
Jonathan Ive on Apple's Design Process and Product Philosophy - trauco
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/06/16/jonathan-ive-on-apples-design-process-and-product-philosophy/?rref=technology&module=Ribbon&version=origin&region=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Technology&pgtype=article
======
jamra
He didn't say anything about process at all. He just reiterated that you must
focus on the product.

~~~
grinich
That's the process.

~~~
mikevm
What else would you be focusing on when you're working on a product?

~~~
grrowl
In the case of Samsung, the opposition's products; in the case of [past]
Microsoft, the users; in the case of Facebook, the advertising revenue.

At my day job I'm focussed on what's best for the client, not the website or
the client's product itself; such is agency life. When I'm at home I can put
away the compromises and make the best damn $thing ever made.

------
Dwolb
The biggest question I have is does Apple do user testing? Do they trust their
small group of designers more than a small sample of the population?

This my biggest question for Apple's design team.

~~~
mantraxB
They do user testing.

~~~
Dwolb
I guess my question is if there's a disagreement between user testing results
and the product development team's own choices, who wins?

~~~
mantraxB
Part of being an intelligent person is the ability to make the best call based
on all available information.

There's no general rule.

I'll just say that fast iteration is key. You iterate quickly and show users
prototypes, and incorporate their feedback (or not), depending on the case.

You can see the "Fake it till you make it" WWDC session on Apple's site, it
speaks exactly about how Apple does prototyping and user testing.

------
leeoniya
some may find this interesting: [http://theultralinx.com/2014/03/dieter-rams-
inspired-apple-p...](http://theultralinx.com/2014/03/dieter-rams-inspired-
apple-products.html)

------
petilon
It is interesting to note that Jony Ive thinks "the change isn't perhaps as
dramatic as you might assume." I would like to point out that people outside
Apple don't necessarily share this opinion. Here are some quotes from some
prominent people in the Apple community:

The Verge wrote: "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
hasn'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." Enough said.

~~~
cmelbye
It's a little misleading to include only part of that quote:

"The core creative community is very small but is also very close – there’s
been changes there, but the change isn’t perhaps as dramatic as you might
assume."

He's saying that there have been changes to their design process and the
structure of their design organization, but they haven't been as dramatic as
people might assume. Meaning: iOS 7 is a dramatic change from iOS 6, so one
might assume that there has been a dramatic change in who's designing the user
interface and how it's being designed, but that's not the case.

Regarding the critiques of iOS 7/8 design, keep in mind that it's version one
of a new design language. Look at Aqua in the Mac OS X Public Beta a decade
and a half ago, and compare it to Aqua in Mavericks. It's going to take some
refinement. But from what we've seen in Yosemite, and to a lesser extent iOS
8, they've already begun the process of refining their new design language.

~~~
petilon
They may have begun refining their design language but is it getting any
better? In my opinion it isn't. Here's an example: in OS X Yosemite, buttons
and textboxes are rendered the same. (See Safari toolbar for example: look at
the buttons and the address textbox.) Also look at Xcode: Look at the status
label on the toolbar (which used to be an "LCD".) It too is displayed with the
same bevels. So labels, buttons and textboxes are indistinguishable based on
their rendering. Who here thinks this is an improvement? They are getting the
basics wrong.

------
pistle
Seriously, Apple PR via third-party technique?

This is just a derivative of the previous NYT fluff piece which might as well
be written by Apple.

~~~
coldtea
Actually, the previous NYT piece was a hit-piece on Tim Cook, full of BS and
snark.

Also "PR via third party"?

It's an interview. Did you really expect him to badmouth Apple in it?

------
qself
Ive is a tool and Steve Jobs used it well.

------
mattsahr
IT is hard to sound more bland than a politician on a softball morning news
show. But Ive has done it.

------
moeedm
Ive is the real deal. You can't fake this shit.

------
justsee
> This is part of Steve’s legacy. Deep in the culture of Apple is this sense
> and understanding of design, developing and making. Form and the material
> and process – they are beautifully intertwined – completely connected.

This is also true of modern web design. It's easy to work out which designers
embody it:

* old-school designer - is still slinging over PSDs with little concern or consideration around multiple screens, technical limitations (is there a webfont available for the typeface(s) etc). Doesn't embody the philosophy Ive expresses.

* modern web designer - provides designs as static HTML, necessary to reveal the 'developing and making' considerations around assets, responsive design experiences etc. Definitely embodies the philosophy Ive expresses.

~~~
mantraxB
I'm sure you can make your trivial point about the intricacies of web design
without having to piggyback on Jonathan Ive's interview.

For the record, a lot of the UI prototyping at Apple _is_ done in Photoshop.

It's also done on paper napkins, in Keynote, in Illustrator, in Xcode and with
whatever works.

Good designers don't judge you based on what tools you use, and they're not
picky about what tools they use. They'd use anything. The important part is
how you think.

You can think about all sorts of screens and devices and do it in Photoshop.
You can also produce unusable trite crap in static HTML.

~~~
jshen
It's much harder to do it in photoshop for things like responsive design.
Responsive is dynamic and fluid and it's very difficult to capture that in a
few static comps. I like this point about web design is very relevant to Ive's
point. Apple isn't perfect, and the fact that Apple does web design a certain
way doesn't mean other ways aren't clearly better and closer to the values Ive
is discussing. Trying to use apple.com on your phone should lead one to the
conclusion that apple isn't doing modern web design well.

~~~
coldtea
> _It 's much harder to do it in photoshop for things like responsive design._

Then again responsive in the web is a co-out and a fad -- instead of creating
the best experience for each screen size, you give them some sliding or
expanding divs and some dissapearing elements from the "full-on" design and
call it a day.

I've never seen a responsive page I like on a mobile device. I'd take the full
page, in which I can pan and zoom, anytime.

~~~
jshen
I've seen a number of responsive designs I like better than the full page of a
regular site. Compare the following sites to using this site, HN, on a phone.

[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com](http://dish.andrewsullivan.com)

[http://video.disney.com](http://video.disney.com)

For a site that would be much better with a responsive design look at

[http://nytimes.com](http://nytimes.com)

