Apple’s design dominance over the past decade has been due to industrial design first, software design second. Their hardware designs have inspired a generation. Over those last 10 years their software has gotten better and better too (it’s really damn good now), but it’s been their industrial design that has made the first impression on the market.
However, I wonder if Apple will soon lose their perceived industrial design edge. It’s not that they aren’t incredibly good at it — they are the best in the business — it’s that industrial design is trending towards transparency. It’s all going glass. Everything is turning into a screen, from edge to edge. Once it’s all about glass, it’s all about software.
Luckily for Apple their software is outstanding. But, I think over time great software is less of a competitive advantage than killer hardware only because software, across the board, is getting better quickly. This is especially true in mobile, where the glass revolution is in full swing. Android is solid, WebOS is solid, and Blackberry’s new OS/UI looks great too. Nothing I’ve played with is better than Apple’s iOS, but a lot of the alternatives are approaching “plenty damn good” status.
Apple does the small things better than anyone else. Their choice of materials, finishes, and fittings are top notch. Their tolerances are tight. Their assembly techniques make their products feel like one solid whole. They are damn good at this. But, while these details matter to those who notice them, I wonder how much they are noticed by the public. The difference in build quality, materials, and tolerances between a MacBook Pro and a Lenovo are still obvious, but as things go all glass, will the build quality between an iPad and a Blackberry Playbook be as noticeable?
Time will tell, I’m just curious about the answer. Apple has a way of making the future. Maybe Apple’s tight integration between products is more important than the first visual impressions. Or maybe Apple’s purchase of LiquidMetal may pave the way for stronger, smaller, thinner, lighter things that other companies just can’t match. Or maybe my imagination isn’t big enough to see what innovative differentiators are coming next. But what about all that glass?
Dmitry
on 28 Sep 10Yeah right, to prove it they made 27” mirror screen.
Rich S
on 28 Sep 10Hardware is key imho. Software is useless without it, and the hardware enables the interface into the software. Computer -> smartphone was enabled with hardware.
Also you mentioned smartphone software. Can’t match it feature for features, but the new WP7 UI is awesome/my favorite.
Ted Price
on 28 Sep 10This is why I took a really long position on GLW.
Jason
on 28 Sep 10Even once they’ve gone all glass, there is still so much more that’s important to the physical design of the product. The overall build quality, weight, textures, buttons, etc… are incredibly important to the product experience.
Dan Saffer
on 28 Sep 10You’re assuming that the forms we have now (mobile phone, tablet) will remain fixed. While this might come to pass, there’s a wide variety of other forms and materials to be explored. The large-scale wall display, for one example. Table-top surfaces for another. And there are other technologies such as e-ink and mini-projectors that don’t rely on glass for multi-touch capabilities.
But even focusing on the typical “glass slabs,” we’re seeing a variety of forms, such as the Ko, the new Nokia mini-tablet, and (although they aren’t necessarily glass) various e-readers. While certainly software is a huge differentiator, there’s still a lot of ID and ME/EE challenges (power, connectivity, weight, positioning of physical controls, etc.) left to solve.
Jesper
on 28 Sep 10I agree with Rich and Jason. If it’s going to be “all glass” tomorrow, then it’s “all glass except for a bezel” today. The bezel isn’t what puts their competitors at a disadvantage.
It’s integration, choice of materials, miniaturization, the battery performance/thrift trade-off, custom silicon, the right kind of silicon (Apple sticks many more sensors in their products; who would ship a gyro without their own app to use it in?).
You should already have known this.
Nikki
on 28 Sep 10LiquidMetal is cool, but Rearden Metal is better.
ceejayoz
on 28 Sep 10Appearance isn’t the only part of the hardware design. Even if it’s a block of glass, if Apple can keep delivering several more hours of battery life than their competitors, they’ll keep winning in that department.
river
on 28 Sep 10i think you’re discounting the importance of the software, and the edge apple has with that. android has certainly improved, but why do surveys show so many android users willing to switch to an iphone, while iphone users are overwhelmingly inclined to get another iphone? i think the software is a huge factor. i’ve played with some android phones, and i would have a hard time living with one. just as with the hardware, the little details in the software add up to create a more seamless, wholistic experience that is superior. things like scrolling and animation smoothness, touch responsiveness, virtual keyboard usability and accuracy, all create the sense the i’m just doing on the iphone, whereas on an android i’m thinking, then doing.
honestly, i haven’t seen any other company that does this as well as apple on this scale. we’ll see if ms can pull it off with wp7. the hard part is that you have to care passionately and obsessively about these little things, in order to push the ux to that level. most companies don’t have the drive and focus to do that.
i think this also goes for the hardware. there’s a lot more nice hardware out there, but apple is pushing the level of quality and streamlining things ahead of everyone else.
the other big factor here is business model. apple also leads in this area. the app store is the obvious example of this. it’s a massive driver of customers wanting ios devices, and a huge reason they stick with them once they have them. beyond the app store, though, apple does a better job delivering a superior user experience in other areas. look at the crapware showing up on android phones now. google is not setting the terms of game for android, so carriers are reverting to their usual tricks, which have always been unfriendly towards users. or try creating an iphone app as a novice and compare that to getting started on android development. the sdks are worlds apart, with ios being easy to get into and the software friendly and intuitive. the android sdk is a nightmare for anyone who is an experienced developer, and is ugly to boot.
there are more examples that can be cited, like the apple retail experience, device integration, etc.
so i think apple’s lead is built on a variety of pillars, not just one or two factors. we’ll see if there’s another company that can match their dedication to good user experience on all these levels. i think it’s going to take more than sexy hardware to take away apple’s lead.
hop
on 28 Sep 10Jason, I think thats a little generalized. They are hitting everything on all cylinders – industrial design, mechanical engineering, material selection and finish, manufacturing capability, component sourcing, hardware, software, operating systems, customer service, marketing, advertising, retail stores, their website, company structure, product development processes. And their software products are wide – OSX, iOS, respective dev platforms, all the productivity utilities they make, iTunes (owning the music industry), whatever cloud apps they are working on now…
Everything is the benchmark for the industry. And I’m not a blind fanboy, I’m agnostic to any company. Now if they could only make a fucking ergonomic mouse.
Kenneth Vogt
on 28 Sep 10I am tempted to say, “I’m not a designer but I play one on TV.” If you think only designers notice this stuff, you need only look at the diverse class of raving fans that Apple possesses. I am less enamored with Apple’s software than its hardware but their software does deliver. Furthermore, most software running on Apple hardware is not Apple-produced software anyway. What they offer is a forum for delivery. Android may be cool, but it doesn’t feel quite as cool as iPhone no matter how much glass they share.
hop
on 28 Sep 10Also… they only have about a dozen people doing industrial design and thousands for software.
JF
on 28 Sep 10It’s integration, choice of materials, miniaturization, the battery performance/thrift trade-off, custom silicon, the right kind of silicon (Apple sticks many more sensors in their products; who would ship a gyro without their own app to use it in?). You should already have known this.
I do know all of this, but these things are on a different scale. They aren’t immediately apparent. These things aren’t obvious to people like the old industrial design differences were obvious. That’s my thesis. I’m curious to see how it all pans out.
Stephan A
on 28 Sep 10Smart responses so far.
Apple made a difficult design decision by pushing for touch-based UIs, and from a market standpoint it was clearly the right decision. Making that leap from buttons to touch was not self-evident and Apple won a head-start. Sure, competitors are catching up to iOS, but Apple’s “industrial design edge” has more to do with their other-worldly capacity to make these difficult decisions than their merely excellent UI design.
Will Apple be able to make the same difficult decisions about other hardware in the future? If Steve is still around, I would say that’s likely.
To me, the real questions are “What else is glass?” or “What’s after glass?”
These are the questions I’m sure Apple is thinking of.
Kalle
on 28 Sep 10It may be logical to assume following development: touch screens -> hologram manipulation -> mind integration.
It’s really hard to see any further developments after you can control all widgets and programs with your thoughts, as the next step would be someone or something (AI) deciding and doing things for you. May seem really comfortable, but this would lead to degeneration of the human mind. Probably some people don’t dream being a vegetable.
David
on 28 Sep 10Fit, finish, user experience is far better in a Bentley than a Honda, and I drive a Honda. That Mac Book looks really nice, but it’s not worth an extra $1000 for this kid. Thinkpad, Ubuntu and Emacs may not have the cachet of Mac Book Pro, OSX and TextMate but it does everything I want done and I get to spend the extra $$ on my grandkids. It’s personal choice – Apple has chosen to be a niche product, and it isn’t my niche.
Chris O
on 28 Sep 10@Stephan A — I think this is a good point. I could also see AppleTV or Nike+ as being a direction they could go with creating other items for ubiquitous computing.
Somewhat relatedly, I’m interested to see how print-on-demand from companies like Shapeways affects industrial design. I sort of wonder if the Starck/Rashid plastic look will make a comeback.
Gordon W.
on 28 Sep 10Luckily for Apple their software is outstanding
Patrick
on 28 Sep 10Software is getting better, but not across the board. As the hardware disappears. Software will be the differentiating factor.
Apple is a software company. To paraphrase Alain Key, “they care so much about there software, that they have to make there own hardware.
daniel
on 28 Sep 10I think you’re missing the overall impact of those under the hood items which I think will start to be the differentiating factor with regards to hardware.
The device itself may not be as striking because of a general similarity in design, but things like battery life are REALLY killer. Think about the iPad, the battery life changes the way I use the device and I believe will become the cornerstone of what differentiates their devices. This will become more and more apparent as competitors start putting out stuff that has a 3 hour battery life like laptops do today.
One other thing, when people started making devices that looked pretty similar to the iPhone they entirely changed the design, no reason to thing that those kinds of moves won’t continue in the future.
David Bishop
on 28 Sep 10To answer the question: it won’t matter. Apple has two things the others don’t: the content and the ability to make their products just work.
On the content front, they own the mobile space. iOS owns half of the mobile OS space in the US.* Apple is the number one music retailer (over 10 billion songs downloaded), the number one online video retailer, and the number one app store retailer (over 5 billion apps downloaded). People will use their devices just to have the content the same way everyone bought Microsoft computers over Apple 20 years ago.
On the function front, forums, the web, and personal accounts I hear are littered with frustration about this problem and that problem and the other. I turn on my Mac and work. I don’t toy around with settings, or try to get hardware working. I turn on my iPad and work or play. I don’t make sure I have this machine setting or that one. I use my iPhone just like I expect to use it: no settings issues or app issues.
The thing that Apple gets dinged for is their strength: their walled garden. If they release an iOS update, all iPhones/iPod Touches can get it (minus those that simply don’t have the horsepower anymore). This can’t be said of Andriod* or other OS’es. The apps work smoothly and don’t crash the platforms. And when I took my Mac out of the box, I installed iWork and the iPhone SDK and DONE! No tinkering and fretting and NOT getting work done.
So, in short, Apple will lead, because they get it: I just want a device that works. I just want to be able to do my job and not mess with things that don’t matter to the bottom line. With Apple I can do that.
Please read this sentence before replying: iPhones are around 30% of the smartphone market, but iOS also includes iPod Touch and iPad. I am a Windows developer by day and a iOS developer at night. I have been a Windows developer for 15+ years, have built many machines, developed web sites, apps, mobile apps – pretty much done it all. I had a Windows 7 machine that was simply a pain in the ass. There were issues with ACLs, etc. I finally had enough: I could spend the time researching and fixing, or I could spend the time working. I choose the latter. This is not anti-android. I really like Android. My friend just bought the Samsung Fascinate and it kicks ass.David Bishop
on 28 Sep 10Forgive the last paragraph. It was actually footnotes denoted with one, two, and three asterisks. Apparently those are formatting marks which put some parts in bold and then removed the asterisks at the end.
Jesper
on 28 Sep 10And all the fine tuning that goes into your products to make them what they are aren’t apparent either. It doesn’t mean some of it doesn’t make or break a product. Change five design decisions in Campfire, Basecamp or Highrise and down the line it’s a whole other product.
I think it’ll be a long time before everyone has both the sheer hardware expertise and appliance design know-how and instincts that they’re basically level with Apple, never mind actually coming around to a market of basically fungible devices. In genres where that has happened, it’s basically the case that every VCR or DVD player is as ugly and plastic as the next one.
Apple does place a lot of emphasis on software. They also place a lot of emphasis on hardware, so that they can place even more emphasis on software in the future. With new devices, that’s going to be even more important. (This is why web apps are less popular on tablets and phones than on traditional PCs; because there’s more fresh potential to tap.)
Lon
on 28 Sep 10First, the phrase “Luckily for Apple their software is outstanding” is incorrect. Apple applies the same effort to their software, as do they to the hardware.
I believe its why most would-be competitors fail so often, and to this day no one has knocked off the easiest of products, the iPod.
Because, the details in both the hardware and software, combined elegantly is the key to Apple’s success.
Also, the simpler one makes these products, the more care and planning they require to maintain a value proposition for consumers.
As an Android toting consumer, the pain I feel everyday is the lack of the elegant solutions Apple long ago mastered on the desktop.
Ben
on 28 Sep 10Apple’s design dominance over the past decade has been due to industrial design first, software design second.
Justin
on 28 Sep 10David Bishop has a great post. I use both a mac and a pc for work purposes. On my Windows 7 machine, I’m always messing around with the bottom toolbar to ensure the programs I want/use frequently are easy to find (instead of having to search through the start menu). With my mac, it couldn’t be any easier with the dock. The only thing Apple needs to work on is the Alt+Tab function between windows.
Stephen Jenkins
on 28 Sep 10Can’t stand the bezel on any of Apple’s products – they tend to be HUGE. My Mac Book Pro could do with about 75% less bezel – and I would gladly trade back a little thickneess if needed to make extra room for the battery.
Likewise, the iPhone’s bezel is too large, although this as little more understandable.
Finally, the iPad – I’m sure people will argue that the large bezel is a result of the overall footprint, which is necessitated by the mammoth battery, but it’s just BAD. From a usability standpoint, you need some kind of a gripable area, I get that, but the bezel on the iPad is overkill and really messes up the weight distribution when trying to use with one hand.
There are two things Apple does really poorly:
1. Any kind of online service or platform outside of iTunes.
2. Screen bezels.
Anson
on 28 Sep 10Ask yourself this – if in 2007 you gave the iPhone hardware to Nokia, Motorola or Sony/Ericcson do you think any of them could have produced the result Apple did?
I highly doubt it. Those companies had decades to do it before the iPhone and failed. And this is despite huge profits, massive hype (remember the constant talk through the early part of the decade about this mobile revolution?), and a willing public.
Their software stunk. And it’s only with Apple lighting the way we’re seeing some B/B+ products from some og these companies.
Other areas are different – a Jobs/Ive Apple could definitely make a business out of building Windows laptops and workstations so you could argue software is less of a factor here.
Of course the real answer is that everything matters and it’s all about the integration. In this game no one can touch Apple.
Nick Morgan
on 28 Sep 10Apple doesn’t sell on hardware or software; they sell on experience. If you have a great experience, the rest doesn’t matter.
Companies that don’t have great experiences have to sell on GHz, megapixels, dimensions, hours, speed, angles, etc.
Just look at their commercials.
Dana
on 29 Sep 10I’ve always felt that i was Apple’s “fit and finish” that made the most difference in their products. Most people probably can’t verbalize what makes a product really great to hold in your hand, but subconsciously it’s those things you talked about; Tight tolerances, choices in materials, the weight, etc.
The thing with design is, it keeps evolving, and by the time everyone has copied Apple’s designs, the truly great designers will already be tapping the next trend.
kyle
on 29 Sep 10dunno about the all glass thing. laptops are going to be around for awhile for professionals, and the industrial design of Apple’s laptops make every other laptop on the market feel like a cheap child’s toy in comparison.
jeez, i friggin’ love apple’s industrial design.
Stacy
on 29 Sep 10It was never about the hardware. In the long run, software drives hardware – ever since Visicalc.
Sachin
on 29 Sep 10i believe that as hardware becomes all glass, software and integrated services will then also have a major role to play….
dave reeves
on 29 Sep 10I think this trend has been going on for a few years now, and apple has been one of the biggest beneficiaries. The physical design of the iphone isn’t what won people over; it was the software and what that software enabled.
And good, deep software takes time. Always has.
Apple’s core advantage in the past ~7 years has been its prioritization of the UX—the understanding that people will buy products based on a great experience, not just a list of specs and features. The big risk comes when other companies start to operate and prioritize similarly.
Neil
on 29 Sep 10I’ve only ever bought 1 PC, ever since that bad experience I’ve always invested in Mac’s, why? Because they last longer and the software is solid, no lagging, no re-installation, no bugs just perfection.
Francis
on 29 Sep 10It’s all about software and how tiny you can make the battery and still be usable.
Etienne Segonzac
on 29 Sep 10Once it’s all about glass, it’s all about software.
Deltaplan
on 29 Sep 10I think that in the long term, what really matters is not hardware nor software quality, but rather content.
iOs is leading these days because it’s the mobile platform with the most diversified content. Android sales are skyrocketing due to its adoption by scores of manufacturers, but in the end many people use droids as basic phones, because – save a small geeky niche – the people who really care about the content will buy an iPhone.
What may really change the game IMO is Internet Explorer 9. The way that it pushes towards the websites to develop an “app-like” experience could be the “killer-app” of the mobile platforms, provided these “app-like” versions developed for IE9 would work on mobile Windows similarly without any further development.
I think it’s no surprise that Apple has brutally changed plans about development tools… They have realized that it iOS remains a closed platform, then someday in a near future the websites may not develop any iOS apps any more, they will just go with an “IE9 app” that will run on Windows and mobile Windows devices, and that’s all. Apple REALLY needs that these “IE9 apps” be ported quickly to iOS, otherwise they will loose lots of customers it the people can’t use the apps for their websites of choice on iOS.
Dmytro
on 29 Sep 10I think it is netiher about hardware nor it is about software. Apple does not own 30% of smartphone market – this report might be considered as misleading and any report is difficult to coclude that is one hundred percent truthworthy. However, what I do believe will make Apple stand out and be the leader is the fact that they create completely new product categories. Instead of designing an MP3 player, they have created an iPod and no matter how technically advanced other mp3 players are, iPod is just another product, so they compete in a sence as ice-cream and going to the cinema (both are ways to enjoy yourself). The same concerns iPhone. Apple has just created another category of product, not smartphones, but ‘iPhones’ and it owns 100% of the market.
aaron
on 29 Sep 10@Nick Morgan – I think you’ve been the closest response to my initial thoughts after reading this article.
Apple brings a whole lot more than amazing industrial design and easy-to-use software to their customers. The Apple experience includes devices that you gladly show off to your non-geek friends.
Apple isn’t just successful because of their designers, they’re successful because they marketed their devices as status symbols.
Bauke
on 29 Sep 10I do feel that Apple has been slipping on the Software front a bit. iTunes 10 comes to mind, and for the iPhone 3GS/4 users The Game Center are pretty bad design-wise and not that good User Interface wise.
Martial
on 29 Sep 10And let us never forget the laser-like focus on making money. Sure, we might assume every company is trying to make money, but that isn’t exactly the case. Most companies are just trying to make a living, get by, not go bankrupt. Apple is trying to get rich.
Making money in a capitalist economy is about making a product people want. This sounds simple, but it really isn’t. All sorts of companies exist to provide stuff that people need (e.g. in today’s world, pretty much everybody needs a cell phone, but not every cell phone is what people want). You can make a living providing products or services people need. You might even wind up rich, but that’s generally an accident of circumstance (monopoly, cartel, scarcity, temporary shortage, etc).
Apple makes products people want.
Web dude
on 29 Sep 10The only reason we are under the impression that Apple delivers good design is because all the other vendors suck at it big time. But by itself, Apple products are amazingly crappy.
It’s like if all you have to eat is some rancid, worm-infested meal, all of a sudden McDonalds burgers look phenomenally yummy. However, next to a nice home made meal, these burgers look and taste atrocious.
Everything in life is relative.
But more importantly, we are presently in a very transitionary period. The fascination with the computing machinery still looms large, but that is slated to wane very soon. What’s going to happen is precisely what happened with electricity and the indoor plumbing—these technologies have quickly receded into the walls, far from our collective sight (when was the last time you’ve participated in heated, passionate debate on an online forum about electricity and the design of indoor plumbing?). Yes, we all depend on electricity and indoor plumbing, but we never discuss these things. They’re just assumed to be there (ever been in a situation where there is power outage or shortage of running water? You know the feeling of helplessness I’m talking about).
The exact same thing is going to happen to the computing devices/software. They’ll just disappear from our consciousness. They will end up being taken for granted, being ‘given’, and that’ll be the end of all these vendors, Apple and all.
Kevin
on 30 Sep 10I don’t think Apple minds being the 10% of the market/the niche brand.
Laurence Cuffe
on 30 Sep 10Design, marketing and propagating the virus free underdog myth. A cradle to grave approach to the user experience i.e. hardware, software, retail, all under one corporate umbrella. These are the keys to corporate success. Is it bombproof? No. Quite frankly the mobile me web application overloads at night and falls down repeatedly, my Imac wifi goes off line for no particular reason and requires multiple restarts to get back online and as for the Iphone.. here my user experience has involved one just dropping dead, and others requiring complete resets and re-installs of the software, some thing I can never recall doing with my nokia.
But apple tells their customers, that this is leading edge, the best there is, and if enough people believe it, they are right.
Ernest Kim
on 01 Oct 10I’m not sure I agree with the original premise insofar as I don’t see Apple so much as a hardware or a software company, but rather as an experience company that happens to focus on computing devices.
For starters, take Apple’s outsized investments in customer service (not only the staffing, but the empowering of CSRs to regularly address out-of-warranty hardware issues with hugely costly resolutions), packaging and ridiculously beautiful retail outlets.
These aren’t natural outgrowths of a company manically focused on hardware or software, they’re expressions of a company obsessed with customer experience. I think this is at least in part a contributor to Jobs’ success as CEO of Pixar—in the early days they were essentially a software company (with Renderman as their product) that happened to do some animation on the side, but post-Jobs they’ve become an experience company that happens to focus on animated films (which is why it made a lot of sense to sell to a fellow experience company like Disney versus a content distributor like Fox).
My main point, though, is that I think Apple’s greatest strength is actually their excellence at product marketing. In the spirit of full disclosure, I should fess up to the fact that I am a practitioner of this dark art, which may give me an outsized sense of its importance, but I don’t think that’s the case here.
I know product marketing is a poorly understood discipline—here’s my definition…
To boil it down even further, in Apple’s case, product marketing is about determining what goes into a product, what doesn’t go into a product, when it hits the market and how much it costs.
Getting the answers to these questions right is the thing that Apple does better than anyone else in the computing or consumer electronics industries, and it’s a skill for which the company is rarely recognized because, when done well, it’s completely transparent.
Steve Jobs isn’t a designer, he’s not a programmer, he’s not an architect or a writer; what he is is the best product marketer of our time. And, so long as Apple continues to set the benchmark for product marketing, I think they’ll continue to outperform and shape the future, regardless of the broader state of industrial or software design.
Paul
on 01 Oct 10Glass -> Software becomes hardware
Aen Tan
on 01 Oct 10Very much of Apple’s design philosophy has been borrowed from and influenced by the Japanese. If you have read the various design literature by Naoto Fukasawa (MUJI’s Jonny Ive) and Kenya Hara you would be familiar with concepts like haptic, without thought, affordance and sense-driven. Apple’s perfection in hardware design and manufacturing tries create these organic and subconscious sensual responses in users which makes the experience so much more magical.
Tom F
on 01 Oct 10The flawed assumption is that all software tends towards convergence – the differences eventually don’t matter. I don’t think that’s true. The differences matter – it’s a big part of why people chose what they use, be it iPhone versus Android or Basecamp versus a competitor. Building good software (or even good enough software) is still a hard thing to do, otherwise everyone would be doing it.
This discussion is closed.