Jump to content
Product Design Forums

Treasurebox
Sign in to follow this  
grasshoper

Braun Vs Apple

Recommended Posts

I think Braun is more simplistic (in a good way) than Apple is. I don't know I just have that feeling that Apple uses some features that are questionable, where as Braun is function to the max.

 

I thnk the main issue here is the reasoning for design. Is it nessesary to put all the components of a comuter into 1 perma - sealed box? It's small but you can't upgrade it, so when time comes and it will become outdated just throw the whole thing away and buy a new one!

 

Or those "handle" looking things on the tower box of Apple: I'm not sure if they carry function or not, looks like it just for aesthetics! "Not good" -Dieter Rams probably would say. In his principals of good design the principle #4 of Good design: "Good design displays the logical structure of a product; it's form follows its function"

 

Also one of the main principals behind Braun design is timeless and appealing to people who like function not fashion. One of the key principals of Brown philosophy told by Eichler: "...Products made not for show windows, loud and obrusive eye catchers, but, rather produts that one can live with for a long, long time."

 

I'm afraid ipod is the total oppoisite of that: it was the accessory totally obsessed with fashion, look all the ads people dance with black silouette, etc.. And now it has reach maturity the fashion isn't so fashionable any more when you see everyone including all the janitors etc. using ipod, so the point is some of Apple products not so "timeless", and Apple just keep release product line extension to keep it alive like ipods with built in touch screen or video conferencing, etc.. That's important difference between the design of 2 companies: 2 Different Philosophies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think Braun is more simplistic (in a good way) than Apple is. I don't know I just have that feeling that Apple uses some features that are questionable, where as Braun is function to the max.

 

I feel that both companies are so obsessed with minmalism they forget about functionality. They both produce undoubtedly beautiful products, but they aren't exactly user friendly. Apple's ergonomics of their mice have always been horrible, and they've actually gotten worse over the years, all for the sake of having a mouse that 'looks good'. Remember the hockey puck mouse? Ugh.

 

I thnk the main issue here is the reasoning for design. Is it nessesary to put all the components of a comuter into 1 perma - sealed box? It's small but you can't upgrade it, so when time comes and it will become outdated just throw the whole thing away and buy a new one!

 

Eh... I think you're just spouting common misconceptions. I bought an original iMac back in 1999. I upgraded the ram, the videocard memory, the hard drive, the processor, added a firewire port, and an entirely new videocard. I then had a 17" g4 iMac, and I upgraded the ram and hard drive in that, followed by a G4 Quicksilver Powermac, and I did a lot of things to that one. Ram, HD, CPU upgrade, fan upgrades, temp monitor, all sorts of stuff. Now I have a 24" widescreen iMac, I upgraded the ram, I'll soon upgrade the hard drive, and I can't really upgrade the CPU since intel quit making Core2Duo's for that socket. So... that's more Intel deciding to stop making a chip than anything Apple decided on.

 

Or those "handle" looking things on the tower box of Apple: I'm not sure if they carry function or not, looks like it just for aesthetics! "Not good" -Dieter Rams probably would say. In his principals of good design the principle #4 of Good design: "Good design displays the logical structure of a product; it's form follows its function"

 

They're pretty useful whenever you need to move the thing. They are heavy and awkwardly large, so the handles do help moving them around quite a bit. I like them. I can't stand the overall size though. They're just gigantic.

 

I'm afraid ipod is the total oppoisite of that: it was the accessory totally obsessed with fashion, look all the ads people dance with black silouette, etc.. And now it has reach maturity the fashion isn't so fashionable any more when you see everyone including all the janitors etc. using ipod, so the point is some of Apple products not so "timeless", and Apple just keep release product line extension to keep it alive like ipods with built in touch screen or video conferencing, etc.. That's important difference between the design of 2 companies: 2 Different Philosophies.

 

Again, disagree. The iPod competed with MP3 players that had a LOT more functionality, some had built in memo recorders, FM tuners, input ports, all sorts of extra buttons and features, whereas the iPod merely was it was: It played music, and that was it's primary focus. Because of this and other things (build quality, itunes integration, ease of use, intuitive controls, fun to use scrollwheel), it became extremely popular. It did not START OUT as a fashion accessory, it started out as a high end MP3 player. It was such a huge success that they made a ton of money, and dumped more of it back into R&D to make them even more and more popular. Smaller, lighter, more durable, etc. Yes, now many many many people have them, but it's not because they want to be fashionable. Do you think your 'janitor' bought his iPod to look cool? Or because it is the best digital music player in the marketplace?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest firecracker

In terms of a non-upgradeable mac, I think Kfed was talking about one of those mac mini's.

 

Mac_mini_Intel_Core.jpg

 

they are probably a little bit upgradeable, probably the same as a laptop.

 

 

I do however agree that mac often stray away from the pure funtionalist derived aesthetic.

 

 

Although they are probably the least-worst offender from ALL todays mainstream manufacturers.

 

I think they do a pretty good job of keeping minimal-modernist for the type of company they are.

 

I mean, look at B & O , they have similar reputation/background as leading modernist minimal home audio/video equipment designers in the 60's/70's

 

But look at them now, horribly failing with outdated technology, monotonous design and completley misguided product lines/company direction.

 

They have a high-end mp3 player too now, but who has one?

 

 

But I must also agree that I completley despise the Ipod advertising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Muzza_77
I think Braun is more simplistic (in a good way) than Apple is. I don't know I just have that feeling that Apple uses some features that are questionable, where as Braun is function to the max.

 

I thnk the main issue here is the reasoning for design. Is it nessesary to put all the components of a comuter into 1 perma - sealed box? It's small but you can't upgrade it, so when time comes and it will become outdated just throw the whole thing away and buy a new one!

 

Two reasons why putting the components in a sealed box is ok (for me at least :) ) Having a sealed computer means that the user doesnt have to deal with all the technological components, it just works for them. Which is a selling point for alot of consumers since it is much simpler and hassle free. Secondly you actually dont need to upgrade macs that often, thats the good thing about them, sure you can upgrade the memory or harddrive if your needs change, though things like the graphic card or CPU dont actually need to be upgrade when it comes to a mac (were talking about consumers here) because the chances are you can get a good 7+ years out of a mac, it doesnt become outdated within a year, so there isnt such a need to be upgradeable.

 

Also one of the main principals behind Braun design is timeless and appealing to people who like function not fashion. One of the key principals of Brown philosophy told by Eichler: "...Products made not for show windows, loud and obrusive eye catchers, but, rather produts that one can live with for a long, long time."

 

I'm afraid ipod is the total oppoisite of that: it was the accessory totally obsessed with fashion, look all the ads people dance with black silouette, etc.. And now it has reach maturity the fashion isn't so fashionable any more when you see everyone including all the janitors etc. using ipod, so the point is some of Apple products not so "timeless", and Apple just keep release product line extension to keep it alive like ipods with built in touch screen or video conferencing, etc.. That's important difference between the design of 2 companies: 2 Different Philosophies.

 

I think that apples design is timeless, take the original imac for example, the 'bondi blue'. It was light years ahead of the competition when it was launched. It was stunning, unlike anything the industry had seen before. And if you look today at the bondi blue imac, it still looks great and it still fits in. If all of aples developments where pushed forward and apple released the bondi blue imac at macworld just past, it would have still be a hit and it would fit in. Same goes for the original ipod, it still fits in today and it still looks great.

 

just my 2c, hope it wasnt too confusing.

 

imac.jpg

apple_ipod.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How come mac go for 7 years with no upgrade and pc only 1 year? Don't they use exact same component inside?

 

CRT blue design would not be a hit today everyone use LCD screen and save desk space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Muzza_77

Macs pre-2006 use different processors to Pcs today, macs from 2006 onwards use intel chips. It is also about the software. Mac OS X is a very efficient and powerful system. For example, my sister as her main computer is using an imac from 2000 as her main computer and its working fine for her and doing everything she needs. My mac that I have now, its the latest imac, it'll carry me through uni easily (4 years) so at the end of uni it will be 5 years old and still able to cope with junk that I throw at it.

 

"CRT blue design would not be a hit today everyone use LCD screen and save desk space." haha true, thats a fair point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
. My mac that I have now, its the latest imac, it'll carry me through uni easily (4 years) so at the end of uni it will be 5 years old and still able to cope with junk that I throw at it.

 

but wouldn't a pc with exact same specs able to do same?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
. My mac that I have now, its the latest imac, it'll carry me through uni easily (4 years) so at the end of uni it will be 5 years old and still able to cope with junk that I throw at it.

 

but wouldn't a pc with exact same specs able to do same?

 

Technically yes.

 

In the real world, I don't think so. I still use my iMac from 1999 for various things... it seems like PCs age a lot faster than macs. I don't quite understand it, they just seem to get slower faster. Today, with the hardware being exactly the same, it doesn't really matter.

 

What does matter is resale value, and Macs win at that by a large margin, which is why I replace my machine every few years and pay a few hundred dollars to have a blazing fast top of the line machine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but that's just stupid people willing to pay more for shiny exterior and apple brand equity :-)

 

I'm not so stupid lol if you just paint computer silver color and put shiny logo I'm not gonna pay $100's more for it!

 

Marketing department at Apple is doing great job because they can fool people like you to buy a mac by making it all pretty but inside it's same :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but that's just stupid people willing to pay more for shiny exterior and apple brand equity :-)

 

I'm not so stupid lol if you just paint computer silver color and put shiny logo I'm not gonna pay $100's more for it!

 

Marketing department at Apple is doing great job because they can fool people like you to buy a mac by making it all pretty but inside it's same :)

 

 

Actually I pay more for them so I don't have to use Microsoft's horrible attempt at an operating system. I have owned both Mac's and PC's for years, and I have spent far, FAR more time troubleshooting the PC's. From driver conflicts, to viruses, to figuring out why your firewall/antivirus isn't allowing something else to work, to the horrid design of the O/S in general that completely ignores user interaction and intuition, etc.

 

That is what I pay a premium for. OSX is far superior. This is why Apple's marketshare is climbing, why their stock is skyrocketing, and why they're the trendsetters, the leaders, and have the highest resale value.

 

Also, there are simply NO pc equivalents of many mac programs, yet if I need a windows specific program I can simply boot into windows to use Solidworks or a PC-specific game, then boot back. I could even install paralells which would eliminate my need to reboot.

 

So basically, macs today can do anything PC's can, since they can also run windows. Windows boxes can only run windows, and I would hate to have all my work rest on the 'reliability' of an MS operating system. Please start arguing rationally. Some people's minds are like cement trucks... all mixed up and permanently set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if I need a windows specific program I can simply boot into windows to use Solidworks or a PC-specific game, then boot back. I could even install paralells which would eliminate my need to reboot.

 

Running Solidworks or PC program on a PC is more simple than re - booting every time you need to run it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Muzza_77

Yeah, I am gonna stop this now lol this started out about braun and apple, so lets keep it to that because we can argue over this until we are blue in the face and still get nowhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if I need a windows specific program I can simply boot into windows to use Solidworks or a PC-specific game, then boot back. I could even install paralells which would eliminate my need to reboot.

 

Running Solidworks or PC program on a PC is more simple than re - booting every time you need to run it.

 

uh huh. Anyway, have fun with your crappy os and crap resale value. I'll stick with good resale value and awesome OS. And iLife, which is great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.