4 ms·
To me, the iPhone backside suggests a compromise between aesthetic properties of a "clean" backside and engineering, manufacturing cost, and user experience pro
by jarek 15y ago
To me, the iPhone backside suggests a compromise between aesthetic properties of a "clean" backside and engineering, manufacturing cost, and user experience properties of not having an ordinarily-operable battery cover, and is in fact quite interesting to think about. Consider what would have had to change had Apple wanted the logos off the backside but to still comply to relevant regulations. Do you think someone hadn't said "screw it, lets spend the money and do it the proper way" about an Apple-grade cover that would allow for the logos to be hidden? Is it not interesting to think of why that decision was not made?
- gnaffle 15y agoI do agree it's interesting to think about. The decision to not have a battery cover was a controversial one, and probably one that was not taken lightly. I'd be wrong to say that this isn't a compromise, but they thought a clean and thinner design and fewer parts was more important than keeping the logos off the back and allowing the user to easily replace the battery. If a battery cover was important to them, they would have spent the resources to make it work. Likewise, if a clean backside was important to the Lenovo designers, they would have fixed the ugly vent holes.