Like so many of you, I’ve been indulging in the amateur analyses all over the web about why Steve Jobs, p.b.o.h., was so great. The recurring message is pithily summarized by Mathew Ingram: “Technology is the least important thing about Apple products”.
Bullshit. The reason why Apple manages to build such magnificent products is because design and usability drive the engineering, yet the technology behind their products is by no means trivial. Apple cares a lot about engineering, more than Dell and Samsung and RIM.
It takes one designer to decide that touch interfaces are the bee’s knees, maybe another one to come up with intuitive finger gestures for such an interface, and then it takes engineers to convert the electrical capacitance of your fingers on a piece of glass into digital information, engineers to make the best damn screen they can, and more engineers to get a computer to interpret your wildly inaccurate finger movements.
Have you ever used a bad touchpad? Like, any touchpad not made by Apple? It’s horrible. Designers without engineers to back them up.
It takes one designer to say “we’re going to build a small, sleek laptop”. It then takes engineers to make sure that laptop doesn’t overheat, engineers to assure that its tiny speakers don’t sound like crap, and engineers to fit everything into that small package.
Have you ever noticed how none of those beautiful Bose speakers in the hifi store sound any good? What a disappointment. Designers without engineers to back them up.
Oh, and, do you remember Windows ME? “We’re really working toward simplifying the computing experience for home users.” said Microsoft’s Shawn Sanford. Except it crashed all the time.
It might seem like semantics, but there’s a big difference between putting design first and saying design is more important than technology. It’s the kind of attitude that leads companies to hire UX experts and design experts who then push all kinds of recommendations down to IT and engineering, and afterwards complain that nothing ever got implemented. Why? Because these companies don’t understand that good design is more than pretty and friendly: good design has meat, good design has substance, good design depends on great engineers.
9 comments
I couldn't agree more. Engineers and designers need each other to produce a quality product. Very well put!
Conversely, a lot of engineers believe that you don't need great designers--just great products. It's a relationship that absolutely must be synergistic if one wants to captivate an audience of millions with their work.
Great point!
The reason most people don't realize the engineering effort involved is because everything works so well. A simple interface makes the underlying system seem simple, but those that are engineers know that the opposite is true. To make a complex system simple is the greatest engineering challenge of all. Design without engineering at Apple would be nothing more than pretty mockups and static prototypes. It's an unfortunate world we live in but the reality is that to most people, the interface is the product.
no, designers don't need engineers. a project needs engineers just as a project needs designers.
And not just one designer. You make it sound like they site around shouting out ideas that magically appear. In your laptop example, you're missing:
a designer to choose the casing color a designer to choose the key size a designer to choose the key type face a designer to choose power button shape etc + thousands of other design choices that you obviously don't appreciate.
I guess you're just as guilty of overlooking design as your post complains about the overlooking engineering.
Sorry to offer a differing opinion, but I think you've missed the point and are acting in a reactionary manner.
First, you flat out grant the point you seem to be arguing against:
"The reason why Apple manages to build such magnificent products is because design and usability drive the engineering"
Exactly. Technology is not unimportant, it's just the lesser of the three parts -– Technology needs to be balanced with user experience and business viability for a product to be a sustainable win. All three parts are important, but ultimately, technology has taken a backseat to user experience in recent years. Apple proves much of that.
Secondly, I find it a bit ironic that you'd pick on Bose – they're one of the most engineer-heavy audio companies out there. Bose's founder, Amar Bose, holds a PhD from MIT in electrical engineering and had done a significant amount of work in acoustics before founding the company.
Currently, Bose dedicates ~5% of their revenues to R&D (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose_Corporation) as compared to Apple which spends 2.2% (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20121322-37/apple-r-d-as-percent-of-revenue-hits-a-low/)
@Ed209: Things are always more complex than 8 paragraphs can say. I think/hope everybody knows the perils of overlooking design (products look ugly and don't work very well), but I've seen more than one case in which manager types thought that design on its own could solve problems, not realizing that the best design needs technology to come alive, and that attitude leads to failed projects. That is the bigger point I hoped to get across; it's not a post about design vs. tech.
@tcp: well, let's just agree to disagree about Bose shall we :-)
Anyhow, re: your point that technology has taken the backseat, I guess if we continue the "driver" metaphor, yes, you're right, technology is in the backseat, but the back has more chairs than there are in front, and the people sitting there are just as important. That's sort of the subtle distinction that I wanted to articulate, especially in my last paragraph.
I'm a User Experience person. The interface, the casing, the experience, the visible product design is where the rubber meets the road. For the user, it is a continuous loop between good design and good engineering. I've always explained to my engineers that all their effort to write perfect code or develop fastest hardware is a waste if a user finds their experience (interface) with the product design is ugly or too hard to use. Good design brings forth the engineer's efforts to be appreciated by the User. The less the user complains about speed, efficiency and reliability the more appreciated the engineering is. Designers need to communicate their design effectively to engineers and learn to become their counterparts. The design can look pretty, but if again the hardware doesn't respond or the code fails and fails...it doesn't matter how pretty it is. It's just another pretty paperweight.
what about a designer that's an engineer or vice versa? There are plenty of multi-talented people out there who can do both. I think it's not very beneficial to take any extremes who say you can do one but not the other.
I agree with the above comment, but in a specific way. I believe that for a great product, not only does functionality and design have to be considerate of one another, they also have to be fully aware of their counterparts' methodologies, constraints, and resources.
An engineer who can, at least, recognize good design is a better engineer.
A designer who understands design constraints and can work around them is the best designer.