Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The dissolution of Apple’s legacy design team

fastcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 330 posts

Re: The dissolution of Apple’s legacy design team

#141

Post by ajross »

ballenf wrote: post #24
scyzoryk_xyz wrote: post #9

That bit about the firing of the designer who used the river metaphor in that email is such a good lesson for anyone: Never ever ever ever announce moves like this if there is still money on the table that can still be taken away from you. No matter how awesome your company is, how great the team, product or how wonderful the atmosphere is. This guy thought he wrote a heartfelt goodbye to his beloved team and was ins…

I just don't buy that the river metaphor wasn't about Apple. It just doesn't make sense unless he was retiring or leaving design entirely. Otherwise the lack of water is clearly related to Apple. If it really was solely about himself it's a really poor metaphor. So the river is moving to a new mountain? And the river's lack of water has nothing to do with the current one? Or, the mountain (Apple) has plenty of water…

> If it really was solely about himself it's a really poor metaphor.

The point of the story was that he was fired for what very well might have been a poor metaphor. I mean, even taking your point as a prior and assuming that the guy was clearly saying that Apple's design primacy was fading as he announced his retirement... why is that a termination-worthy act?

I mean, yeah, he was firing some mildly poetic shots at his employer. Who among us, as it were. That quote was a little bit of passive aggression. Firing him was an act of deliberate malice.

Re: The dissolution of Apple’s legacy design team

#142

Post by ejj28 »

ghaff wrote: post #86
deanCommie wrote: post #76

> Stringer found the HomePod dissatisfying because Apple treated it as a hobby, depriving it of the cross-division focus it lavished on core products, such as the iPhone and iPad. I mean...yeah? iPod, iPhone and iPad are Apple's whole 21st century legacy. And most recently, arguably Apple Watch and EarPods. They all have the same thing in common - they're wearables that you see on the person on the street. Apple is a…

I partly agree. But what makes the iPhone so sticky is ecosystem--and that includes a bunch of other products that might be a lot less interesting in isolation.

Indeed. I'm a staunch Android user, but I seriously envy iPhone users for the Apple Watch. Nobody else has put the same level of care and resources into their smartwatch and if it wasn't for a myriad of personal dealbreakers I have with Apple products, I'd be tempted to switch to iPhone to be able to have an Apple Watch.

Re: The dissolution of Apple’s legacy design team

#143

Post by matwood »

Octoth0rpe wrote: post #95
duped wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAUI that setup is not possible with an M1 Mac today. You can only use one external display.

That is true only of the 13" m1 Pro, and the 13" m1 macbook air. The 14" m1 mbp, 16" m1 mbp, the m1 mac mini, and m1 studio all support more than 1 external display.

Yeah, the 13” ‘pro’ is simply a bad name. No idea why they kept it around. All the other pros support 2 or more monitors depending on model.

Re: The dissolution of Apple’s legacy design team

#144

Post by laserlight »

KptMarchewa wrote: post #74
protastus wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone in a leadership position has a responsibility to measure their words carefully, especially in a farewell email. "Sadly, rivers dry out, and when they do, you look for a new one." broadcasts extreme negativity to the people who remain. It almost reads like a cautionary warning followed by advice. One can write a heartfelt goodbye without ambiguity. Assuming the ambiguity was unintentional, the author was carele…

>broadcasts extreme negativity to the people who remain ...which was immediately proven right by execs who fired him.

Firing is almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy. It signaled that misinterpretation is the right interpretation.

Re: The dissolution of Apple’s legacy design team

#145

Post by gnicholas »

sangnoir wrote: post #114
gnicholas wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think part of the reason they sold insanely expensive Apple Watches is that they wanted to compete with luxury watches. Of course, the functionality is very different; the similarity is that both are methods of conspicuous consumption. I’m not an Apple Watch fan myself (still clutching my Pebble for dear life), but I can understand why the uber-expensive Apple Watches would appeal to a certain audience.

> I can understand why the uber-expensive Apple Watches would appeal to a certain audience. I never could understand why Apple (or anyone else) this would be a possibility. Luxury watches are almost synonymous with heirloom; there is no way anyone will be wearing a functional Gold Apple watch in 2085 with the anecdote "This was my dad's watch" - it would be hopelessly outdated, and likely non-functional by then. This…

I agree that they won’t be heirlooms, and old money folks would never be fooled into thinking they would.

But a lot of people wear luxury watches simply to show off how much disposable income they have. To these people, having a watch that is recognizably expensive is the only requirement.

Re: The dissolution of Apple’s legacy design team

#146

Post by DrewADesign »

illwrks wrote: post #137
DrewADesign wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vindictive? Artists? BS. You're clearly extrapolating on an unfounded assumption. I'm an adult art student getting a BFA as part of a career change and have known hundreds of artists and designers over the years. Firstly, there is no unifying culture among even large subsets of artists, let alone artists in general. Secondly, claiming that artists in general are vindictive is flat-out absurd.

I took it to mean artists/designers in a corporate setting where it's a bit more cutthroat.

Beyond never having heard anyone conflate the terms 'artist' and 'corporate designer,' the sentiment would still be wrong. I've worked in corporate software projects as a developer, designer, support person, project manager, QA engineer, and even IT/Ops guy and would rank designers, on a whole, somewhere near last in terms of likeliness to be vindictive. Sales? Management? Even support? Sure.

You can have vindictive jerks in any job, but considering that design's fundamental purpose is to empathize with people and manifest that it some medium, vindictive people tend to filter themselves out.

Re: The dissolution of Apple’s legacy design team

#147

Post by SllX »

thoms_a wrote: post #135
mickelsen wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh man, those trailers with him speaking are the stuff I MISS the most, it was the last reminder of that old Apple now that keynotes and product launch commercials are so bland and boring I don't even bother to watch them anymore.

As a counterpoint, I bought my first iPhone (first ever Apple product) this week, and it was specifically because it seems like Apple is finally designing products with usability and functionality as their top priority. Ive was great, but he was way too much of an artist to understand that computers are mostly tools. Ive was more interested in folding katanas and the process of creation than the mundane design of a p…

I think he understood perfectly that computers were tools.

The PowerBook/MacBook Pro designs up through 2016, the MacBook Air from 2010 onwards, the Power Macs G3-G5/Macs Pro through 2013 and the 2019 Mac Pro, the iBook/MacBook line through 2011, and the entirety of the iMac’s history all reflect a recognition that computers are fundamentally tools. They just held the conceit that tools can also be beautiful.

But yes, sometime between Job’s death and 2017, the wheels just completely fell off when they introduced new Mac designs, and they spent the better part of the last 5 years putting them back on after Ive was promoted into the sky and left the company.

Re: The dissolution of Apple’s legacy design team

#148

Post by topicseed »

wincy wrote: post #32
ballenf wrote: post #25

At work, the new MacBooks with HDMI are trickling in and I've never seen so much excitement around a laptop. People (mostly Product people) just giddy they don't need a dongle to connect to screens. I didn't realize how much people hate dongles.

I mean, I buy a dongle and maybe it’ll support 1080p, maybe 1440p, maybe 4K? Who knows! The Amazon review certainly won’t tell you, the company selling it to you will lie through their teeth. You won’t find out until you’re plugging it in (probably during a presentation) It’s just so much fun playing dongle roulette.

This made me laugh too much. It's true on so many levels with anything I bought recently on Amazon.

Re: The dissolution of Apple’s legacy design team

#149

Post by eastbound »

burnished wrote: post #131
KptMarchewa wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually like that I can connect everything - keyboard, mouse, two monitors, headphones, power, ethernet via one thunderbolt cable. What I'd hate is the fact that I'd have to unplug everything and take this dock with me if I wanted to connect in the conference room.

Wait what? How are you doing that? I want this thing so my laptop can be more easily unplugged and stop being a stylish desktop pc

The legendary dongle! The one that serves as a docking station! I’ve heard of this one, a major company here has it. Even for them, they had their IT team to research it, and it’s valued $300 on the internal resale forum.

So, the magic dongle that delivers the USB-C dream is ultra expensive and rare and only worth finding if you have 6000 employees to provide.

Re: The dissolution of Apple’s legacy design team

#150

Post by ascar »

scyzoryk_xyz wrote: post #9

That bit about the firing of the designer who used the river metaphor in that email is such a good lesson for anyone: Never ever ever ever announce moves like this if there is still money on the table that can still be taken away from you. No matter how awesome your company is, how great the team, product or how wonderful the atmosphere is. This guy thought he wrote a heartfelt goodbye to his beloved team and was ins…

Can someone explain to me how you can fire someone that already declared to leave and do financial damage to the employee with that?

I guess it's some clause of a vesting schedule that gets triggered when being fired and he already declared his resignation before his shares were vested, but they would've been after his last day?

I find it so weird that he already quit the job but the company could actually save money by firing him. Shouldn't something except fear of a bad reputation prevent this kind of move to do actual damage?

Post reply on HN