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

Apple's aesthetic dichotomy (2011)

madebymany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 31 posts

Re: Apple's aesthetic dichotomy (2011)

#11

Post by kemiller »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #5
kemiller wrote: post #2

I dunno, it sort of reminds me of the Beatles (another Jobs favorite). John being serious and political, Paul being silly and saccharine. The combination was part of the magic, and everyone had their favorite. I think if you fully digitalized the software, the overall package would be too severe. If you made the hardware whimsical, it would be sickening. Part of it is that the hardware is a fixed thing. You have it o…

Nokia's phones show some signs of whimsy. I think you are right about the severity of all tech design, but I'm not convinced hardware can't be whimsical.

Oh, I'm not either. But you'll note that Nokia runs Windows and Symbian, which are pretty much both all-business. They also carry a lot more models, which broadens the scope for the hardware.

Re: Apple's aesthetic dichotomy (2011)

#12

Post by jamesbritt »

joe_the_user wrote: post #7
rys wrote: post #3

I read these articles bemoaning Apple's skeuomorphic application UIs, usually evoking the spirit of Dieter Rams to put their point across. In this instance it's classed as "horrific, dishonest and childish crap". I understand the strong feelings of dislike, but I'd much rather be pointed towards alternative designs or even better alternative apps as a means to get away from the designs. Malady without remedy never si…

Yes. Reading this I had a sudden flash why Apple might just be right. The thing is that modern phones and computers are getting to the point where they can display texture to good effect. Textures are very pleasant, comforting things to add to the UI of an application. Yet what other way is there to integrate texture effects besides using images of familiar physical materials? Images of physical materials leverages o…

Yet what other way is there to integrate texture effects besides using images of familiar physical materials? Images of physical materials leverages our intuitions of the physical world.

How do people acquire their intuitions of the physical world? By interacting with it. Likewise with computers and software.

Better to to develop appropriate intuitions based on the thing you're actually using than to rely on increasingly outdated analogs.

Re: Apple's aesthetic dichotomy (2011)

#13

Post by recoiledsnake »

joe_the_user wrote: post #7
rys wrote: post #3

I read these articles bemoaning Apple's skeuomorphic application UIs, usually evoking the spirit of Dieter Rams to put their point across. In this instance it's classed as "horrific, dishonest and childish crap". I understand the strong feelings of dislike, but I'd much rather be pointed towards alternative designs or even better alternative apps as a means to get away from the designs. Malady without remedy never si…

Yes. Reading this I had a sudden flash why Apple might just be right. The thing is that modern phones and computers are getting to the point where they can display texture to good effect. Textures are very pleasant, comforting things to add to the UI of an application. Yet what other way is there to integrate texture effects besides using images of familiar physical materials? Images of physical materials leverages o…

Here's some analysis of Metro's alternative approach.

http://www.riagenic.com/archives/487

http://www.riagenic.com/archives/493

http://www.riagenic.com/archives/526

Re: Apple's aesthetic dichotomy (2011)

#14

Post by aufreak3 »

I, for one, am for more realworldness like this on these devices (not misplaced realworldness though).

Given that an iPad can morph into so many things that were formerly analog - books, synthesizers, effects boxes, instruments, the calendar, address book, notebook, etc. - it is quite comforting to distinguish these roles based on the physical features of their real world cousins if possible.

The traditional computer's interface put many, um, "interface" barriers between you and the thing you were supposed to be manipulating - keyboard, mice, gui in particular. With these touch devices, the barrier feels smaller and in some cases so good as to be non-existent - i.e. our natural ability to figure out things in the real world by poking and prodding is what is being carried over into the digital world this time.

SJ said "it feels great to be able to touch your music" (or something like that) when he showed cover flow on the iphone. What purpose does "touching your music" serve? The answer is right there in SJ's statement. If you show a texture on the iPad's screen, we probably feel it in some way when we touch it despite the absence of the tactile sensation.

Re: Apple's aesthetic dichotomy (2011)

#15

Post by barista »

laibert wrote: post #4

While my personal opinion regarding skeumorphic design falls very much in line with the author's, I don't think that there is a contradiction in Apple's design philosophy. The hardware is minimal because its true purpose is to let the software shine. It's a magical box that can become anything, from a calendar to a photobooth to a music studio. Apple's visual design choices in software have always seemed to fall unde…

Besides people have proved that they like Apple's approach to design. Whatever the philosophy is, if it has succeeded in the marketplace isn't it superior?

Re: Apple's aesthetic dichotomy (2011)

#16

Post by barista »

kemiller wrote: post #11
SoftwareMaven wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nokia's phones show some signs of whimsy. I think you are right about the severity of all tech design, but I'm not convinced hardware can't be whimsical.

Oh, I'm not either. But you'll note that Nokia runs Windows and Symbian, which are pretty much both all-business. They also carry a lot more models, which broadens the scope for the hardware.

What makes you think Windows is all business? In fact it's the most social phone out there.

Re: Apple's aesthetic dichotomy (2011)

#17

Post by barista »

rys wrote: post #3

I read these articles bemoaning Apple's skeuomorphic application UIs, usually evoking the spirit of Dieter Rams to put their point across. In this instance it's classed as "horrific, dishonest and childish crap". I understand the strong feelings of dislike, but I'd much rather be pointed towards alternative designs or even better alternative apps as a means to get away from the designs. Malady without remedy never si…

I think the article concludes with a pointer to the metro or whatever its called today UI that Microsoft introduced with Windows 8. That is the remedy you are looking for.

Re: Apple's aesthetic dichotomy (2011)

#19

Post by overcyn »

barista wrote: post #15
laibert wrote: post #4

While my personal opinion regarding skeumorphic design falls very much in line with the author's, I don't think that there is a contradiction in Apple's design philosophy. The hardware is minimal because its true purpose is to let the software shine. It's a magical box that can become anything, from a calendar to a photobooth to a music studio. Apple's visual design choices in software have always seemed to fall unde…

Besides people have proved that they like Apple's approach to design. Whatever the philosophy is, if it has succeeded in the marketplace isn't it superior?

People have proved that they like Apple's products. Skeumorphism is but a fraction of the entire user experience.

Re: Apple's aesthetic dichotomy (2011)

#20

Post by terryven »

laibert wrote: post #4

While my personal opinion regarding skeumorphic design falls very much in line with the author's, I don't think that there is a contradiction in Apple's design philosophy. The hardware is minimal because its true purpose is to let the software shine. It's a magical box that can become anything, from a calendar to a photobooth to a music studio. Apple's visual design choices in software have always seemed to fall unde…

Au contraire, people buy iOS for the beautiful hardware. Apple hosts mainstream events to reveal new hardware, not new software. Their most famous designer, Jony Ive, is a hardware man. At most you reduce the relationship to an equal partnership. But Apple's attempts to reduce software sales to commodities clearly shows that they consider software as intended to make the hardware shine.
Post reply on HN