

Jonathan Ive on the design of the iPhone 4 - latif
http://www.core77.com/blog/object_culture/core77_speaks_with_jonathan_ive_on_the_design_of_the_iphone_4_material_matters_16817.asp

======
ben1040
I really liked the original iPhone for how solid and a little heavy it felt,
as though it's actually worth the $600 you paid for it. I'm glad to see that
back with the iPhone 4; the 3G model just felt like a cheap toy.

Reminds me of that scene from Jurassic Park where the kids find the night
vision goggles in the back of the truck:

    
    
      Gennaro: Hey, where'd you find that? 
      Tim: In a box under my seat. 
      Gennaro: Are they heavy? 
      Tim: Yeah. 
      Gennaro: Then they're expensive, put 'em back.

~~~
ugh
Sometimes Apple’s material choices are questionable. Their iPod touches have
this really slick, polished metal back. It looks really great – for a few
weeks. Then it’s quickly getting scratches.

I don’t know whether they picked that material for sentimental reasons (all
iPods back to the first one – except the smaller ones – had that back) and
whether you are just supposed to accept that back that’s slowly getting more
and more scratches. (I won’t use cases. Never. I have to be able to put your
gadget in my empty jeans pocket. If I can’t there’s something wrong with your
product.)

Apple knows and used better materials. My trusty six year old brushed aluminum
iPod mini pretty much looks like new and has been treated far worse than my
iPod touch.

~~~
dieterrams
> Their iPod touches have this really slick, polished metal back. It looks
> really great – for a few weeks. Then it’s quickly getting scratches.

Likewise for the chrome bezel. Within an hour of ditching my iPhone's case, I
nicked the damn thing with a very slight bump. It was a huge relief to see
Apple lose the chrome for the iPhone 4. But after one of Engadget's phones got
a nice big scratch on the back, I can no longer assume they're using gorilla
glass on both sides.

I'm forced to believe they make questionable material choices merely to
increase the "shiny", which is one of my main gripes with Apple. It's
undoubtedly why they use glossy displays by default on MacBooks, iMacs, and
iPads, even though matte is far more usable.

~~~
somebear
To be fair, the introduction of glossy displays was done after most other
laptop manufacturers had switched. I'm sure they did it because it looks
better at the store, i.e. you have to know that a matte display is more usable
in daylight to prefer that over the glossy display.

~~~
derefr
They do consider how it will look past the store—not in the least because
Apple products are sold online as well as through the retail stores.

The likely explanation, to me, is that professional graphics people (Apple's
high-end core market) will set up the environment of the device to be perfect
for it (i.e. "studio lighting"—basically the same as the Apple stores) rather
than expecting the device to conform to the environment. Glossy _is_ better
under perfect conditions.

~~~
dieterrams
I don't buy that explanation, as glossy displays are ubiquitous on Apple
products aside from the Cinema Displays and matte options for MacBook Pros.
They surely aren't assuming that iPads and regular Macbooks are being used in
perfect lighting conditions, which is an unreasonable assumption to make for
any portable device.

I would actually argue that glossy displays are not ideal in any lit
environment, for the simple reason that blacks just turn the display into a
mirror. This is also a problem if you've turned down the brightness in order
to save power.

Matte really needs to be the default for any display, with glossy as an
option.

~~~
fdkz
One sunny day I went outside and tested glossy and matte lcd side-by-side. I
had the same results as described here:
<http://netwalker.nl/2007/07/28/glossy-vs-matte/>

Glossy was better. (lcd panels were from different manufacturers, so my
results may not apply to every case)

edit: unlike in the linked blog-post, backlight intensity of both lcd-s I
tested was roughly the same.

~~~
dieterrams
That blog post is comparing a glossy LED to a matte non-LED display. Big
difference, and one I know about first hand because I own MacBook Pros with
both types of display, only my LED is matte.

Personally, it's incredibly rare for me to be using a laptop outside on a
sunny day, so even if glossy were better in sunlight, I'd never base my
decision on that fact. But I can tell you that I did get to compare a matte
and glossy MBP of the exact same model in an Apple store, side by side, and
saw no significant difference in brigntness.

------
vena
_When you see the breaks, the three little black reveals that interrupt the
band, in photographs, you could be forgiven for assuming you're seeing three
separate strips of metal with gaps in between; but in fact it's all one
piece._

from the internal photos at ifixits iphone 4 teardown[1] this doesn't appear
to actually be true... or am i crazy? ( i am fully prepare to be called
crazy/blind :) )

[1] <http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPhone-4-Teardown/3130/1>

~~~
wmeredith
I'm pretty sure this is a difference of semantics. He means that it's all one
piece and then they machine into the separate antennas that fit together with
incredibly tight tolerances.

------
bonsaitree
This article reminds me vividly why, at my Alma mater, EVERY engineer (even
EEs and CEs) were REQUIRED to take a class in their freshmen or sophomore year
called "Manufacturing Process & Materials Design".

It was basically a fancy academic term for "shop class".

We made gears, arc welded (still have a scar from that), cut screw threads,
riveted sheet metal, worked milling machines & saws, turned fixtures on
lathes, and glued/bagged/baked carbon fiber.

At a very visceral hands-on level were introduced to the materials, workflows,
and structural fastening tech that makes up the shells and supporting
frameworks of physical goods.

At the time, it was a royal pain in the ass (I'm not a natural kinesthetic
learner) and I didn't "get it", but looking back it was an extremely valuable
experience.

Aside from the welding scar on my left thumb, I think the biggest takeaway was
gaining an appreciation for the EXTREME ROI gained in designing processes
which have "loose" tolerances where it's acceptable and "tight" tollerances
where it's required.

------
rbranson
Anyone else read Johnny Ive quotes in a British accent, almost as if it's
instinct?

~~~
sjs
It is instinct. At least for me. If I know how someone actually sounds I
"hear" their voice as I read a quote by them.

------
geuis
Ive is right. My new iPhone is like a work of art. Like a piece of art in a
museum, because I can't touch it either. The unit I have has so many problems,
simply holding it makes it lose both 3G and wifi signal. I'm exchanging mine
or switching back to my 3GS

~~~
nickpp
3G AND WiFi? Somehow I doubt you even own an iPhone...

~~~
MisterWebz
Could you explain why? I don't own one and never really read much about
Iphones.

~~~
bmalicoat
When you're on wifi you have no indication of the signal strength of any other
data source (3G, Edge or GPRS).

It's possible the Wifi would go out and then the bars would drop, I suppose.
Any signal issues I've seen have been non-wifi though.

~~~
bombs
You do. The signal strength bars are to the left of the carrier name, while
the connection type (EDGE, 3G, WiFi) icon is the right.

The WiFi icon (which acts as a signal strength indicator for WiFi connections)
unfortunately does hide the cellular data indicator, which shows whether
you're connected to EDGE or 3G.

~~~
bmalicoat
What I mean is you could have full voice signal with no data signal and not
know it if you are connected to wifi too. Most areas have at least GPRS, but
you can still find some towers that are voice only. Because of this you really
don't have an indication of your cellular data. You can assume you have it,
which is true most of the time, but you can't know for sure.

------
Qz
Zzz... device porn. Nothing new to see here, move along.

