Jonathan Ive on Design and Apple's Focus on Great Products Instead of Profits

[Ochyandkaren]

Originally Posted by boss.king
If your goal isn't making money, then why not lower your profit margins and sell your stuff at a reasonable price?

BOOM! That's what I'm talking about!

Wow!
: Ignorance, ignorance.
Who own Apple?
: Who will pay the employees, attract new geniuses?
: Funny no-one called him a socialist yet.

: Do engineers and designers, they work together, are accountants?
: The money Apple IS making is an effect of its biz model. a biz model that took a decade to bear fruit.

: They used to call me tricky-kid, with a tiny market-share, now they call me famous and rich. Everybody wants to be famous and naked, not me. Yeah, it is hard for you to swallow, i know. Because i am not like you.


The BEST way to make fast money IS to outsource, that means licensing orgy a-la Microsoft and Google.
You not only do less research, you have others to do yr battle.
Apple alone fight against two cartel that are comprised by the same firms, and it is winning, isn´t that awesome!

Apple compete with:

--- Google, Microsoft, copyCat Samsung, copyCat LG, DELL, SONY, Motorola, Nokia … which all sell the same OS, so compete nothing at all, plus sell their products thru phony IT technicians to ignorant consumers, who never choose what they want.

And guess what apple is winning.
Just go think WHY?!

 

[antonis]

what an incorrect statement. Every competitive company's goal is to maximize profits. Their goal is to make money.
Jonny is trying to make it look like Apple is different than any other company, when in it's definition it's the same as Samsung, RIM, Google etc, ... their goal is to make money.
Apple makes great products to get money, but money is still the main driving force.

Also, if a two-toned iPhone is their 'best work yet'.. then i'm unpleasantly surprised.

That's a moot point.

Yes, every company's ultimate goal is to make money, this is necessary after all in order to pay everyone's salary check and keep company going. The difference Apple has with other companies is that they make money by targeting to the great product and the innovation, while all the others are targeting to the big sales and follow/copy apple's footprints. It is a different approach that benefits them (obviously) and also the end-users.

Take google for example. They have the opposite strategy of Apple, while they still make money. They made a mobile device OS and they sold it to every device manufacturer and their cat, with no standards or prerequisites to secure a minimum product quality. Do they make money ? Of course they do. Do they care about their creation ? Not much.

 

[Ochyandkaren]

That's a moot point.

Yes, every company's ultimate goal is to make money, this is necessary after all in order to pay everyone's salary check and keep company going. The difference Apple has with other companies is that they make money by targeting to the great product and the innovation, while all the others are targeting to the big sales and follow/copy apple's footprints. It is a different approach that benefits them (obviously) and also the end-users.

Take google for example. They have the opposite strategy of Apple, while they still make money. They made a mobile device OS and they sold it to every device manufacturer and their cat, with no standards or prerequisites to secure a minimum product quality. Do they make money ? Of course they do. Do they care about their creation ? Not much.

Because the GOAL IS to lure people to its search engine.
: … To guess WHAT?
: MAKE MONEY!

There is nothing different between Google to Microsoft. They both sport the same biz model. Only Microsoft is run by accountants NOT engineers.

 

[D-a-a-n]

Wow!
: Ignorance, ignorance.
Who own Apple?
: Who will pay the employees, attract new geniuses?
: Funny no-one called him a socialist yet.

Who has $100 billion cash reserves? Not me..

 

[JustRon]

Enjoy

Every day I am thankful for the many little ways that Apple products have added ease and enjoyment to my life. I am better connected, informed and entertained because of the Apple ecosystem and elegant device designs in the form of my iPhone and iPad. If they never improved either of these devices I would still be pleased because they are efficient and fun to use.

Are there other design solutions, ecosystems, products available that also serve the same functions? Certainly. Are there better designed, simper, more elegant solutions? No.

It is the user experience that makes Apple products excel. Keep in mind what the world was like a few short years ago, before the iPhone and iPad existed. It was Apple that took a huge chance and made a tremendous investment in a high end, design driven product. This is when innovation in laptops, smart phones and PDA's was in the doldrums. The bubble had burst on tech stocks. The computer industry was just doing variations on a theme - incremental increases in processing speed and memory.

Today the world is a different place. There is a new vitality and ever deepening levels of connectedness. This can be directly attributed to the leadership and innovation from Apple. I think we should give credit where it is due. Other companies may have less expensive, bomb proof products with faster processors and ports and plugs for every possible contingency. But for me Apple is enough - and if it costs a bit more I willingly pay because it is the effort and attention to detail on every level that makes these products such a joy for me to use.

Thanks Sir Ive.

 

[dendowling]

Maybe Kate's asking Jony about the new iPad.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/britishmonarchy/7683203414

 

[Rogifan]

Or just do what Samsung and Nokia do and use polycarbonate, a very lightweight and strong material. You really think there are no other material options?

Yes of course Apple used glass because they wanted people to break their phones and have to replace them. And of course because they're to stupid to know about all these other great materials that are so much more durable. You'd think a genius like Steve Jobs would have told Jony Ive where to shove his glass, but no apparently he told Ive that Apple needed to master glass.

 

[Rogifan]

Design is important - but not everything.

Reading between the lines, in the Jobs days Jony wouldn't have got this sort of media exposure - now it's portrayed as if his design is Apple's savior. Only time would tell if Tim has the instinct to put the creative back to earth when necessary.

Baloney. Ive has plenty of exposure and gave plent of interviews while Steve was running the show. In Adam Lashinsky's book "Inside Apple" (pg. 80) he says Ive:

"is the one personality at Apple besides himself that Jobs tolerated having a public profile."

And let's not forget what Steve told Walter Isaacson (pg. 351):

"He's not just a designer that's why he works directly for me. He has more operational power than anyone else at Apple except me. There's no one who can tell him what to do or to butt out. That's the way I set it up."

Now maybe Steve was full of it or this was part of his reality distortion field, but my guess is Tim Cook spends little time managing Jony Ive an the designers. At the D10 conference Cook admitted he doesn't focus much on design and marketing, that his focus is in other areas.

 

[Ochyandkaren]

Who has $100 billion cash reserves? Not me..

Then it is envy!
For a decade Apple struggled, now it is paying. Remember What Windows backers used to say about Apple?

: They used to say, license yr product that t is the best way.
: Now they envy my bank account, losers!

 

[kdarling]

#1: Given the fact that Apples sells out, I mean, given the fact Apple has no problem selling as many products as it can produce, why should they reduce costs? To say they don't care about making money doesn't mean they don't see the benefit in having money lying around to make more products, should they need to draw on those resources during the course of their development.

True, having all that spare cash overseas no doubt is a nice leverage when it comes to buying overseas parts.

At the same time, it's extremely difficult to claim that Apple is simply out to make great products to benefit the world, when it prices its products out of the reach of so many people.

Contrast that to all the companies who worked for decades to make cell phones ubiquitous around the world. The iPhone would have no market without the huge cellular infrastructure built up by other companies that were willing to take lower profit margins in order to encourage the spread of cell networks and phones into even the poorest of countries.

#2. R&D is expensive, so having that extra cash might be incredibly useful down the road.

Reinvestment in research is not a valid point in Apple's case, as they do fine with comparatively tiny budgets.

Apple spends far less on R&D than any other major tech company, which is proof that focusing on very few products is a good way to get more bang for your buck.

For example, in 2006 Apple only spent $500 million on everything they did, including creating the iPhone. Microsoft spent $7 BILLION in 2007 and what came of it? (To be fair, MS is into a lot more fields than Apple is. They also publish a lot of their research.)

 

[Ochyandkaren]

Baloney. Ive has plenty of exposure and gave plent of interviews while Steve was running the show. In Adam Lashinsky's book "Inside Apple" (pg. 80) he says Ive:


And let's not forget what Steve told Walter Isaacson (pg. 351):


Now maybe Steve was full of it or this was part of his reality distortion field, but my guess is Tim Cook spends little time managing Jony Ive an the designers. At the D10 conference Cook admitted he doesn't focus much on design and marketing, that his focus is in other areas.

Design = drawing + engineering ( physics, biology, high math ).
Design is NOT scribbling.
If drawing is thinking, design is applied science.

----------

True, having all that spare cash overseas no doubt is a nice leverage when it comes to buying overseas parts.

At the same time, it's extremely difficult to claim that Apple is simply out to make great products to benefit the world, when it prices its products out of the reach of so many people.

Contrast that to all the companies who worked for decades to make cell phones ubiquitous around the world. The iPhone would have no market without the huge cellular infrastructure built up by other companies that were willing to take lower profit margins in order to encourage the spread of cell networks and phones.



Reinvestment in research is not a valid point in Apple's case.

Apple spends far less on R&D than any other major tech company, which is proof that focusing on very few products is a good way to get more bang for your buck.

For example, in 2006 Apple only spent $500 million on everything they did, including creating the iPhone. Microsoft spent $7 BILLION in 2007 and what came of it? (Note however, that MS is into far more fields than Apple is. They also publish a lot of their research.)

View attachment 350806

: Focus, focus baby!
: Money IS nothing if you spend it wrong. Focus help you prioritize.
: No wonder the average Canadian is richer than its USA counterpart nowadays, but USA IS still richer than Canada. WHY?
: The gap is wider in the USA. Again prioritize.

Not related, but a food for thought.
I wonder how much of those complaining about Apple in china ( how can Apple compete with the Google cartel, Microsoft cartel that made millions with the worst working condition while people made a blind eye for decades, only going after Nike or Coca-Cola ) will vote for Romney ( with his Swiss bank account to avoid taxes, and his desire to privatize social security and deny healthCare for millions )

 

[Rogifan]

Because the GOAL IS to lure people to its search engine.
: … To guess WHAT?
: MAKE MONEY!

There is nothing different between Google to Microsoft. They both sport the same biz model. Only Microsoft is run by accountants NOT engineers.

Really? If you sat down and interviewed Larry Page he'd tell you the mission statement of Google is to make money? We all know (including Mr Ive) that a company needs to be profitable to survive. But what CEO or company executive explicitly states making money as their company's goal? They don't. It's implied that if you run your business well and make products and services people want and will buy you'll make money and in many cases turn a profit. I really didn't think people could be so obtuse but I guess they can. Either that or they're just trolling.

----------

Design = drawing + engineering ( physics, biology, high math ).
Design is NOT scribbling.
If drawing is thinking, design is applied science.

I would consider design to be fine art + engineering. Unfortunately too many think of a designer as someone who slaps a coat of paint on something to make it look pretty (and I'm talking in general, not just Apple).

 

[kdarling]

: No wonder the average Canadian is richer than its USA counterpart nowadays, but USA IS still richer than Canada. WHY?

Among other important pieces, that study left out all the cash Americans have in their 401K and other retirement plans.

Not to mention the US is flooded with immigrants looking for a better life (I know Canada gets their share too), who as yet have relatively few holdings to increase their net "worth".

 

[heavy2healthy]

If it wasnt about profit then every apple product would offer more than just good enough specs so you are upgrading in 2 yrs. Its all about profit dont kid yourself and there is nothing wrong with that. They arent on some religious quest.

 

[Ochyandkaren]

Among other important pieces, that study left out all the cash Americans have in their 401K and other retirement plans.

Not to mention the US is flooded with immigrants looking for a better life (I know Canada gets their share too), who as yet have relatively few holdings to increase their net "worth".

Denial. It is sexy.
: Lets blame the immigrants.
: Fanny for a country of immigrants.

 

[boronathan]

If it wasnt about profit then every apple product would offer more than just good enough specs so you are upgrading in 2 yrs. Its all about profit dont kid yourself and there is nothing wrong with that. They arent on some religious quest.

Agreed. Of course Apple is aiming for profits. So is every Android oem. This is a great feel good story but a little fluffy.

 

[Ochyandkaren]

If it wasnt about profit then every apple product would offer more than just good enough specs so you are upgrading in 2 yrs. Its all about profit dont kid yourself and there is nothing wrong with that. They arent on some religious quest.

: People in the Vatican are laughing at you.

Creative people at Apple say that, i´ll believe that. I have Apple biz model as a proof. People who cherish ART, do value art more than money. And Apple products are work of art, and the purpose of ART goes beyond the material world.
: what is Left of the ancient Great civilizations: ART, not money, no politics.

----------

Agreed. Of course Apple is aiming for profits. So is every Android oem. This is a great feel good story but a little fluffy.

Minus Google which makes money selling you ads. AH! Humanity.
: No wonder people hate hippies in the USA, and as more greedy USA gets more decrepit its economy gets.
: WallStreet mentality win over.

 

[boronathan]

Minus Google.
: No wonder people hate hippies in the USA, and as more greedy USA gets more decrepit its economy gets.
: WallStreet mentality win over.

Google is not aiming for profits?

 

[Ochyandkaren]

Google is not aiming for profits?

: OfCourse it is! Why they want to destroy Apple ( flooding the world with cheap-cheapo and lure people to their search-engine ) ?

: looks like i failed being sarcastic.

 

[boronathan]

: OfCourse it is! Why they want to destroy Apple ( flooding the world with cheap-cheapo and lure people to their search-engine ) ?

: looks like i failed being sarcastic.

lol i apologize, usually I'm good at picking up sarcasm!

 

[antonis]

Because the GOAL IS to lure people to its search engine.
: … To guess WHAT?
: MAKE MONEY!

There is nothing different between Google to Microsoft. They both sport the same biz model. Only Microsoft is run by accountants NOT engineers.

I could not describe it better. That's exactly what it is. Therefore the results of their strategy are identical:

1. Uncontrolled licencing of their product. If you can buy it, you can use it for your devices. No terms applied.

2. Fragmentation. A huge one.

3. Security issues. Comes as a result of the 2 above points. If you don't care to protect it...someone will notice, eventually.

4. Poor user experience. Bloated UI.

 

[Jon the Heretic]

Myth

They supplied enough until the demand got too great for America to keep up. If you want jobs to come back to America, more people need to get in to hard sciences and technology. More Asian countries seem to be far ahead of us in this field.

I've been working in technology for nearly 2 decades and tell you there is NO shortage of top coders, engineers or scientists in the U.S. Actually, there is a glut, especially among more experienced engineers/scientists. However, MBA-run companies like HP or IBM want to purchase "talent" for as little money as possible, and so they use the H1B Visa program to increase the supply of lower cost labor and have sent millions of engineering and science jobs to India and China in order to procure people willing to work for less. You can't compete with the Chinese on salary because the yuan is kept artificially low and the Chinese state actually subsidizes American businesses out of their own pocket.

In other words, just as many specialist MDs make money hand over fist because of having high demand skills in a market where there are relatively few MDs (thanks to America's most successful lobby, the AMA), scientists and engineers should also be able to command a nice salary and live a good middle class life for the same reasons----only that doesn't happen any longer. Thanks to congressional lobbying and outright lies about a shortage, high tech companies are working around normal market forces to push salaries way, way down----McDonald's low. Great compensation for that PhD, huh?

There is a partial truth here too -- many lies have them -- in that not as many kids are going into the hard sciences as they used to, which means that CHEAPer inexperienced 'talent' is become scarcer. Big Tech actually prefers inexperienced people over experienced people because the MBAs can't see the difference because they aren't technical -- they can only see differences in shades of green. Less green is always better. Big Tech uses this trend to help lobby, successfully, for more and more H1B visas and tax credits to offshore workers and layoff more American workers. It's a vicious cycle created by Big Tech in the first place. Students are behaving rationally by avoiding the hard sciences and engineering because they know they are poor career decisions today, resulting in lower pay and poor job security compared to medicine or business. PhDs in engineering and science are very hard to obtain in the first place, and it's just not worth it. American kids know what's going on and are acting rationally to avoid the trap that many American experienced scientists and engineers are in today.

 

[theanimaster]

Interesting effect of having no down-votes. There are people here who have spoken their mind and have seen a great deal of support, rather than being down voted into oblivion.

It's good to see that, regardless of how pro-Apple I am.

 

[antonis]

Interesting effect of having no down-votes. There are people here who have spoken their mind and have seen a great deal of support, rather than being down voted into oblivion.

It's good to see that, regardless of how pro-Apple I am.

But downvoting didn't have any actual negative effect anyway.

IMHO, if there's an upvoting, there has to be a downvoting too, otherwise it's meaningless.

 

[RobertMartens]

what an incorrect statement. Every competitive company's goal is to maximize profits. Their goal is to make money.
Jonny is trying to make it look like Apple is different than any other company, when in it's definition it's the same as Samsung, RIM, Google etc, ... their goal is to make money.
Apple makes great products to get money, but money is still the main driving force.

Also, if a two-toned iPhone is their 'best work yet'.. then i'm unpleasantly surprised.

Why ask him how he thinks if you are going to disregard his answer.

This is one of the top men at the largest corporation and you are 'correcting' him

Thanks