Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Comparing the Royals to America's bad traditions or politicians is not a cogent argument. In fact, it corroborates my point. We'll just have to agree to disagree. No biggie.

In my last post, I wanted to say that I am a big fan of Great Britain. Even though the Royals don't impress me, I admire your architecture, museums, classical writers, many actors, most of the people, and of course, Jonathan Ive.

Here's to a great 2012.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
At least we're not in danger of any nasty colour clashes from all the flag waving (still!) going on in this thread from both sides of the pond.
 
Congrats Sir Jonathan on this distinction.

yeah, give me all your electronic devices and go back to your horses and knights if living in the dungeons is your dream lol

geeze guys, time to catch up with america in the 21st century, we invented computers for peace sake

----------

Now can someone please take a photo of him smiling?! He looks like one of the drones from the 1984 commercial

yeah just one foto, add some hair while your at it, its hard to believe people look like this under 30
 
That's it, everyone of even the slightest note seems to get a knighthood. How about Baronet at least?

Since he works he wouldn't qualify for the peerage. But how come we never hear of anyone of note be granted the ranks of Baron, Viscount, Earl or Marquess or Duke. Though to be fair Duke is reserved for members of the Royal Family.

----------



I'd rather my member be in one of the Kardashians.:rolleyes:
Isn't Lord Sugar a Baron?
 
Could Jonathan Sue Apple for discrimination if they don't allow him to wear his Suite of Iron to work & meetings everyday? Would it be lawful for him to "let the light" into someone w/ his sword of they insulted His Queen. Probably OK in Britain, not OK in America.

In all seriousness, as an American w/ our Origin & History of freeing ourselves from British Class & all notions of European Imperial elitistism; the idea of Knighthood as a distinction in the 21st Century smells a bit much of an anachronistic, dead & rotting culture from the past.

Traditions serve many complex purposes; they are not by definition anachronistic. Give it another thousand years and your progeny may see the benefit of such time-honoured traditions that you seemingly don't.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Americans give Congressional honors all the time.

So I think it's nice that he got the recognition. He deserves it.

Heck, he even redesigned himself over the years:

jon_ive.png

Good for him!
 
Rubber Jony; Dick awarded dick

A right-place, right-time guy.

Nothing special here, move along now. Jobs was the genius, he could have found any half decent designer and shaped them to fulfill his needs.

Ive's so-called revolutionary transparent i-Mac wasn't British design - far from it - it borrowed much from the American industrial design era of the 40s and 50s, and the retro look was well underway by the mid-nineties so he wasn't even ahead of the curve. Still, it got rid of the beige box and of that we are thankful. The second wave of white and 'ahloooominum' simplicity was not particularly British either; truly Californian in spirit and owing much to Kubrick and Lucas, but standing in the shadow of Dieter Rams.

There are far more talented British designers out there. I'd like to say that its good to see designers getting a look in - the knighthoods go to politicians and civil servants [non-politicians who work for the government in high office] far too much - but its so way out of skew maybe it is best kept for these officious toadies, ageing television presenters and the occasional rock star that will "keep the people happy".

That this drawing-board and pencil guy can rank with Sir Tim Berners Lee is ridiculous - its just the British establishment jumping on the iTrain, trying to cream some credit where none is due. Let the Americans win this one, they did good with our idea [google Charles Babbage]. This little putz never made a penny that helped the British economy, and god knows we need it since we spent billions on two wars to help keep American gas station prices low.

If Americans think the British monarchy is out-of-date, then stop coming over here Union Jack waving and lapping it all up like kids in a Puppy shop. Then you'll get your way, as its your slowly-but-surely sinking dollar that keeps the Royal Family going. Go spend it in Disneyworld or buy yourself another gun.
 
If Americans think the British monarchy is out-of-date, then stop coming over here Union Jack waving and lapping it all up like kids in a Puppy shop. Then you'll get your way, as its your slowly-but-surely sinking dollar that keeps the Royal Family going. Go spend it in Disneyworld or buy yourself another gun.

You mad, bro?
 
Sorry but this" nothing to see here move along" is just BS. So is this Steve could've hired anybody to do what Ive did. If that's the case then why didn't Steve hire somebody else? Ive had his resignation letter ready to go, I'm sure he thought he was going to be chucked out with everyone else when Steve came back to Apple and cleaned house. Yet Steve basically put his arm around Ive and sent you and I are to be best buds.

It was Steve who promoted Ive to Senior VP, working directly for him. At the iPhone launch Steve placed the first phone call to Ive, not Schiller or Forstall or Tony Fadell or anyone else. And at the iPhone 4 launch Steve demoed FaceTime by calling Ive (who he introduced as one of his best friends in the whole world). In Walter Isaacson's book Steve called Ive his 'spiritual partner' and said Ive understood Apple at its core better than anyone. I don't think it's just a coincidence that Apple's rise to the top came after Steve pulled Ive from the dungeon and gave him a prominent role in the company. The way I see it, if you diss Ive as nothing special you're basically dissing Steve and his eye for spotting great talent.
 
Well done mate, you deserve it.

He's made an outstanding contribution to industrial design over the past 15 years and no matter how old fashioned it might seem I'm glad that we've given him this pat on the back.
 
...I'm so happy that I don't live in Texas, and don't have to worry that some testosterone-poisoned Apple fan will shoot me if I open my Windows tablet at the coffee shop.

I realize that was a flustered attempt at an insult but it simply doesn't make sense. Testosterone has nothing to do with self-defense. Plenty of independent women carry concealed firearms for protection as well. Why would someone shoot you for "opening" your Windows tablet? Again, you make no sense and appear to be lashing out with pure emotion and no logic.
 
In the realms of the Commonwealth, the restrictions on personally owned firearms are less of a constitutional deal than they are in the United States.

The reason is that we are not so afraid of our governments, and this is a by-product of our reliance on the institution of the monarchy.

The entire governmental apparatus is sworn to that one, regular person. The entire civil service *shadows* the government, and in many ways it is the Cabinet Secretary who is the superior of the Prime Minister. When the last general election looked like it was going to lead to a deadlock, no politician was allowed anywhere near The Queen...the decision was taken by The Queen in the company of the Cabinet Secretary.

We're not so afraid of the armed police, or of the Army, because they are all in the control of a National Command Authority that is represented by one average person's average common sense.

In the United States, the right to keep and bear arms is protected because in their day, and for good reason, of course, the Founding Fathers were afraid of their colonial governments and they could very well foresee another armed insurrection being necessary in the future. The Founding Fathers wanted an armed population to be a *threat* to the police and the Army. The British constitution learned from the American War of Independence, and it is partly a result of this catastrophe that the monarchy developed the way that it did.

It's just another way of looking at things.

If I had to pick which system were better, I am not sure if I would be able to do it. They are both very valid, both very functional, and both very, very FREE.
 
Respect for achievement is hardly a relic, especially when Her Majesty makes choices as good as this one. I can think of no one better qualified than Sir Jony to receive his country's highest award.

"Her Majesty"? This fascination with Lords and Kings being references to the old ways of the Dark Ages amazes me. The idea of Nobility is a disgrace to humanity. Being so pompous as to make your official title include the word "Sir" really says a lot about a person.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.