never bemoaned the absence of a SD-card slot on my MBA either. And wifi was fast enough that I never had to scramble for an ethernet cable. This is clearly an example of design done right, by correctly predicting what users wanted before they themselves realised it, and having the advantages outweigh the drawbacks.

Except your “example of design done right” is done right for your use case. Perhaps you would have been served very well with a 1-port hyper-thin/light MBA, had it remained hyper-thin/light. But as Apple made the shopping decision more complex as the MBA inched towards its big brother, surely complaints could be justified.

 

[Colpeas]

MacBook Pro lid is 4mm thick. You can’t stack the camera and the LCD on top of each other in such a small space. Therefore you need the notch if you want the small bezel.

iPad Pro is 7.8mm thick.

I guess you didn’t notice the ludicrously thick bottom bezel on the macbook pro. There is absolutely no reason for the notch on the mbp, all they needed to do is to make the display sit a little lower, like on the outgoing generation. It’s just a design gimmick.
I believe it’s also the reason why they omitted the “macbook pro” label that was previously found there. Otherwise everybody would notice at first sight.