New Video Pits iPhone Click Wheel Prototype Against Scott Forstall's Icon-Based iPhone Prototype

[840quadra]

Thank got Tim wasn't apple's CEO when they decided between touch OS and click wheel OS. I'm pretty sure his choice would be the safe, dull , boring click wheel.

I disagree. There have been quite a few unsafe choices made under his control, some work good, others are questionable

• Mac Pro Cylinder
• 3D / Force Touch
• Apple Watch
• iPad pro
• Removal of headphone jack
• Touchbar
• Removal of legacy ports on Macbook, and new MacBook Pro
• Removal of the glowing apple logo on new laptops
• Apple Music subscription service
• New AppleTV Remote
• IOS 7+

While many of these items could fall under job's 5 years of products (quoted many times after his death), it's sufficiently clear (IMO) that playing it safe really isn't something that Tim does.

 

[smacrumon]

i LOVE PROTOTYPES!

The are the best insights to how people think.

This is great.

Have a lovely day y'all!

 

[Thunderhawks]

Hindsight is 20/20. But we don't know how it really went down and who ultimately had all the information and made the final decision (usually the CEO.) Do we know for a fact that Forstall said it was good to go at time of release (we know he did publicly but what about privately?) Maybe Tim was pushing to release but Forstall fought it then it flopped.

Also I found it interesting he would not sign the so called apology. This is something Jobs would never do and maybe he felt it was anti-Apple.

I had a sign in my office saying:

In every company there is a person who knows what is going on.
This person MUST be fired!

Seen that fit a lot of times, including for me.

 

[Glideslope]

More proof that Tim Cook is clueless for firing Scott Forstall.

As is we really needed more proof?

I can't wait for the reasons to become public some day. People will see the real TC for the hypocrite he is.
[doublepost=1484156869][/doublepost]

Forstall had a great vision for iOS. I really did like iOS 6 and before. It had a snappy feel to it. Apple wanted to progress. We can also speculate why Forstall was fired, but ultimately no one here knows. And it's not really our business. It's clear that Apple had a different vision for iOS, hence the iOS 7 overhaul. Did it make it feel slower? Yes. Did it change the look of almost the entire OS? Sure. But iOS is very good for what it is. We don't know if iOS would have been better or worse with Forstall continuing and not being fired. Do I miss iOS 6 feel? Sure. But I'm excited to see what iOS 11 brings us.

Please don't speak for everyone.

 

[Apple 26.2]

I said it recently and I'll say it again... I still love with the design of the original iPhone.

 

[Rafterman]

Early prototypes of devices are always fascinating.

 

[meetajhu]

Forstall always looked like a team player.

 

[kdarling]

Early prototypes of devices are always fascinating.

Ditto for UIs. Like the much rougher test version of the iPhone UI shown below, which for secrecy is supposedly all that the hardware developers were allowed to see. (It looks sort of Star Trek -ish, to me.)

 

[farewelwilliams]

non compete clauses are illegal in the state of California.

did not know that which is weird because every single startup contract i received (8 of them) had a non-compete clause in them. didn't sign any of them because of it.
[doublepost=1484161725][/doublepost]

There was never any master plan. Forstall was fired because he stepped on one too many toes and Cook is all about streamlining and stability, being the operations guy that he is. Jobs was eager to preserve the fragile peace between Apple's number one software guy, Forstall, and his design counterpart, Ive, so he picked Cook to keep both of their egos in check. Cook probably soon realized that he wasn't up to the job and one of the two had to go if Apple were to move forward so he pinned the Maps debacle on Forstall and ousted him.

Forstall's reputation would make it hard for him to get a job in Silicon Valley where he isn't the top dog. It's not weird if you think about it. If Forstall does come back, it won't be because of some master plan of Cook's but rather that Apple has waken up and smelt the coffee.

I know. it's a weird theory.

But the closest person to be considered as a "product" person is jony, and that newly created position "CDO" smells like one step in the direction of retirement. Even Steve said Tim Cook is not a product person. Forstall however is a product person.

 

[25ghosts]

Letting Forstall go was about as bad as Steve's passing.

Tim Cook would have Fired Steve Jobs too had it not been for the fact that Steve headed the company. But had someone else been Steve Jobs and Steve Jobs an Employee like Scott, Tim Cook would have fired him too...

Perhaps NOT pleasant to work with but neither was Steve, according to many who worked with him, nevertheless for us users Steve and Scott are the reasons why Apple exists today. Mr. Cook and those to follow will drive this company in to the ground like a good old fence pole !

 

[Asarien]

More proof that Tim Cook is clueless for firing Scott Forstall.

Remember this wonderful hire?

 

[slimothy]

As is we really needed more proof?

I can't wait for the reasons to become public some day. People will see the real TC for the hypocrite he is.
[doublepost=1484156869][/doublepost]

Please don't speak for everyone.

The irony is that you're speaking for everyone by asking me not to speak for everyone. You don't have to agree, feel free to type up your own post with thoughts. This is a forum.

 

[cosmichobo]

So, you're designing a product head to head to put up to show Steve Jobs... and you decide to go with Dark Blue Buttons With Black Text... Seriously?? Yes, sure, someone like Steve would no doubt see past that, at the actual interface itself rather than its aesthetics... but - seriously?! I'm no graphic designer, but even I know that's a poor choice.

 

[cmichaelb]

Funny how people believe they know the person when they never have spoken to them.

Regardless of why Forstall left the company, it would be interesting if he returned to help innovate or at least shake the boat a little. Again, I don't know, but I think Apple needs something.

I remember a few times when I was working in teams for projects. There was always a few or one person who was a pain in the A**. If you got rid of them, the team seem to be missing something, even though that person the team would rather not have on the team.

I believe this was the case with Forstall. The mix worked, but without Jobs to manage the animals, it probably got out-of-hand.

If Forstall was back at Apple...minus the schisms..

Humm...maybe..

Kind of like Jobs time in the wilderness before he was brought back. Interesting idea.
[doublepost=1484171364][/doublepost]

It's impossible to imagine why anyone would go to the trouble to code the one on the left.

Not really if you think about the time frame. An iPod like interface that many were used to already would seem plausible. Looking back it's easy to see but probably not so much then.

 

[Wowereit]

No one specifically can identify the exact reasons for his departure, but I do believe Forstall had an ego that affected his relationships with Cook and Company, which put him in a tight corner until his leave.

Product-focused ******* who doesn't care if somebody hates him if it's necessary to get the job done.
Seems to be exactly the right type of senior executive for Apple.

 

[whiteboytrash]

I gotta say…it took some huge foresight and BALLS to choose the touchscreen design. Sure, we know now where it evolved to, but that a/b demo really puts things into perspective. And 99 out of 100 CEO's would've chosen the UI on the right (click wheel).

Safari Pad already exsisted in the labs so it wasn't that hard or a choice.

 

[Wowereit]

I disagree. There have been quite a few unsafe choices made under his control, some work good, others are questionable

• Mac Pro Cylinder The product itself wasn't a safe bet but calling changes in a product that might make up 0.2% of revenue a risk?
• 3D / Force Touch How is that considered a risk? It's not a main method of input, just a alternative. If it doesn't stick people can ignore it, which quite frankly many of my friends do.
• Apple Watch Agree, although it was a small one. To lose: some R&D cost. To win: a entirely new market.
• iPad pro Introducing a higher tier iPad with additional features (okay, more like one additional feature) for a higher price isn't a risky thing.
• Removal of headphone jack 100% true, that was a huge risk.
• Touchbar 100% true. I still wonder why they first introduced it with the new MBP. Personally would've started with a consumer device because they probably won't care about their F-keys as much as some groups of professionals who use them constantly.
• Removal of legacy ports on Macbook, and new MacBook Pro True, but I think they covered themselves a bit by releasing 12" MacBook first. 12" MacBook was a guinea pig for the new MBPs in multiple ways.
• Removal of the glowing apple logo on new laptops Most people aren't seriously complaining about this, that's just a nostalgia thing. Even critics of this decision admit that it didn't influence their decision at the end.
• Apple Music subscription service True.
• New AppleTV Remote It's just a remote...
• IOS 7+ True.

While many of these items could fall under job's 5 years of products (quoted many times after his death), it's sufficiently clear (IMO) that playing it safe really isn't something that Tim does.

 

[Glideslope]

The irony is that you're speaking for everyone by asking me not to speak for everyone. You don't have to agree, feel free to type up your own post with thoughts. This is a forum.

I did post my thoughts.

 

[B4U]

The sad part is, Cook would apologize for the maps screwed up but would not accept the fault for letting Forstall go...

 

[jon3543]

Not really if you think about the time frame. An iPod like interface that many were used to already would seem plausible. Looking back it's easy to see but probably not so much then.

Emulating a physical iPod with that awkward wheel thing I never liked and the associated interface entirely in software for a touch device was an obviously wrong idea even back then. The whole idea behind touch is to manipulate UI elements directly instead of by some indirect, idiosyncratic method.

 

[lympero]

I disagree. There have been quite a few unsafe choices made under his control, some work good, others are questionable

• Mac Pro Cylinder
  With no support for 3+ years seems he was forced 5 that and not really believe it
  
• 3D / Force Touch
  This is just an evolution of touch screen. Nothing new here.
  
• Apple Watch
  Reaction to other companies which they have already introduced smartwatches.
  
• iPad pro
  He chose the safe option to ship it with mobile OS. The unsafe option was to ship it with osX - MacOS.
  
• Removal of headphone jack
  Removal from iPhone but not for MacBook. Give iPhone headphones which can't be used on macs. Ship beats headphones with usb c. This is just a mess.
  
• Touchbar
  Again the safe option. The unsafe option would be the touch screen for mac.
  
• Removal of legacy ports on Macbook, and new MacBook Pro
  This is the only thing which I agree with you.
  
• Removal of the glowing apple logo on new laptops
  Totally aesthetic and not worth mentioning.
  
• Apple Music subscription service
  Again reaction to market (Spotify)
  
• New AppleTV Remote
  Evolution of existing Apple remote. Nothing unsafe here.
  
• IOS 7+
  An redesign after 5-6 years of the same iOS seems natural to me.
  

While many of these items could fall under job's 5 years of products (quoted many times after his death), it's sufficiently clear (IMO) that playing it safe really isn't something that Tim does.

 

[jgdeschamps]

Again, Steve Jobs is a marketing guy. This is the guy that many of you keep praising while criticizing marketing. Ironic.

He was a "products" guy. That's what he was into, according to him. The marketing department helped him sell the creations, aligned to his vision of the product.

 

[slimothy]

I did post my thoughts.

Read the whole message

 

[cmichaelb]

Emulating a physical iPod with that awkward wheel thing I never liked and the associated interface entirely in software for a touch device was an obviously wrong idea even back then. The whole idea behind touch is to manipulate UI elements directly instead of by some indirect, idiosyncratic method.

I always thought it worked well especially once it was touch sensitive and didn't need to move. It just seems like a logicial progression to try that and see how it worked. Thankfully they realized it would be terrible for a phone.

 

[rudychidiac]

Everyone? I beg your pardon? Skeuomorphic design has always had an ardent following and Ive's form over function philosophy had already been drawing criticism before their spat became public.

Do you think Scott was fired because of "skeuomorphism"?
And do you think Scott wasn't going to work on a new UI for iOS?
LOL.