You know Nate, you are absolutely right.
 
I'll offer a response to why this may be, and what influence that had on the planning of the event (maybe kick up enough additional dust to start the ball rolling).
 
The first thought is the stream of Apple references are a huge recognition to their high priority on Design within the development process. It's nothing short of prolific in their products. This makes Apple very easy to use as a case study of success in 'What to do'-type presentations.
 
Personally, my bigger issue is that reality dictates we don't all get to design the ubiquitous, high-style, higher-dollar, any-form-factor-I-want MP3 players. The reality is often less sexy than that. Your cordless drill design might be better-served with a different inspiration than your MP3 player.
 
Which brings me to the second point; why I asked Robert Brunner to speak.
 
I attended the DMI National Conference last year, and Rob gave a very similar presentation. As I watched it begin, I thought, maybe like you would have Nate, "Great, more Apple design dream-world stuff", but Rob took the story somewhere else...
 
Personally, I was totally fascinated that Rob was able to say, in extremely abridged language, "What is good for Apple is not necessarily good for YOUR company or client".
 
Because I agree with your point, Nate, and because I wanted to make it clear at a conference focusing on the BUSINESS of Design, I thought 'Who better to make that point than the guy who had his finger involved with many of those Apple successes, and when given the choice, chose not to repeat that formula'?
 
To me, Robert's presentation was a well-told message stating that, following Apple's lead is not always the path to 'Design success'. The clear case study of Apple versus Dell solidified the point. 'Apple'-like Design would have been a dis-service to Dell.
 
Ideally, Robert's presentation will make people consider other components (cost, practicality, durability, etc.) of Design as 'sexy' as Apple. Maybe someday that will better proportion the references to Apple as the pinnacle of good Design.

I think your rationale for asking Robert to speak, and the message he conveyed were both justified and valuable. I did appreciate that his presentation was never about throwing tons of praise at Apple, but rather showing how what they do works for them, and that you can't apply the magical formula they use to everyone's product line.

My original post was more of an observation on how Apple has penetrated a vast majority of the discussions on design and business. People are fascinated at what they have done. I've found that there are, for the most part, 2 kinds of people: those who LOVE Apple, and those who HATE Apple. There are many who walk the line, but I think they are far outnumbered by the extremists. Apple is a company who spurs debate, so I can understand the draw, and drama of including them in a presentation. I just wish we could find a better balance...

Well-said. Maybe others of you could at least chime in on what OTHER companies produce products that exemplify good design - at any level. Like Wenger? Ducati? Chrysler?

interesting sighting: an artist here in Cincinnati is trying to sell a photograph of his brand new iPod tattoo (located on his calf) at a local coffee shop. What the??

I guess its just proof at how Apple has reached out and given all kinds of demographics the 'product experience'.

I think it came up so much b/c this conference was so focused on design as it applies to your business. Apple's got that down and its a good company to point to in terms of a design success story...especially when speaking with design nonbelievers.

I think this overall theme was a good one because a lot of us designers in corporate settings are fighting the same kinds of battles. HOWEVER, it would have been nice to also get a balanced dose of purely creative, blue sky inspiration. Maybe next time...