Why Are Apple's Designs So Damn Sexy?“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” – Leonardo da Vinci
They did it again, boy did they ever. This week Apple unveiled its holy grail of new technology – the iPhone which combines the iPod, cell phone and Internet handheld into one device. Hmmm- shouldn’t it be named the iDevice then? Maybe it will be.
Steve Jobs, the “Babe Ruth” of new technology and gadgets, hit another grand slam with this product but what makes Apple so good?
Yeah, sure they have tons of loot (with worldwide annual sales in its fiscal year 2006 of US$ 19.3 billion) and have been around since the late 70′s giving them time to make mistakes and learn from them, but what about the design or aesthetics that makes it so appealing to the devoted masses it attracts?
If we are asking that question then first lets quickly go over what aesthetics are.
Aesthetics examine what makes something beautiful, ugly, sublime, boring, etc… The surface “look and feel” aspects that deal with appearances. Judgments of aesthetics can involve numerous other issues as well both personal and cultural.
For instance we might judge a Hummer to be beautiful or sexy partly because it is desirable as a status symbol or it can evoke some sexual desirability, thus the term ‘sexy’ is often used to describe something that begs of you to ‘get to know’ it better- it attracts and compels you as if it was some primal urge and maybe it is.
Or we might judge it to be repulsive partly because it signifies for us over-consumption of gasoline and offends our political or moral values. Or maybe a mixture of the two.
Many see a rose as a beautiful flower because of its proportions and simplicity or that it is associated with love. Aesthetics is a branch of philosophy so, like all philosophy, it can get pretty deep.
Apple has been at it for awhile now. Lets look at some of the various stages the Apple logo has gone through. From its first appearance in the late 70′s with its engraving style featuring Isaac Newton under his famed apple tree (left). to the rainbow logo (middle) with all its full color glory to today’s refined simple grey version (right) of the Apple with sleek gradients that give it a sense of depth and weight.
OK, so what makes Apple’s design so damn sexy? What makes good design may be a better question to start with.
Something that is designed well will satisfy every requirement or need of the user in a clear concise fashion. Simply put, design solves problems in whatever medium it is pertaining to.
That being said lets take a look at the layout from the new iPhone page on Apples site and see how it fulfills the needs of the user (my needs) which are to find out information regarding the new iPhone.
They all have a simplicity to the elements in terms of arrangement and relationship within the overall composition.
The imagery is appropriate to the page, no excess froth here- just the product and some text. Simple things are easier to explain and understand thus making them easier to use.
There is a simpleness even down to the Sans Serif typeface used cutting out all the extra flourish and focusing on what is being said with clarity and legibility.
“There’s an applied style of being minimal and simple, and then there’s real simplicity.” -Jonathan Ive
Jonathan Ive, Senior Vice-President for Industrial Design is the man behind the man at Apple who is primarily responsible for the stark minimalist look of the products. “This looks simple, because it really is.”
The page is full of healthy negative space “white space” (or black space, shown with red bars) , both macro and micro. This acts as a buffer and helps to guide the viewer’s eyes through the page helping to facilitate the digestion of the content and imagery.
We do not see any extra images or text on the layout- just the pertinent information, all without vertical scrolling on my 1280×1024 monitor.
The color palette is also refined to predominantly cool colors with a neutral base (blues, greens residing on grays and blacks/whites). This limiting of the color used within the design focuses attention better to the main information or imagery.
The use of color and form to attract attention to buttons is also very effective. I see that the blue gradient rounded square on the top right side of the content area, with the compass icon on it, is giving the illusion of depth- it’s a button- just like on the iPhone itself, consistency helps with usability.
If we do a comparative analysis of another page layout from a ‘similar’ product, say the Zune mp3 player from Microsoft we see certain similarities and vast differences.
Zune’s page is filled with a lot more content than the iPhone layout . The images of the actual product are not as crisp and all seemed to be a bit cropped, not showing the full product, why is this?
Apple shows us the iPhone in beautifully crisp clarity and in with a reference for scale by placing it in the hot little hands of a human, not on a picnic table. Maybe Zune was trying to highlight its earth toned “brown” color?
The text on Zunes page describing the “technical specifications” for the player seems a bit to “techie” to me and the length of the text goes well below the fold. There is something not so great, in my opinion and the opinion of some others, in giving out to many choices (what too many is nobody really knows).
Zune seems to have tried to fill the real estate with the “Times Square” method of putting everything in one dense area within a grid structure. I would have thought the tone would be more casual and “hip” trying to appeal to a certain culture while remaining sleek.
If we look back to Apples iPhone page the text tells you a bit about what the product is/does then below it highlights the main feature again with buttons that link to pages that go more in depth regarding specific features.
Albeit the products are not identical in what they offer, but the designs and layouts of the feature pages can be compared for aesthetics as well as functionality for this experiment.
Both pages are from huge companies that employ very able and talented graphic designers/artist, user interface designers and information architects to sell their products- and they do it well, but it just seems that Apple does it much better.
“You can always recognize truth by its beauty and simplicity.” — Richard Feynman
yeah, you nailed it here. i am always amazed at apples stuff. everything always just looks better than everyone else’s products. cool article dude.
This is rubbish.
Shouldn’t we wait till we have actually used the iPhone before lauding apple for its design brilliance?
Are you really judging the iPhone on the amount of white (black) space on a webpage?
Why are you comparing the iPhone to the Zune aren’t they different products?
Like bell bottoms and cod pieces, fads fade and it doesn’t matter how much white space you have on your website if your product isn’t good enough it will fail. All we’ve seen is a gee whiz, ‘isn’t this cool’ talk and a few pictures. I think I might wait until I see the actual product and leave the fan boy proselytizing until I have used the actual phone and found it to be the “holy grail”.
I know its heresy but there are a few mp3 players out there that are better than the ipod, don’t have the digital rights issues and a significantly cheaper. I am so tired of blogs lauding apple because the author is living vicariously through the voracious ego of Jobs.
I have always loved apple computers but blogs like this will be its death. There is only so much wind that can be blown up one arsehole before it loses its elasticity.
to jason:
wow. you obviously missed the entire point of this post. it’s not a defense of the product itself, just an analysis of the design language used by apple (and compared to m$). you need to larn tuh reed gooder than what you duz now!
@jason – did you even read the article dude? troll is exactly right: “you need to larn tuh reed gooder than what you duz now!”
This guy is talking about the DESIGN of apple’s products, not how they operate/sell/etc.
Patrick, good post man, I liked the examples a lot and i also like that you didn’t just sit there and bash microsoft and just showed the differences from your perspective as a designer.
Like troll says, this is purely an objective analysis of design concepts employed by two companies, not their products. I’ve taken a few interface design and graphic design classes and we use the same methods of critiquing to look at web pages, posters, magazines, etc. All fanboyism aside, you tend to look at Apple’s designs and their use of a variety of elements such as simplicity, whitespace, gridding, and visual organization amongst many others with a certain sense of satisfaction and pleasure. Another characteristic that I noticed differing between the two is functionality. Apple’s iPhone page provides information in a less obtrusive way: “This is how you use the iPhone”, “These are some of its features”… Microsoft’s Zune page feels more like an ad with the pictures of people smiling, holding it in their hands, or what have you. This is true throughout their respective product pages and can sometimes alienate the web audience.
@jason:
I completely agree (to a degree). This article was specifically about the design of the websites. I believe what you were getting at is why do most people assume that a website’s design reflects the product its displaying. The author of the article and the arrogant commentors were not saying this, however, I agree that this is most people’s perspective and I will take a stab that the author (and many readers) are without a doubt more excited about the iPhone than zune, 100% due to design and not functionality. On a completely unrelated note: I do not believe this phone will succeed because it doesn’t add enough value at the price and does not replace any serious business professionals phone. I wouldn’t give up my nokia e62 for this phone. I certainly wouldn’t pay the same as an e62, 30gb ipod, and wii for this phone.
Actually, Jason seems right after reading this. It is a load of rubbish. Patrick is conflating product design and web design principles. “Simply put, design solves problems in whatever medium it is pertaining to.” doesn’t really cut it. While the point he’s trying to make is valid, he’s using a really stupid example to make it.
Actually, more than one stupid example. If you think a Hummer is beautiful or sexy, chances are your are either (a) a man with a small penis, or (b) a woman with a man with a small penis.
I actually think that everyone should just take a step back and relax. This is one person’s opinion and I enjoyed the way he layed it out.
And Akshay, you say that it’s a stupid example and then you make a completely juvenile example yourself throwing your credibility out the window. Unless of course you have done significant hands-on research to back up your claims of men with small “equipment” who own Hummers.
I think the differences between the two are the most important. As more people adopt a similar look, that same look begins to lose its appeal. If Microsoft and Apple were just alike, someone else would have to be the anti-Microsoft.
I agree with BREN, if the design is gonna cost me more than I already paid for my i-pod or Blackberry- I’m not getting the iPhone.
However, I do agree with Patrick on how they stuffed the space on ZUNE with too much of this and that, rather than really getting the visitors to focus on the features of the product, like Apple did for their iPhone. ZUNE has a really good commercial that makes you want to buy the product, and if it is less than the cost of the iPhone, design of the website ultimately won’t matter.
PS > AKSHAY- did you watch Borat? He was told the Hummer is some sort of magnet ;-) and I don’t think it had anything to do with small whatchamacallits.
if you ask me, and noone has…
Aside from the Zune’s functionality, it’s basically (from a design standpoint) a hybrid bite off the iPod and Palm Pilot.
(While not defending either), the iPhone has a newer and fresher design all around, and it’s site reflects that (which was the entire point of this blog, no?) Patrick is right, the Zune uses an overly complex layout and lots of verbage to promote how cool it can be.
@jason and akshay – just cause someone pooped in your cereal this morning doesn’t mean ya gotta be condesending devil’s advocates.
evaluate your argument b4 you post – - sucka!
Zune and iPhone have design similarities but the big difference is covered in he word “simple”. KISS is he consumers mantra. Simple, ease of use, clear functions, crisp, clean describes what I’ve seen in iPhone usage.