10 reasons why Apple is bad for design (maybe)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

10 reasons why Apple is bad for design (maybe)



I know this may upset a few, naturally it is meant as a provocation and hopefully may spark some thinking

I know this may upset a few, naturally it is meant as a provocation and hopefully may spark some thinking



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



5 Embeds 182

http://www.scoop.it 156
http://www.linkedin.com 23
https://twitter.com 1 1
https://www.linkedin.com 1


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • Reminds me of a great Dostoevsky quote:
    There are three forces, the only three forces capable of conquering and enslaving forever the conscience of these weak rebels in the interests of their own happiness. They are: the miracle, the mystery and authority.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • Idea: prepare a ten-point slideshow on why egocentric mind-reading gurus are REALLY bad for design. Coming soon...
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • A self-proclaimed 'design guru' has this to say about this slideshow: 'The author confuses marketing with design and engineering. It is a really stupid piece. He is simply jealous of success.' Really made me laugh -and proud. That's exactly the type of reaction one is glad to receive from these 'experts'
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • You may like to read this: http://www.tnr.com/article/books-and-arts/magazine/100978/form-fortune-steve-jobs-philosopher
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

10 reasons why Apple is bad for design (maybe) 10 reasons why Apple is bad for design (maybe) Presentation Transcript

  • 10 reasons whyis bad for design
  • 1: Design attributions Apple’s design may be good (or not –see below), but too many people accept that the success of the company can be attributed to their design achievements Jobs, Ive and the media have reinforced this causal relation, underplaying the primary role of marketing and exaggerating the ancillary role of design Yet, many designers prefer to believe fabricated stories that attribute commercial http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/05/jonathan-ive-knighted/ success to ‘design strategies’
  • 2: The ‘inevitability’ illusion Apple’s successes largely depend on a system of ‘engineered anticipation’, while their failures go largely unnoticed -or are grossly underrated. Their product design escape objective evaluation and professional scrutiny. Critical views are non- existent or are rapidly dismissed as ‘dissenters’ of a higher cause. www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/9488354/New-iPhone-New-iPad- Rumours-drive-Apple-value-to-new-heights.html
  • 3: Sosumi: Double standards Apple has shown a double standard in regard to intellectual property. Jobs ‘borrowed’ many inventions from Xerox PARC and SRI in the 1980s and the company is well known by experts to improve existing technologies. Yet, Apple is the most active company launching patent battles against http://www.mbaonline.com/ Also see: http://www.androidauthority.com/patent-war-infographic-88534/ competitors.
  • 4: Stereotypes The corporate strategy of Apple has been built in building simplistic and ridicule stereotypes. Sadly, many in the design world have blindly adopted this worldview and equate the ‘creative type’ with buying Apple products. The irony is that “think different” becomes a way of conventional, uncritical conformism. http://www.apple.com
  • 5: Cult and rhetoric Indoctrination, delusion and infatuation of a leader’s personality have been very successful components in Apple’s commercial strategy. Apple fanatics are made believe that by buying these products they somehow ‘change the world’. Few people are critical of Apple’s revolutionaryhttp://www.world-and-local-news.com/2012/06/5-signs-that-apple-is-cult.html rhetoric.
  • 6: Greenwashing Apple is constantly questioned for its strategies, materials, suppliers and ‘sustainability’ claims. They have addressed some complaints, but the core of their strategy is “planned obsolescence”. Many corporations engage in these practices, but it is especially cynical coming from a company thathttp://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/apr/21/apple-least-green-tech-company markets itself in such metaphysical terms.
  • 7: Bubble Apple’s growth is unsustainable and the company is over-valued - this is 2012, check back in a few years. This is almost trivial from a design viewpoint, except that so many people are claiming that design can do miracles for any company who follows Apple’s example (see slide #1).mashable.com/2012/08/22/apple-is-ridiculously-valuable-infographic/
  • 8: (no) design contribution Besides setting superficial trends in product appearance, Apple design has made no substantial contribution to design. Jobs and Ive follow the modernist tradition, praising Bauhaus, Braun and Dieter Rams’s 50-year old principles. Their claims of “product essence” and “purity” are http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/8555503/Dieter-Rams- uncanny and lead to a Apple-has-achieved-something-I-never-did.html racist ideology of design and aesthetics.
  • 9: The designer is God Apple’s paternalistic view of design is becoming a paradigm in some design circles. In such conventional terms, the “user” doesn’t really know what he/she wants – and the designers’ superiority enable them to envision breakthrough ideas. Fortunately, participatory and co-creation methods have shown in the lasthttp://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/08/28/steve-jobs- decades that individuals and american-genius.html communities know better than any self-proclaimed genius.
  • 10: Gatekeeper Apple’s model of the Internet consists of an “app world” where they get to decide and approve what is made available to the users. This is not being challenged by most people, but it is as if back in the 1990s Mosaic and Netscape inspected every website before its publication.http://gawker.com/5809978/listen-to-richard-dreyfuss-make-apple-sound-evil Ludicrous.
  • Want more facts and arguments? Check Morozov’s article:http://www.tnr.com/article/books-and- arts/magazine/100978/form-fortune- steve-jobs-philosopher
  • http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/business/apples-tax-strategy-aims-at-low-tax-states-and-nations.html
  • http://vator.tv/news/2010-04-05-ipad-launch-weekend-news-round-up
  • http://theredlist.fr/wiki-2-24-224-267-view-fiction-profile-adam-eve.html