
On Jony Ive Leaving Apple - deca6cda37d0
https://daringfireball.net/2019/06/jony_ive_leaves_apple
======
n1000
To me it seems like somebody is afraid to make a tough decision. There have
been indications that Ive wants to get out for quite a while. So they offered
him more and more to make him stay. As the article says, they promoted his
C-level job to a A-level one. They gave him ever more freedom, power, and
probably money. Now came the point where his willingness to leave became too
big. The obvious choice would have been a full divorce. Of course that is
hard. But now Apple is basically outsourcing one of its core competences,
product design. That is both dangerous and embarrassing for such an iconic
company.

~~~
dbbk
> But now Apple is basically outsourcing one of its core competences, product
> design.

The leadership of the design team is still in place. All Jony has been in
recent years is essentially a Creative Director overseeing them. It's not like
all of Apple's product design is now being handled by an outside company.

~~~
bayareanative
Yes, although IDEO could probably do a better job.

------
povertyworld
Everyone is talking about the keyboards, but I want to know about the Mac
Pros. I'm assuming Ive is responsible for the cylinder, but is he involved in
the return to the cheese grater, or did that happen while he was off designing
glass doors at the Apple building? The keyboards aren't the first stinker on
Ive's watch.

~~~
mantap
Learned helplessness runs wild at Apple. If you listen to them, they say that
with the trashcan they had "designed themselves into a corner", and that's why
it took them six years to design a new enclosure. As if it is beyond the
capabilities of one of the world's richest and most powerful corporations to
design a new enclosure every year.

The trashcan Mac Pro was OK. The design was perhaps uninspired but it did
provide adequate cooling for the 2013 Xeons that they were using. It so
transpired that the design did not provide ample cooling for Intel's recent
CPUs. But so what? Just change it.

The actual problem with the 2013 Mac Pro was operational. They decided to
build it in the US. They made a big, high-tech factory with a large degree of
automation. That's a great way to build a high volume product. It's a terrible
way to build a $3000 niche computer.

~~~
ksec
>The actual problem with the 2013 Mac Pro was operational. They decided to
build it in the US. They made a big, high-tech factory with a large degree of
automation. That's a great way to build a high volume product. It's a terrible
way to build a $3000 niche computer.

Which is why I think the recent Apple has Tim Cook's operational focus all
over it. They couldn't close it down but they had to sell it as long as they
could trying to amortised the cost. Same with MacBook Pro Keyboard, they were
stubborn and cost focus to try and itch out another generation. Just because
of the cost involved.

You could see Steve Jobs doing it differently, bring an MBP home to use it, (
As he used to call himself low cost Beta Tester ) saw the problem himself,
demand it be fixed within 4 weeks, or get a new team to design a new Keyboard.

I think he cares about product quality way more than numbers on balance sheet.
He might publicly dismiss it, ( very likely ), but quietly he would have the
team working on a new keyboard and ship it, only to sliently provide extended
warranty to MBP at a later date.

~~~
pas
This cost minimization seems quite strange when every year people were anxious
for a new Pro. How hard it is to make the trashcan bigger and put in more
airflow? (Bigger fans with the same RPM.)

And sure, it might cost some, but Tim should count lost profit (opportunity
costs) too.

~~~
ksec
>How hard it is to make the trashcan bigger and put in more airflow? (Bigger
fans with the same RPM.)

My guess is that because they tried to manufacture and assemble in US, so they
had very high automation for the TrashCan, which also meant these automation
are likely not flexible enough to change the design. I don't think the Mac Pro
was about cost though. Because Mac Pro unit shipment would not have made up
for that investment anyway. I think it was merely an exercise for Apple's
operational supply chain. And Apple's design team had lack of time and had to
focus on many other more important issues. That was why it took so long.
Basically the design department in Apple were not scaleable.

~~~
pas
Design bandwidth limitation is pretty plausible. (I have no idea how hard it
is to change automation, but my guess is not _that_ hard/expensive. After all
assembly robots are not custom built, they are probably programmed like the
simpler CNC machines.)

Plus on top of that probably in Apple's hivemind the cost of coming out with
something bad is more than the opportunity cost of missed profit.

------
jph
Suppose you're Jony Ive, and you've designed so much for Apple-- computers,
fonts, even Apple Park-- what would entice you to leave?

I speculate his reason must be to design something massively popular, that so
many people in the world touch every day, that blends computers and
architecture. And that his reason must a project so big that it can't
reasonably fit inside Apple Park, both in terms of physical space and in terms
of manufacturing partnerships where the team must be on site.

I speculate he's leaving Apple to design the Apple car.

Replies: 1) If Ive wanted to retire, I'd expect he could; he has mountains of
money, and has achieved tremendous success in the marketplace. 2) If Ive were
forced out, I'd expect an announcement akin to "will serve as an advisor to
CEO Tim Cook", not "founding an agency with Apple as a client". 3) Why leave
now? Because Apple just bought a big piece of the car project, Drive.ai.

~~~
CharlesW
> _I speculate he 's leaving Apple to design the Apple car._

If you think Gruber is correct ("You’re either at Apple or you’re not" rings
very true to me), Ive is done with Apple. The completion of Apple Park
represents the culmination of his transition to architecture.

~~~
christoph
The problem becomes where he would go (that is, what he would build) next.
He's designed the HQ of one of the biggest companies in the world down to the
smallest details. A company so deeply intertwined with his own persona and
DNA. Bizarrely, I can see him somewhat disappearing off into the sunset - he
might still do some design work when he chooses and have some passion
projects, but outside of Apple, it's deadlines, limitless budgets, ability to
acquire anything it deems necessary, etc. maybe he's achieved all he wants to?

~~~
mrep
> _Bizarrely_

Why Bizarrely? The guy is probably worth millions if not tens of millions. He
can probably live a lavish life off of 4% gains for the rest of his life and
there is nothing wrong with that.

~~~
christoph
I would guess hundreds of millions, if not way more. I'm sure his salary was
reported as being $30m base + $25m stock per year back in 2011.

I said bizarrely because in these situations the media & general public seem
to always think that people like this can't survive without work. The guy is
undoubtedly incredibly passionate about design and almost certainly a
workaholic. The grandparent is talking about him going on design the future of
automobiles - maybe, maybe not. It felt like I was suggesting something
against the grain, which was why I prefaced it with "bizarrely".

------
olliej
I share his concerns about not appointing a C level design executive. You need
design (at Apple) to not be cost driven

~~~
UIZealot
Jony Ive had been the CDO for years and the results weren't great. It's not
that Jony Ive isn't a great designer. It's just that it's difficult to judge
your own work, no matter how good you are.

What they need, more than a CDO, is someone who they have to run every design
by, someone (EDIT: with an impeccable eye) who is not afraid to say no. In
other words, someone who can fill the role Steve Jobs used to play.

I, for one, nominate the great John Siracusa, for this job.

See
[http://hypercritical.co/fatbits/2009/05/06/hypercritical](http://hypercritical.co/fatbits/2009/05/06/hypercritical)

~~~
unethical_ban
Why isn't that Cook?

Without knowing Apple internally, the point is that the staff under the COO
(if the "C"s have their own divisions) are the back office, the accounting,
HR, IT, and other shared services accross an organization. There isn't
necessarily creativity as a mission.

~~~
olliej
Cook doesn't (and recognizes that he doesn't) have the necessary design eye.

I think I agree with @UIZealot that there's a need for a design approval that
isn't directly involved in the design process, e.g. the SJ world would
presumably have SJ saying yes/no to Jony, but in the post-SJ world it was Jony
saying yes/no to essentially just Jony. I assume those decisions would be
fairly one sided :D

------
Isamu
>Today’s MacBooks are worse computers but more beautiful devices than the ones
they replaced. Is that directly attributable to Jony Ive? With these keyboards
in particular, I believe the answer is yes.

Until now design was king at Apple. Will his departure bring balance back, or
will design lose out to the other teams?

~~~
minikites
>Until now design was king at Apple.

Was it? Design is "how it works" and Apple products have been "working" a lot
less lately (cylinder Mac Pro with no room for future processors, laptop
keyboards, two different kinds of Pencil depending on which iPad you have,
etc).

~~~
mod
In this situation, design is not "how it works" IMO.

------
mc32
Gruber is trying to read the tea leaves, but I think he's overconfident in his
read. Also, I really don't get the Monday Night quarterbacking that's evident
throughout his whole piece. Maybe he's upset, maybe he's held back and now
feels free to offer opinion --but I think it's just that. An abrupt opinion.

That said, I wonder who Apple will try to snatch? Who are some other good
designers out there? MS has some nice HW design. Google to me does not. Nokia?
I'm sure there are some others, but can't think of any ATM.

~~~
hn_throwaway_99
I'd don't really agree with what you and many other commenters seem to be
saying that Gruber is "Monday Night quarterbacking" or bashing Ive. I mean, he
says Ive is a "preternaturally talented designer" but that post Jobs that
"software design has declined and hardware gone wonky." Does anyone really
disagree with that statement? Ive is amazing but Ive and Jobs were magic.

I think the bigger thrust of Gruber's piece is his closing sentence, with
which I wholeheartedly agree: "I don’t worry that Apple is in trouble because
Jony Ive is leaving; I worry that Apple is in trouble because he’s not being
replaced."

~~~
mc32
I have a different take. How can he on the one hand say he’s supernatural but
on the other imply he’s quite replaceable (but Apple’s mistake is not
replacing him).

I don’t get the abnormal bashing _now_. He’s had some mild criticism before
but now suddenly there have been intractable issues since Jobs died. It comes
across as opportunistic and makes me doubt him.

~~~
sooheon
A differently/less gifted replacement is better than no replacement. My
understanding is that now, the software and hardware design teams both report
to the COO. Gruber rightly points out that this structure is not like Apple
under Jobs, who famously bashed companies led by salespeople as opposed to
designers.

~~~
innagadadavida
Has it occurred to anyone that Tim might have pulled off something amazing and
no one is even aware of it? Given all the hardware/software design getting a
bad rap, Tim has made this Jeff’s problem. If Jeff can pull it off, he is
worthy of becoming a successor, otherwise he will get booted out in the next
scandal.

------
doe88
I respect John Gruber but on this one I find it a bit too easy to lash-out
(rightly or wrongly) on Jony Ive only when the man stepped-out of his job at
Apple. It would have been a bit more courageous to have said these things when
he was still there.

More on the point though, I'm not in the camp of those believing that in this
day and age in a company as big as Apple you can assign all the mistakes (or
successes) to a single man. For instance, to think Jony Ive being even
remotely responsible for the keyboard debacle seems preposterous to me.

~~~
scarface74
Gruber has not been shy about bashing Apple’s design decisions with either the
keyboards, or the prioritizing of thinness over battery life.

The keyboard debacle was a direct result of Apple striving for thinness.

~~~
mistersquid
> or the prioritizing of thinness over battery life.

Apple’s current MacBook lineup starting in late 2017 (i.e. the thinnest
laptops and with butterfly keyboards) have the best battery life of any Apple
laptop ever made.

I don’t recall Gruber ever complaining about the battery life of Apple’s thin
devices. Do you have a link?

~~~
jvzr
Huh, you mean late 2016, right? I have late-2016 MBP with a Touchbar

~~~
mistersquid
Yes, you’re right. I meant late 2016.

------
thomasjudge
I would go John Gruber one further and say that Apple needs not just a chief
design officer, but a chief PRODUCT officer. Steve Jobs was not just a design
guru, he was a PRODUCT guru. Design is an integral element to Apple products,
but product strategy is more than just design. The obsession with thinness
that Gruber cites is one way in which Apple's design - and product - strategy
has gone off the rails, but there are many others. What is the Macbook product
strategy and segmentation strategy anymore? Why did it take FIVE YEARS to get
a redesigned Mac Pro out? I could go on..

~~~
dang
Could you please not use allcaps for emphasis? This is in the site guidelines:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html).

------
archagon
Why is this article attributing the San Francisco font design to Ive?

~~~
panacea
He singed off on it.

------
jmull
> I’ve never been an “Apple is doomed without Steve Jobs” person. But...

Ah, pundits believe Apple Is Doomed!

The sentiment is reassuring. All seems well.

------
Skunkleton
> I don’t worry that Apple is in trouble because Jony Ive is leaving; I worry
> that Apple is in trouble because he’s not being replaced.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand why out of all of the skill sets that go
into creating a product, "design" should be the only one with a dedicated
C-level executive. To me it seems much healthier for the needs of the
mechanical engineers (for example) to have equal weight with the needs of the
designers.

~~~
armadsen
Because design is extremely and uniquely important to Apple’s success compared
to its competitors. It’s why you know who Jony Ive is and have no idea who is
responsible for mechanical engineering at Apple. (I say this as an engineer
myself.)

~~~
Skunkleton
The importance of design at apple is completely irrefutable. All I am saying
is that Apple should avoid more butterfly switch fiascos, and one way to do
that is to put the designers on a level playing field.

~~~
azernik
Industrial design includes functionality. Ives' problem wasn't that he put
design over other things; it's that he put form over function in his design
decisions and had a very narrow set of design principles (minimalism,
thinness) that he followed too religiously.

------
brandonfro
I remember reading somewhere that Jony said if he weren’t designing computers
he would like to be designing cups.

~~~
dokem
Sounds hyperbolic.

------
gigatexal
Damn. This is not good. But I understand. He has other interests. And it’s
time to check those out. That the other remaining design people will report to
the COO sounds like design by committee which could be terrible. But then it
could be great. Time will tell.

------
EGreg
I ain’t John Gruber. But here was my take a few years ago and I stand by it
today:

[http://magarshak.com/blog/?p=234](http://magarshak.com/blog/?p=234)

------
beardedman
I don't understand the unnecessary tone John Gruber uses in this article.

> Fuck this “sir” shit. We don’t have titles in the United States.

The US isn't the only country on the map (surprisingly enough, I know). And
who cares if Jony Ive is starting his own thing? Why would that be "pure
spin"?

Apple is not in its renaissance days anymore - whilst Jony Ive might have been
critical back then - Apple is just not the same company anymore. There are a
lot more people responsible for the "magic" these days (which is a good
thing).

~~~
toasterlovin
He's not saying that Jony Ive starting his own thing is pure spin. He's saying
that Jony continuing to be substantially involved in Apple design is pure
spin.

And regarding addressing people as 'Sir so and so'. As an American, it's
always really jarring when I come across this in print. America has a lot of
problems, but one of the most hopelessly idealistic things we ever did was opt
to forego a formal aristocracy. But anyway, I think Gruber perhaps didn't
realize that the reason the Financial Times was using Ives' title is that
they're an English publication.

~~~
mathieuh
All I ever see is people in US TV saying “sir” and “ma’am”, is this
inaccurate? I’m from the UK and similarly don’t believe in titles and I have
never used or heard these words used in my life

~~~
toasterlovin
We add those terms to the end of a phrase in lieu of a person’s name. As in,
“How may I help you, sir?”. But the usage referenced in the article was
putting the word before the person’s name to indicate that they’ve been titled
by the British government (or the crown, perhaps?). As in, “Sir Jony Ive has
announced that he will be leaving Apple.”

Very different things.

~~~
NeedMoreTea
Well he is British, so it's reasonable to respect his title, no? Just as I
might respect an American general or president's title, or a vicar's reverend
even though I am an atheist. All replace a simple Mr or Ms just like Dr does.
Not that I'm likely to meet many generals or presidents... :)

~~~
lame-robot-hoax
Exactly, people are making something out of nothing.

------
jpswade
> Fifth: Fuck this “sir” shit. We don’t have titles in the United States.

That's pretty disrespectful and ignorant to other cultures and customs.

It made me realise that this whole article is really spiteful and negative. It
doesn't contribute anything to making things better.

~~~
dang
Please don't pick the most irritating point in an article to comment on just
because it's so irritating. This is the most minor thing that he had to say.

~~~
jpswade
If it's so minor, why commit a whole point to it?

I'm surprised point 6 didn't defend into playground name calling.

Grow up.

~~~
dang
The original point was minor, if provocative. Unfortunately, though, posting
an HN comment about a minor provocation can actually have a major effect on a
thread—especially if it gets upvoted to the top, as indignant comments often
do. That's why we moderate those and why I replied to you. The fault lies more
with the upvoters and repliers than the original commenter, usually—but it's a
co-creation. We all need to resist it because it leads to much shallower and
less interesting discussion.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

~~~
jpswade
I'm glad you pointed out your authority and the guidelines that you have
adhered to otherwise your point may have been missed.

------
coherentpony
> Fifth: Fuck this “sir” shit. We don’t have titles in the United States.

The Title of Nobility Clause prevents the federal government from granting
titles of nobility. That's it. It doesn't prevent other countries from
granting them to their citizens, and Ive is British.

There are plenty of titles that aren't of nobility in the US. Here's a few:
Mr. President, Congresswoman, General, Colonel, and Mayor.

~~~
gchokov
Indeed. Plus some people think the United States is the only country on this
planet.

~~~
sosborn
Or, perhaps, Gruber was just adding in some humor.

------
AJRF
Could you DREAM of a world where DaringFireball posted an article
disrespecting and demeaning Sir Jony Ive this time last week?

What use is a pundit like this when they are on rails to just spin any and
every piece of Apple news to protect the mothership, at this point any words
from Gruber have lost all objectivity.

------
1-6
The title should have been, "Jony Ive left Apple" You've missed a sweet
opportunity...

------
baxuz
Wow this website is bad. Almost as bad as HN

------
cat199
> Fifth: Fuck this “sir” shit. We don’t have titles in the United States.

The 1 second it took me to google revealed he is British, and apple is all
about showing off your "class".. so yeah.

~~~
ruytlm
This baffled me as well. The US may not grant titles of nobility, but it has
an awful lot of other titles that are given and used similarly; in my
experience typically military ranks, or former political office titles.

Also, Ive's title may not have been awarded by the US, but that doesn't mean
it shouldn't be acknowledged in what is an official piece of communication
from one of the worlds largest companies.

To be facetious, one could also say that it is a surprise to hear outrage at
the use of 'Sir' given that everyone in the US seems to call everyone else
'sir' or 'ma'am' all the time.

~~~
_jal
There is a tradition of anti-nobility sentiment in US culture as old as, well,
the US. It is literally written into the Constitution[1]. How much you were
exposed to it probably depends on where you grew up; I think it is louder in
the north east, and I don't hear it much in California.

Personally, I am more annoyed at being sir-ed constantly. I much prefer to
reserve it as a genuine term of respect, not a generic form of address.

[1] Article I, section 9.

~~~
bin0
> I think it is louder in the north east

Loud in the South, certainly. That's how I was raised, and it's used as a
_respectful_ , though somewhat common/generic, term of address. I don't know
that I or many Americans would be comfortable with the social implications of
referring to some one as "sir" out of respect the way you describe it; it
implies superiority rather than respect.

------
petilon
> _Ive is, to state the obvious, preternaturally talented. But in the post-
> Jobs era, with all of Apple design, hardware and software, under his
> control, we’ve seen the software design decline and the hardware go wonky._

These two sentences don't make sense when read together. If Apple design --
hardware and software -- declined during Ive's rein that, to me, is evidence
that Ive is not preternaturally talented. The moment iOS 7 was unveiled at
WWDC I knew Emperor Ive is wearing no clothes. The number of basic design
mistakes iOS 7 was astounding.

~~~
errantspark
I gotta _eyeroll_ pretty hard when some internet expert points out the basic
design mistakes in something.

None of those things were mistakes, they were choices made as a result of
tradeoffs that people agonized over.

I think it makes perfect sense to me, Ive seems like he's got a big
personality and a laser focus on a set of things he has a deep deep
understanding of. Without Jobs maybe there was nobody to challenge Ive and
thus the balance was pulled too far toward his vision and the greater picture
has suffered.

~~~
petilon
Let's consider Jony's performance on software design first. This is what some
prominent people have said about iOS 7: The Verge wrote in their review: "iOS
7 isn't harder to use, just less obvious. That's a momentous change: iOS used
to be so obvious." In iOS 7 basic usability features such as making buttons
look like buttons are now stuffed under Accessibility options. About this,
Tumblr co-founder Marco Arment wrote: "If iOS 8 can’t remove any of these
options, it's a design failure." (And iOS 8 didn't.) Michael Heilemann,
Interface Director at Squarespace wrote, "when I look at [iOS 7 beta] I see
anti-patterns and basic mistakes that should have been caught on the
whiteboard before anyone even began thinking about coding it." And famed
blogger John Gruber said this about iOS 7: "my guess is that [Steve Jobs]
would not have supported this direction."

And what about Jony's other responsibility, industrial design? The iPod,
iPhone, iPad, MacBook Air and other Apple products are all amazingly well
designed and breathtakingly beautiful. But these products weren't designed by
Jony Ive all by himself. He designed them under Steve Jobs's guidance and
direction. Steve was the tastemaker. Apple's post-Steve products are nowhere
near as well-designed.

Consider iPhone 5c, for example. The colors are horrid, and when you add those
Crocs-like cases it looks more like a Fisher-Price toy than like a device an
executive would want to be seen holding. Then they released some ads for the
5c, and I kid you not, one of the ads had sounds of bleating farm animals. (It
was titled "Every color has a story", published on tumblr.) That the 5c didn't
do well in the market shouldn't surprise anyone.

~~~
iwasakabukiman
> Consider iPhone 5c, for example. The colors are horrid, and when you add
> those Crocs-like cases it looks more like a Fisher-Price toy than like a
> device an executive would want to be seen holding.

But it wasn't for executives. It was supposed to be a downmarket phone. You
may think the colors were horrid, but I think they added much needed character
to the iPhone line, much like the XRs.

~~~
ballooney
Yeah i often look at my iphone SE and think it really needs some character.

