Apple's Marc Newson Believes Automotive Design is Lacking Progress

[apolloa]

ha. really?

[...] Ive said, quietly, “For example.” As the disgraced car fell behind, I asked Ive to critique its design: “It is baffling, isn’t it? It’s just nothing, isn’t it? It’s just insipid.”

talking about this car:

View attachment 575241


... so you're saying you 100% disagree, utterly and totally.. that the toyota echo is insipid?

or what, exactly, are you so completely disagreeing with?

I'm sure some people will like that car, perhaps in a different countries try to yours it makes a lot of sense.
I flat out disagree as the comment was made in a blanket way covering ALL modern car design. It is an extremely arrogant comment to make in that mannor.

 

[noveneerhere]

I'm sure some people will like that car, perhaps in a different countries try to yours it makes a lot of sense.
I flat out disagree as the comment was made in a blanket way covering ALL modern car design. It is an extremely arrogant comment to make in that mannor.

How is it arrogant? He is comparing it to "what a car could be" which he knows better than us. We can conclude that cars haven't evolved much so there is an opportunity for innovation that Apple recognises.

While attending an industrial design school I found the Transportation Designers (M.A.) to be fixed in their mindset of what a car should/could be.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Show me a better looking lap top then Apples new MacBook.

So looks are more important than function?

 

[dchesney]

The Wall Street Journal has published an in-depth profile of industrial designer Marc Newson, a longtime friend of Apple design chief Jonathan Ive who joined the Cupertino-based company in September 2014. The interview touches upon a number of topics, ranging from Newson's creative process and design philosophies to his favorite artists and fashion designers.

Apple designers Marc Newson (left) and Jonathan Ive (right) via Vanity Fair​

Just months after reports claimed Apple is actively researching and developing an electric and possibly self-driving vehicle, Newson added fuel to those rumors by referring to the automotive industry as one of his design pet-peeves. The designer said that while cars used to encapsulate "everything that was good about progress," the industry is now "at the bottom of a trough."Newson's comments certainly do not imply that Apple is working on a vehicle, but it is clear that multiple executives at the Cupertino-based company are car enthusiasts. Apple's SVP of Internet Software and Services Eddy Cue joined Ferrari's Board of Directors in November 2012, while Ive has owned several luxury vehicles ranging from Aston Martins and Fiats to Bentleys and Land Rovers.

Jonathan Ive's previous Aston Martin DB9 supercar​

The New Yorker also reflected on how Newson and Ive are "car guys" in February:It was reported in February that Apple has hundreds of employees, including former Tesla, Ford and GM engineers, working on an electric vehicle at a top-secret research lab possibly located in the Sunnyvale area. The much-rumored initiative, known internally as "Project Titan," likely remains in the early stages of research and development, with Bloomberg reporting that Apple hopes to begin production in 2020.

Article Link: Apple's Marc Newson Believes Automotive Design is Lacking Progress

 

[dchesney]

The ability to buy, own, and have an opinion on a crazy expensive car you don't wash, work on, or get your hands dirty putting gas in, does not make you a car guy. Just sayin.

 

[Pilgrim1099]

How is it arrogant? He is comparing it to "what a car could be" which he knows better than us. We can conclude that cars haven't evolved much so there is an opportunity for innovation that Apple recognises.

While attending an industrial design school I found the Transportation Designers (M.A.) to be fixed in their mindset of what a car should/could be.

Which ID program did you attend at?

It helps to know the kind of system being taught versus the other programs or countries. As long as the paved road exists, the car will always be a vehicle with four wheels on the ground. Either way, you need to name the school you're talking about to back it up.

It's not the mindset of the designers that are at fault but rather it's the governments setting regulations that restrict certain conventional ways vehicles can be built or created.

It's pretty obvious that Apple is trying to pull a Tesla with it but having their own CarPlay built in. I don't think they're going to manufacture it but rather provide a service solution to the way a car operates. It's the other partners that will, which is my impression. I think Apple is experimenting in Project Titan but not manufacturing for the masses. If it fails, they will kill it. If it works, they may do contractual partnerships with other car manufacturers.

If you read between the lines, the answer is right there, no matter how hard Cook tries to be coy about it. I don't think Jony or Marc are the right guys to do industrial design on cars and should stay out of it.

Car design is a specialized discipline.

 

[flat five]

I'm sure some people will like that car, perhaps in a different countries try to yours it makes a lot of sense.
I flat out disagree as the comment was made in a blanket way covering ALL modern car design. It is an extremely arrogant comment to make in that mannor.

idk, i agree with what they (Newson & Ive) are saying.. i've thought that way for the past couple of decades.

go back to 1965 and ask people to give examples of pinnacles of mankind's technology and design capabilities.. you can pretty much guarantee automobiles will be prevalent on the lists.

now? cars are meh and for the most part, unexciting/uninspiring.. ask the same question today and what, people are going to answer 'honda accord' or smthng? i doubt it..
cars haven't really progressed much in the past 40 years or even the past 100years.. automobiles progression has slowed to a crawl.. we're at the bottom of a trough.

 

[apolloa]

idk, i agree with what they (Newson & Ive) are saying.. i've thought that way for the past couple of decades.

go back to 1965 and ask people to give examples of pinnacles of mankind's technology and design capabilities.. you can pretty much guarantee automobiles will be prevalent on the lists.

now? cars are meh and for the most part, unexciting/uninspiring.. ask the same question today and what, people are going to answer 'honda accord' or smthng? i doubt it..
cars haven't really progressed much in the past 40 years or even the past 100years.. automobiles progression has slowed to a crawl.. we're at the bottom of a trough.

That is you're opinion, of course now a days cars don't kill pedestrians or occupants half as much as cars in 1965 did. Car design can of course go back to 1965, if you happily ignore all safety laws and regulations that constantly progress to cut road deaths year on year....
If you don't think cars have progressed, well I think you'll find you're in the minority.

And I would be much more happy to take a modern design then a car from the 60's.

How is it arrogant? He is comparing it to "what a car could be" which he knows better than us. We can conclude that cars haven't evolved much so there is an opportunity for innovation that Apple recognises.

While attending an industrial design school I found the Transportation Designers (M.A.) to be fixed in their mindset of what a car should/could be.

Well I can be certain Ive knows very little about car design, seeing as he's never designed one from scratch and put it on the market ever. Hence why he is getting everyone else to help,

And as for Marc Newson, if you Google 'Marc Newson car designs', this is the ONLY car that you get in the results under images that he's ever designed, and I think it sums it up perfectly, he has NO CLUE about how to design a car that's actually 'better' than anything else on the roads today.

Although Newson and Ive did actually customise this Fiat together for a charity auction, yeah well if this is their combined idea of the perfect car, Apple's shares will plummet further.... mmmm wicker seats...

So perhaps people should actually research on what these two, 'designers', have contributed to car design before believing everything they say eh?

 

[noveneerhere]

Which ID program did you attend at?

It helps to know the kind of system being taught versus the other programs or countries. As long as the paved road exists, the car will always be a vehicle with four wheels on the ground. Either way, you need to name the school you're talking about to back it up.

It's not the mindset of the designers that are at fault but rather it's the governments setting regulations that restrict certain conventional ways vehicles can be built or created.

It's pretty obvious that Apple is trying to pull a Tesla with it but having their own CarPlay built in. I don't think they're going to manufacture it but rather provide a service solution to the way a car operates. It's the other partners that will, which is my impression. I think Apple is experimenting in Project Titan but not manufacturing for the masses. If it fails, they will kill it. If it works, they may do contractual partnerships with other car manufacturers.

If you read between the lines, the answer is right there, no matter how hard Cook tries to be coy about it. I don't think Jony or Marc are the right guys to do industrial design on cars and should stay out of it.

Car design is a specialized discipline.

It's lazy to blame it on regulation. The car industry is big enough, and have enough lobbyists to influence regulation. It's not that. It is lazy companies, lazy CEO's and lazy designers. Apple is already partnering with others on CarPlay. You mean they'll do a BMW/Apple car?

Car design is not different in principle from other areas of design. That mindset is the problem. The car-design-students who 'see things differently' are fast discarded when they start climbing the corporate ladder. Because it's risky to change things. It's true with many industries but cars is a big one. Apple with Newson & Ive and the others are perfect to stir things up, see things different and do great things!

 

[apolloa]

That's lazy to blame it on regulations. The car industry is big enough, and have lobbyists to have influence on regulation. I don't think it's that. It is lazy CEO's and lazy designers who don't challenge themselves. I'm sure it's hard and costly but it is possible to do it 'different'. They're already partnering to others with CarPlay and the next step is a car. You mean they'll do a BMW/Apple car?

Car design is not different in principle from other areas. That mindset is the problem. You just made my point. The car-design-students who 'see things differently' are fast discarded. Because it's risky to change things. It's true with many industries but cars is a big one. Apple with Newson & Ive and the others are perfect to stir things up, see things different and do great things!

It's also very ignorant to choose to ignore safety regulations and believe lobbyists can put prettier designs in front of life, it's a tad different to gun laws you know. No lobbyists will NOT change car safety regulations, for a VERY good reason. You in fact show a lack of understanding how car manufacturers work? High volume ones still make very good designs but also have to mass produce them, low volume manufacturers have the luxury of using exclusive expensive space age materials and hand built shapes so can make luxurious wild and strong and safe designs.
Either way they have to abide with the the safety laws and regulations of the different countries they wish to sell in.

If you don't like this then you can always go and buy an old classic, just don't crash it.

 

[flat five]

That is you're opinion, of course now a days cars don't kill pedestrians or occupants half as much as cars in 1965 did. Car design can of course go back to 1965, if you happily ignore all safety laws and regulations that constantly progress to cut road deaths year on year....
If you don't think cars have progressed, well I think you'll find you're in the minority.

And I would be much more happy to take a modern design then a car from the 60's.

hmm. i sort of feel like you're arguing for the sake of arguing but not really too concerned with understanding the other person's point of view.

another approach to saying what i'm saying.. go back to 1965 (again ) and ask people if they think there will be flying cars in 50 years (which is today).. i believe an overwhelming majority would say yes.

now, i'm not saying flying cars are necessarily practical or necessary or whatever.. the example is meant to show what people's expectations of automobile progression would be.. then compare to the actual progression over the past 50 years and barely anything has changed..

further, i don't get your road death thing.. there are way (way!) too many automobile deaths occurring today.. probably not too dissimilar than 50 years ago.. maybe 1/2 as many?
should be a much much higher drop if that's your main argument (imo)

 

[noveneerhere]

It's also very ignorant to choose to ignore safety regulations and believe lobbyists can put prettier designs in front of life, it's a tad different to gun laws you know. No lobbyists will NOT change car safety regulations, for a VERY good reason. You in fact show a lack of understanding how car manufacturers work? High volume ones still make very good designs but also have to mass produce them, low volume manufacturers have the luxury of using exclusive expensive space age hand materials and hand built shapes so can make luxurious wild and strong and safe designs.
Either way they have to abide with the the safety laws and regulations of the different countries they wish to sell in.

If you don't like this then you can always go and buy an old classic, just don't crash it.

You totally misunderstood me. I meant that they're already influencing regulation. So there are no excuses. (Not wanting to sound smug but I am from the land of Volvo's)

 

[apolloa]

You totally misunderstood me. I meant that they're already influencing regulation. So there are no excuses.

Why would lobbyists make cars more dangerous just to look prettier? Who wants that? What do you mean?

 

[flat five]

Why would lobbyists make cars more dangerous just to look prettier? Who wants that? What do you mean?

huh?
i feel your understanding of 'progression' is lacking.

progression of cars would mean, yes, they're more stylish or modern in design.. but it also means they're safer, more comfortable, more practical, and more efficient.. both in resources being used to power them and more efficient in moving 100,000 of them down a road on the way to wherever.

why do you think a prettier car means it's more dangerous?

 

[noveneerhere]

hmm. i sort of feel like you're arguing for the sake of arguing but not really too concerned with understanding the other person's point of view.

another approach to saying what i'm saying.. go back to 1965 (again ) and ask people if they think there will be flying cars in 50 years (which is today).. i believe an overwhelming majority would say yes.

now, i'm not saying flying cars are necessarily practical or necessary or whatever.. the example is meant to show what people's expectations of automobile progression would be.. then compare to the actual progression over the past 50 years and barely anything has changed..

further, i don't get your road death thing.. there are way (way!) too many automobile deaths occurring today.. probably not too dissimilar than 50 years ago.. maybe 1/2 as many?
should be a much much higher drop if that's your main argument (imo)

I also think we can do more. It's setting the bar low to just make cars safe. There's room for improvement on other areas of cars, and opportunity for totally new ones we can't even imagine.

 

[gaximus]

So looks are more important than function?

No, but that's what this article is about.

 

[apolloa]

hmm. i sort of feel like you're arguing for the sake of arguing but not really too concerned with understanding the other person's point of view.

another approach to saying what i'm saying.. go back to 1965 (again ) and ask people if they think there will be flying cars in 50 years (which is today).. i believe an overwhelming majority would say yes.

now, i'm not saying flying cars are necessarily practical or necessary or whatever.. the example is meant to show what people's expectations of automobile progression would be.. then compare to the actual progression over the past 50 years and barely anything has changed..

further, i don't get your road death thing.. there are way (way!) too many automobile deaths occurring today.. probably not too dissimilar than 50 years ago.. maybe 1/2 as many?
should be a much much higher drop if that's your main argument (imo)

Nope, not arguing, and it is a fact cars are safer now than they ever have been in history, if you look at the number of deaths in the 60's relevant to the number of drivers and compare to today, it is a lot safer today and fall year on year.

It seems the impact safety regulations play on design is not fully realised on here?, for instance the height a rear light is placed is by regulation, if you can afford to make a car out of titanium and carbon fibre and aeroplane aluminium and glue it all together, then you make an incredibly strong car and can also afford to change the shape to something much more sleek. Mass produced cars don't have the luxury and so have to allow for different methods of safety. I say that because in car's like McLarens for instance, the cell the passengers sit in can 'break away' in accidents from the rear engine.

I am just stating why my opinion is different, but I still maintain modern cars look great, sure there were beautiful designs in the 60's, but unless you can use luxurious materials and hand building techniques and charge prices accordingly, then you are more limited in the design.
Insurance companies also play a part in car design, cars are made to be cheaper to repair in accidents.

 

[apolloa]

I also think we can do more. It's setting the bar low to just make cars safe. There's room for improvement on other areas of cars, and opportunity for totally new ones we can't even imagine.

Explain in full what you mean.

 

[apolloa]

huh?
i feel your understanding of 'progression' is lacking.

progression of cars would mean, yes, they're more stylish or modern in design.. but it also means they're safer, more comfortable, more practical, and more efficient.. both in resources being used to power them and more efficient in moving 100,000 of them down a road on the way to wherever.

why do you think a prettier car means it's more dangerous?

Because you have to take into account pedestrian safety which is why front grills are so big now. You can make systems that prevent a pedestrian's head from hitting your engine block, but currently they are laughably expensive to replace after they deploy.
Sure cars will progress in design but I can't see Apple bringing anything better at a reasonable cost, then again maybe they will chase that high end luxury market where the prices charged allow for a lot of flexibility.

 

[noveneerhere]

Explain in full what you mean.

How do you mean? Wish I could but I'm not working on a revolutionary car (at the moment). But I'll give you an example of something I couldn't have imagined was possible:

As an Industrial Design student I like Apple because they consistently take design seriously. Though designers play a small part we are the assistant conductors to the CEO (Mr. Jobs) hence the “Musicians play their instruments, I play the orchestra." And the engineers et.c do the heavy lifting.

 

[AppleScruff1]

I think Ferrari, Lamborghini and a few others have pushed design into the stratosphere. Of course it's not practical for the masses, but Jony couldn't outdo an Aventador.

 

[Renzatic]

Although from 1999, this thing looks like something a 6 year old drew with crayons.

Looks more like an old Soviet car from the 70's to me.

 

[apolloa]

How do you mean? Wish I could but I'm not working on a revolutionary car (at the moment). But I'll give you an example of something I couldn't have imagined was possible:

As an Industrial Design student I like Apple because they consistently take design seriously. Though designers play a small part we are the conductors together with the CEO (Mr. Jobs) hence the “Musicians play their instruments, I play the orchestra." And the engineers et.c do the heavy lifting.

I thought you were talking about the exterior design of the car, not the entire car, I see what you mean by highlighting the Google bubble car thing.
I do still find self driving cars as potentially boring, but it is definitely where things are going. BMW have done a lot in self driving cars too. Cars will always progress yes but I don't think we are in any kind of trough at the moment, with electric cars and hybrids across all model ranges being developed.
I even believe in your home country Volvo has done an awful lot with self aware cars and car safety, I believe they want to launch a car that won't crash soon.

 

[noveneerhere]

I thought you were talking about the exterior design of the car, not the entire car, I see what you mean by highlighting the Google bubble car thing.
I do still find self driving cars as potentially boring, but it is definitely where things are going. BMW have done a lot in self driving cars too. Cars will always progress yes but I don't think we are in any kind of trough at the moment, with electric cars and hybrids across all model ranges being developed.

It all plays together, interior and exterior. We can't know if we're in the trough until somebody does something new. The Apple-company-type is replicable but nobody's done it yet. They are experts at understanding the average user need. Think of the day when two companies will compete on that level...

Thank you for saying that, sadly it ceased to be Swedish in 1999 when bought by Ford Motors and then by its' current Chinese owner. Although the headquarters (and some assembly & production) are still in Sweden.

 

[StyxMaker]

Since none of my manly ego is tied up in the looks of my car I would much prefer manufacturers to continue spending more money on safety features durability and lowering the cost of ownership instead of spending more money on good-looking exteriors.