If one applies the typical standards of high school English to this article, asking "What is it trying to communicate?" "What is someone trying to tell me?" etc., one will be left very empty. It's a puff piece, inflating a corporate celebrity. All of the text is designed to persuade you that "yes, indeed, this man surely is impressive. Yes, this company is impressive."
With all that gleaming prose, it's easy to forget all the things one might want to know, such as, "How can I do this, too?" or "Are there any pitfalls or problems with this?" "Are these appropriations of resources worth it or is this a Dutch tulip fiasco playing out in slow-motion?" "Why are people so starved for quality in other parts of their lives that they demand quality in their digital appliances?"
But none of that really matters, b/c Time is a dying, over-inflated magazine, so they'll just put "Apple" and "Design" in a headline, mollify people with fascinating details with no hint of self-reflection and call it a day.
In short, this an article for sheep, not people trying to figure out how to make the world good.
Well its not like they had to look far for inspiration, some of the products of the 30s through 50s were amazing. When manufactures, designers and engineers, started down the path of mass production many of them did it with beautifully designed products, from lights, dishes, appliances, to cars.
Being a fan of the art deco periods and vintage glass its not like Apple invented getting it down to the details, however they may be worth crediting for reminding us of when design, appearance, and quality, could all go together. Got a toaster from the 50s that meets all of those and still works; 1B16
Ive actually doesn't know as much about proper design beyond the computing field; his horribly disfigured Leica M design is proof of that. Recessed dials? A photographer wouldn't be caught dead without quick access to ISO, aperture values, shutter speed, and exposure metering/bracketing. Fumbling around with fingernails inside a recessed dial is the last thing you want to do when a child is running between two trees and the sunlight is streaming down on him, mottled from the shadows of the trees, and you've got the perfect shot.
That camera is rather ugly indeed, but as an (non digital) M owner:
> Recessed dials? A photographer wouldn't be caught dead without quick access to ISO, aperture values, shutter speed, and exposure metering/bracketing.
Plenty of cameras that photographers use don’t have direct access to many of those settings.
> Fumbling around with fingernails inside a recessed dial is the last thing you want to do when a child is running between two trees and the sunlight is streaming down on him, mottled from the shadows of the trees, and you've got the perfect shot.
You would miss that shot with any Leica M ever made, unless you were already set at ƒ/8 and hyperfocal, in which case this one would work just as well.
You would probably miss that shot with an H5D too, and I’m pretty sure some photographers find that useful.
Finally, that camera was not made to take pictures. It’s sad, maybe, but that’s just the way it is.
I'm sorry micampe, but that's total crap. As the parent comment said, Leica cameras are very much designed to be used, they were the photojournalist's top choice for decades. Recessed dials is moronic. If Ive can't design a Leica that can actually be functional then it doesn't speak very highly for his product design skills.
If you had used a Leica M you wouldn't be spouting such nonsense about f/8 and hyperfocal.
the H5D? that bears not a single resemblance to a Leica M (non digital), it's a digital, autofocus medium format SLR, as opposed to a film, manual focus, 35mm rangefinder.
A competent photographer would get that shot using either an M or H5D, it's the amateurs with no idea that miss shots.
Just reading the first sentence was enough for me. Apple has a good enough marketing team already; they don't need to have Time Magazine do this. I think this article is a bad idea for Apple's PR in general. I'm not even sure what they are trying to accomplish. They praise his "humility" in the subtitle text, and then go on to say all these things. Incredibly stupid.
TIL: "The adjective sycophantic is perfect for describing someone who uses flattery to get what they want. The sycophantic guy in your biology class might compliment the professor on her fabulous shoes as he hands in his lab report."
For instance :
> "...The iMac banished complicated, hard-to-use PCs from our desks and made computing easy."
> "...the two men set out on their maniacal journey to remake what they saw as the bland, lazy world around them.."
> "...Tomorrow doesn’t wait for the man who designs it."
Seriously?
> "... It looks like all the other dull, un-Apple-like glass and beige — yes, beige — concrete blocks."
This last one isn't so much worshipful as ironic, considering the color chosen by Jobs for the original Macintosh.