3 ms·

I feel like if we wouldn't obsess over aesthetics, the gadget market would be a better place. Something similar goes for software too, in my opinion. However,

by dmos62 7y ago

I feel like if we wouldn't obsess over aesthetics, the gadget market would be a better place. Something similar goes for software too, in my opinion. However, I'm slowly learning that wishful thinking and complaining detracts from the reality of things, like current needs that people have, and the subtle trends that lead to this phenomenon: things that you can easily render yourself blind to if you go around rejecting what you don't like. That said, I do feel confused and at odds with the state of things in this time and place. I can't say that I have a firm understanding of the average consumer who is targeted by these products. I'd like to feel more connected with the different segments of the market. I suspect that a lot of people feel this way, but we may not be the most vocal of groups.

hrunt 7y ago
Except that obsessing over aesthetics is a key part of the iPhone's history (and Apple's history overall). The iPhone's history is one filled with "function follows form" (or, sometimes, does not follow at all), so an article that points out some of the more glaring aesthetic flaws of the newer iPhones is more than appropriate for this specific device. I agree with the author that the iPhone is "ugly." Rather, I think that the iPhone's aesthetic solutions for its technical challenges are inelegant. In particular, the notch is so big it may as well function as a thick bezel and the square camera arrangement and placement seems like it was dictated by a specific technical solution without any influence from the design team. In the past, I feel like Apple would have argued that their elegant solutions were "better" and thus commanded a premium for it. Now they are happy to compromise their aesthetics for technical capabilities. I cannot think of a product released during the second coming of Jobs that made that compromise so obviously. Still, Apple commands the same premium, so that leads people to obsess over the aesthetics.

by dmos62 7y ago

hrunt 7y ago

Except that obsessing over aesthetics is a key part of the iPhone's history (and Apple's history overall). The iPhone's history is one filled with "function follows form" (or, sometimes, does not follow at all), so an article that points out some of the more glaring aesthetic flaws of the newer iPhones is more than appropriate for this specific device. I agree with the author that the iPhone is "ugly." Rather, I think that the iPhone's aesthetic solutions for its technical challenges are inelegant. In particular, the notch is so big it may as well function as a thick bezel and the square camera arrangement and placement seems like it was dictated by a specific technical solution without any influence from the design team. In the past, I feel like Apple would have argued that their elegant solutions were "better" and thus commanded a premium for it. Now they are happy to compromise their aesthetics for technical capabilities. I cannot think of a product released during the second coming of Jobs that made that compromise so obviously. Still, Apple commands the same premium, so that leads people to obsess over the aesthetics.