DUTCH DESIGN WEEK 2009
PRAGUE DESIGN DAYS 2009
LONDON DESIGN FESTIVAL 2009
GIZMODO GALLERY 2009
EUROBIKE 2009
MAKER FAIRE AFRICA
NEW YORK INTERNATIONAL GIFT FAIR
ISTANBUL DESIGN WEEKEND 2009
BAUHAUS SUMMER SCHOOL 2009
On the Counternotions blog, the author - known only as Kontra - writes at length about the concept of releasing concept products that many companies such as Microsoft, Nokia and various automobile manufacturers indulge in. He points out that Apple doesn't 'do' concepts and hasn't released one to the public since the eighties then tells us that 'real artists ship'. His post expounds at length on Steve Jobs' approach to visionary product design and Apple's strategy of releasing real products not just concepts. Here's a snippet,
Pretenders don't quite understand that design is born of constraints. Real-life constraints, be they tangible or cognitive: Battery-life impacts every other aspect of the iPhone design - hardware and software alike. Screen resolution affects font, icon and UI design. The thickness of a fingertip limits direct, gestural manipulation of on-screen objects. Lack of a physical keyboard and WIMP controls create an unfamiliar mental map of the device. The iPhone design is a bet that solutions to constraints like these can be seamlessly molded into a unified product that will sell. Not a concept. Not a vision. A product that sells.It turns out that when capable designers are given real constraints for real products they can end up creating great results. In Apple's case, groundbreaking products like the iMac, the iPod and the iPhone. Constraints have a wonderful way of focusing the mind on the fundamentals, whereas concept products can often have the opposite affect.
Concept products are like essays, musings in 3D. They are incomplete promises. Shipping products, by contrast, are brutally honest deliveries. You get what's delivered. They live and die by their own design constraints. To the extent they are successful, they do advance the art and science of design and manufacturing by exposing the balance between fantasy and capability.
So, what do you think? Should companies release concept designs or simply wait to launch the products?
Dutch Design Week
Prague Design Days
1 Hour Design Challenge Winners!
Coroflot Salary Survey Results
Comments
I agree.
Concepts are just fake and out of the future scenario, like on paleo future - http://www.paleofuture.com/
It works for entreprises who whant to creat de future and own the thing, but it's a lie, when the future comes the concept from the past is just past.
I don't think it's working nowadays, the society, people, concepts and tec changes so fast that this kind of thinking just don fit anymore.
or not...
Isn't the point of conceptual design to expand the imagination and push boundaries? Something that was coneptual 30 years ago might initiate a reactive design today. While I like Apple's model in regards to this, how flat and mundane might our current products be if everyone adopted the same ideal?
As an "Mac guy" (and stock holder) it is nice to know they don't spend time and money in conceptual designs but I can't help but think where they'd be as a company if they did.
This nails it on the head. Great designers do great designs "inside the box". There is ALWAYS a box.
Figuratively and often literally. High concept design is like masturbation. Its fun but it doesn't lead to much!
Tom,
I seriously doubt that Apple "skips" the conceptual design stage. I'm sure it is still a very big part of their process as is evidenced by the great products they release into the market. They just don't let you see it so that you, and bloggers, and tech critics can pick it apart and speculate about it before it's even had a chance to develop into a finished working product.
I don't think a design office that works with different clients can necessarily work this way. Showing a client a solid concept and getting them onboard with an idea and direction is critical to a product's overall success. That does not mean, however, that a concept should ever released for public scrutiny especially since they can so easily be distributed via the internet to a wide assortment of people who don't necessarily know what a concept is for and misconception about a product can spin wildly out of control.
I DO however, think it would be neat if Apple would give those of us who are interested a glimpse of their concepts AFTER the finished product has been released. I would love to see the initial concepts for the iPod and early mock-ups.
Although there is truth in design is born of constraints,I have a more cynical response to why Apple does not produce or show concepts. I believe in an industry where it is so easy for competitors to easily emulate (read: copy) a good idea and run with it, Apple simply does not wish to tip their hat too early. They have considerable investments into how people view and use technology. The technology itself is rarely the ground breaking component. Apple just finds the way to make people want it!
One of the problems I have with concept design ala what we see with the car companies and more recently the computer companies is that often they will exhibit something rather compelling and very possibly innovative, only to pull back and wash out the idea with revisions that address various realities after the fact. This is just play for them not real. They will never move beyond this until they take this conceptualization seriously and act like it will be a reality.
What about the apple actually not indulging in groundbreaking product architectures at all?
What business have they in pushing the boundaries of design? They know they can follow in the footsteps of other companies that have done the hard work in design-led research. Let them test the water and then we will just add our apple factor to it when we think everyone is ready.
I'm sure they understand that transformation isn't about new products it's about new ways of using them.
So I'm not sure I agree with the post entirely. There is little mystique around apple's not creating concepts. They just go about design differently as per their MO. It's not purely because they are so much more amazing at design than everybody else that they don't see the point. That's absurd.
It's not better it's just different and it's more about business than design in my opinion.
I'm wondering if the reason why apple doesn't show any conceptual masturbation is because they really don't have to. If you look at all the apple inspired concept work that gets posted everyday on the internet, there is already a wealth of possibilities sitting there for there designers to pick and choose, why spend all that time drawing and modeling a conceptual touchscreen laptop if there are already a wealth of product concepts on the net. As a designer you could pick and choose the most interesting aspects which are relevant to your constraints and actually work on making them real. It doesn't really make any sense for a company like Apple to get there designers to work on public releases of concepts which probably have already been to some degree designed by one of there fans.
Further more if Apple did highlight an experience gap in the market, they would be crazy to release a public conceptual product around that experience gap. Makes no business sense, but that doesn't mean that in there own design process they are not building concept products, they probably are but like someone else has posted they don't show anyone.
Microsoft has mostly stopped doing the 'Showcase' concept products that they indulged in for several years at CES, and WinHec. As a non hardware company they were actually trying to get the OEM'S like HP, Dell etc to do cool innovative things, thus they had no intention of productizing these concepts but simply trying to push their under-resourced, low margin partners to try to make PC's cool. They've mostly stopped publicizing this work, though they are very engaged with OEMS on trying to 'rethink' PC's.
Apple has no need for additional hype, its product announcements are so incredibly monumental that pre-announcing would just be take some of the excitement away from the real thing.
Totally disagree with the original post, but I will comment on that site about that.