Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 27th Apr 2012 02:56 UTC
In the News "Sir Jonathan Ive has been crowned British Visionary Innovator in a competition, run by the Intellectual Property Office. Ive won by a large margin with almost fifty per cent of the vote (46.6%). In second place was Sir Tim Berners-Lee (inventor of the world wide web) with 18.8 per cent of the vote. James Goodfellow OBE (the inventor of PIN technology and the cash machine) was in third place with 15.2 per cent of the vote." Alan Turing was also nominated. If you ever needed an illustration of everything that's wrong with the technology industry today, it's this. Guy who designs the exterior of mass-market gadgets wins over guys who actually really contributed to technology. Telling.
Order by: Score:
fire them
by fran on Fri 27th Apr 2012 03:29 UTC
fran
Member since:
2010-08-06

British visionary awards committee should be fired.
Incompetent idiots voting a industrial package designer over and above Tim Berners Lee and Allan Turin can you fck imagine, this so bloody retarded. Probably all in love with apple.

Reply Score: 4

RE: fire them
by Athlander on Fri 27th Apr 2012 05:48 UTC in reply to "fire them"
Athlander Member since:
2008-03-10

Seeing as it's the Intellectual Property Office, they probably think Tim Berners-Lee is some sort of anti-capitalist communist activitist because he didn't patent the www.

Reply Score: 9

RE: fire them
by puenktchen on Fri 27th Apr 2012 08:59 UTC in reply to "fire them"
puenktchen Member since:
2007-07-27

It was a vote of the general public on their website. The general public doesn't know Turing or Berner-Lee. Neither do they know what the WWW is supposed to be. Alas, you can't fire the general public.

Edited 2012-04-27 09:00 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: fire them
by Laurence on Fri 27th Apr 2012 13:28 UTC in reply to "RE: fire them"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

It was a vote of the general public on their website. The general public doesn't know Turing or Berner-Lee. Neither do they know what the WWW is supposed to be. Alas, you can't fire the general public.

Sometimes I wish you could....

Reply Score: 3

tylerdurden
Member since:
2009-03-17

dupe post.

delete please.

Edited 2012-04-27 04:24 UTC

Reply Score: 2

tylerdurden
Member since:
2009-03-17

Or perhaps the world in general. It's the penultimate triumph of form over substance; a boring industrial designer, who in terms of technology has produced basically nil, getting promoted over a genius like Turing whose ideas transformed the world in what now seems almost an infinite number ways.

The shortsightedness of such election, makes this "Visionary" award the more ironic.

Reply Score: 5

kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

The shortsightedness of such election, makes this "Visionary" award the more ironic.


The good thing is that history doesn't care about stupid meaningless awards.

Reply Score: 2

Logical flaw
by kwan_e on Fri 27th Apr 2012 04:35 UTC
kwan_e
Member since:
2007-02-18

The flaw with these things is that they get voted on.

What we really need is to develop a graph of technology with the nodes being specific discoveries and inventions and the edges being a "lead to" relationship between nodes.

The person with the most nodes and weighted by the number of outgoing edges from those nodes is the winner of life.

The person whose nodes have a balanced ratio of outgoing edges with incoming edges (with an above average number of outgoing edges) is the winner of innovation.

The person who uses patents to eliminate competition disqualifies themselves.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Logical flaw
by arpan on Fri 27th Apr 2012 12:20 UTC in reply to "Logical flaw"
arpan Member since:
2006-07-30

The flaw with these things is that they get voted on.


This.

This award doesn't reward the most innovative person. It rewards the celebrities. Alan Turing or Tim Berners-Lee deserve an award a lot more, but since they aren't as well known to the general public, as someone who creates consumer products and appears in ads, they didnt get it.

On the other hand, the fact that they didn't get it, just means that the award is worthless.

Reply Score: 3

v Missing the point
by Tony Swash on Fri 27th Apr 2012 08:30 UTC
RE: Missing the point
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 27th Apr 2012 08:47 UTC in reply to "Missing the point"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

As nice a designer as Ives is - his wholesale Braun ripoffs not withstanding - you can't honestly argue, with a straight face, that he deserves an award for innovation more than Berners-Lee or Turing.

Like I said - it's telling for the state of the industry and the world itself - like the war on science currently taking place in the US. A sad state, where design is more important than actual technology. Arguing that a designer of the exterior of mass-market gadgets deserves this award more than, say, the guy who invented the motherfcuking world wide web, quite possibly the greatest and most profound development in the history of mankind, is almost downright offensive.

In 200 years' time, nobody will give two shits about iPods and iPhones. However, we'll still feel the reverberations of Berners-Lee's work, and the history books of those days will tell of the effects of his work, its importance, and how it changed mankind forever.

Your stupid iPods, iPhones, Android phones, and more of that crap? They'll barely be a sidenote.

Edited 2012-04-27 08:49 UTC

Reply Score: 9

RE[2]: Missing the point
by MOS6510 on Fri 27th Apr 2012 09:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Missing the point"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Well, Berners-Lee did "invent" the world wide web on a NeXT computer.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Missing the point
by arpan on Fri 27th Apr 2012 12:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Missing the point"
arpan Member since:
2006-07-30

Which AFAIK wasn't designed by Ive.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Missing the point
by MOS6510 on Fri 27th Apr 2012 13:11 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Missing the point"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

True, Ive joined Apple while Steve was at NeXT.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Missing the point
by Soulbender on Fri 27th Apr 2012 09:48 UTC in reply to "RE: Missing the point"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

You're confusing innovation with invention.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Missing the point
by kwan_e on Fri 27th Apr 2012 09:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Missing the point"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

You're confusing innovation with invention.


Invention is a special kind of innovation. An invention can also be an innovation. But an innovation is not an invention.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Missing the point
by Tony Swash on Fri 27th Apr 2012 13:46 UTC in reply to "RE: Missing the point"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

The award was a result of people voting. Democracy can be irritating if one disagrees with how other people vote. People voted for Ives because his work resonates with them and that's because of their experience of his (and Apple's) work. bear in mind also that Ives has a portfolio of work over a period of time and one that is building a very large and deep cultural footprint.

a designer of the exterior of mass-market gadgets


You still thinking about design in a shallow way. It's a classic error and one that almost all of Apple's competitors make. There is a very good film about the importance of design called 'Objectified' that's worth a look.

http://www.objectifiedfilm.com/objectified-trailer/

his wholesale Braun ripoffs not withstanding.


Now, now - stop being bitchy. Ives 'ripped off' Dieter Rams in the same way Henri Matisse. 'ripped off' Gauguin ;)

In 200 years' time, nobody will give two shits about iPods and iPhones.

Like we have forgotten about the the Fender Stratocaster, the Helvetica type face, the Swiss Army Knife, Levi 501 Denim Jeans, Telephone Type 300 or the Mercedes-Benz 300SL perhaps??

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Missing the point
by kwan_e on Fri 27th Apr 2012 14:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Missing the point"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

[q

In 200 years' time, nobody will give two shits about iPods and iPhones.

Like we have forgotten about the the Fender Stratocaster, the Helvetica type face, the Swiss Army Knife, Levi 501 Denim Jeans, Telephone Type 300 or the Mercedes-Benz 300SL perhaps?? [/q]

Forgetting and "not giving two shits" are different things.

The Fender Stratocaster hasn't been around for 200 years. Neither has the Merc 300SL. Neither has Helvetica. The Swiss Army Knife actually has a use, rather than just looking good.

What's more telling is that you obviously think the Helvetica type face is on equal importance with the invention of the WWW, or the mathematical bases of computing.

What next? Are you going to try to argue that Lady Gaga songs are of equal importance to the discovery of penicillin?

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Missing the point
by M.Onty on Fri 27th Apr 2012 16:05 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Missing the point"
M.Onty Member since:
2009-10-23


What's more telling is that you obviously think the Helvetica type face is on equal importance with the invention of the WWW, or the mathematical bases of computing.


I'm not sure that is obvious. He was giving an example of products that haven't been forgotten yet, not making direct comparisons.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Missing the point
by kwan_e on Fri 27th Apr 2012 17:19 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Missing the point"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

"
What's more telling is that you obviously think the Helvetica type face is on equal importance with the invention of the WWW, or the mathematical bases of computing.


I'm not sure that is obvious. He was giving an example of products that haven't been forgotten yet, not making direct comparisons.
"

Given the context, he's obviously making the statement that they are equally important enough to both be remembered in 200 years time. I accept that my comment reads as though I said Tony Swash thinks they are equal in technological achievement.

I just find it highly amusing that in response to Thom's "200 years time" argument, he brings up as examples things that have barely made it past half a century.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Missing the point
by Tony Swash on Fri 27th Apr 2012 16:22 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Missing the point"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

What's more telling is that you obviously think the Helvetica type face is on equal importance with the invention of the WWW, or the mathematical bases of computing.


I don't think that actually, I think you may be responding to a point I did not make. I do think that the Helvetica typeface was a pivotal moment in the development of modern graphic design and that when the history of the culture of the 20th and 21st century is written in the 22nd century understanding why the graphic design of almost all media changed sharply after 1957 (and remained changed at least until now) and the role of a single typeface in that change will still be of serious interest.

I do think that seminal objects and designs that have reshaped mass culture have an enduring importance.

There is a really interesting and entertaining film just about the cultural impact of Helvetica - worth a look in my opinion. Once you have watched this film you will view the visual fabric of your life utterly differently ;)

There are some clips here

http://www.helveticafilm.com/clips.html#

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Missing the point
by kwan_e on Fri 27th Apr 2012 17:14 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Missing the point"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

"What's more telling is that you obviously think the Helvetica type face is on equal importance with the invention of the WWW, or the mathematical bases of computing.


I don't think that actually, I think you may be responding to a point I did not make.
"

Oh but you did make and you continue to make it, because you are using it as an argument to support the notion that Jonathan Ives deserved the award more than Berners-Lee and Turing.

There is a really interesting and entertaining film just about the cultural impact of Helvetica - worth a look in my opinion. Once you have watched this film you will view the visual fabric of your life utterly differently ;)


Sorry, but my life is too fulfilling already for a typeface to be worth anything. And that says a lot, given that I'm an atheist with no purpose in life ;)

I personally can't tell the difference between Helvetica and Arial or other popular sans-serif fonts and don't care to. I doubt most people can (or care) either.

I can sink this self-importance with one single question: how significantly has the Helvetica typeface impacted Chinese or Indian culture?

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Missing the point
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 27th Apr 2012 16:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Missing the point"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

You still thinking about design in a shallow way.


I don't (you'll see with the next version of OSNews, designed by me). I just think it's utterly idiotic to consider the design of a music player and phone to be as important as the world wide web or Turing's work.

The only reason you think about Ive like this is because he's from Apple. That's all there's to it. Had Berners-Lee been an Apple employee, you would've defended him. That's just how you operate.

Edited 2012-04-27 16:37 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Missing the point
by tylerdurden on Fri 27th Apr 2012 18:34 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Missing the point"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Like we have forgotten about the the Fender Stratocaster, the Helvetica type face, the Swiss Army Knife, Levi 501 Denim Jeans, Telephone Type 300 or the Mercedes-Benz 300SL perhaps??



I think you have your orders of magnitude mixed up... none of these items is more than a few decades old, let alone hundreds of years.

Edited 2012-04-27 18:36 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Missing the point
by nefer on Sun 29th Apr 2012 11:21 UTC in reply to "RE: Missing the point"
nefer Member since:
2012-02-15

Design IS the product. Design is how it works, not how it looks.

Id much better have well designed, well thought out products, which are easy to use and can be picked up by millions, than techy gadgets which are based around great ideas, but poorly executed, in usability, in look and feel, in build quality. That just competely counteracts with the prime goals of said device in the first place, which is being a tool to enable humans to do something beyond their initial capabilities.

Consider computers. Before the iMac came along, your average desktop PC was a mumbo jumbo of cables. all components were modularized, which meant you had cables for video, printer, mouse, keyboard, speakers, scanner, network ... looking at the back of a PC, its a mumbo jumbo of cables, a dust collecter and a laymans nightmare to set it up. Most people needed an IT guy to get their computer working.

Before you go "but that already existed before" let me stop you right there : the iMac was the machine that brought this quality of computing to the proper attention of the masses, and changed the experience for millions in this respect in a positive way; maybe for you, as a technology enthousiast, this is trivial; for millions of computer users, however, its things like this which make a profound impact on overall user experience.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Missing the point
by kwan_e on Tue 1st May 2012 08:54 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Missing the point"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

Design IS the product. Design is how it works, not how it looks.
.
.
.


I can't believe that people can even argue that a person's contribution to what amounts to nothing more than wasteful discard-once-broken consumerism deserves an innovation award MORE than the person who made computing achievable; MORE than the person who gave the power of crossing cultural and physical barriers to communication to the common person.

Really, "geeks"? Really?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Missing the point
by Janvl on Fri 27th Apr 2012 09:02 UTC in reply to "Missing the point"
Janvl Member since:
2007-02-20

Indeed missing the point.

A series of copied ideas, the chinese worthy.

About the environment, read www.phonestory.org
Apple is one of the largest polluters.

Thom is right, a very very sad result that shows how little we care about real achievements.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Missing the point
by kwan_e on Fri 27th Apr 2012 09:50 UTC in reply to "Missing the point"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

Can you stop it with your HR/marketing/MBA logic? You types are the most useless people in tech and we'd be all better off without you guys trying to make yourself more important than you are.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Missing the point
by M.Onty on Fri 27th Apr 2012 10:07 UTC in reply to "Missing the point"
M.Onty Member since:
2009-10-23

Ive isn't being compared to some obscure code monkeys or engineers whos' admittedly brilliant but inaccessible work was only made successful by the intervention of a worldly designer. He's being compared to the man who came up with the concept of universal computers, helped shorten WWII by a two years* and was midwife at the birth of both the British and American computer industries. He's also, as Thom points out above, being compared to the creator of the world wide web, which we appear to be essentially using to debate the relative importance of it vs the iPod.

Its only a public poll, meaning people make snap judgments based on who they've heard of, so we shouldn't get too worked up about it. Therefore I wouldn't say it was indicative of a general world malaise; but I would say its indicative of Britain's forty years of media and politics deliberately belittling its 'metal bashers'**, of which we have had some of the best.

______________________________________________________

* Axis forces knew that the Enigma was breakable, they just thought that the effort required to break it would be so gigantic that no-one would ever bother. Guess who did bother?

** Real headline from The Times, some decades ago, arguing that Britain should become an exclusively service based economy: "Metal Bashers Should Shut Up Shop".

Edited 2012-04-27 10:14 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE: Missing the point
by BallmerKnowsBest on Fri 27th Apr 2012 18:13 UTC in reply to "Missing the point"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

I think your response is erroneous and incomplete. It is founded upon the mistaken idea that what counts is the technical intricacies of devices rather than what they do for people.


Congrats, only 2 sentences in and you've already managed to shoot your own argument in the foot. And I can demonstrate that with 2 simple questions.

1) What precisely is it that Ives-designed products "do for people" (your words) that is of any real significance?

2) And would any of those things be possible without the work done by Berners-Lee and Turing?

The answer to 2 is obviously "no" - meaning that Berners-Lee's and Turing's contributions are infinitely more important than Ives'. Unless, of course, your answer to question 1 is "give people warm, fuzzy feelings."

Reply Score: 4

What about Sir Clive Sinclair?
by bloodline on Fri 27th Apr 2012 09:57 UTC
bloodline
Member since:
2008-07-28

I think Clive Sinclair once said (about 1995 IIRC), that genius was not about thinking up something new... But finding a new way of combining existing technologies, in a way that is more beneficial to the user.

I guess what he was trying to say, is that done right, the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts.

Edited 2012-04-27 09:58 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Don't forget that...
by Kochise on Fri 27th Apr 2012 11:35 UTC
Kochise
Member since:
2006-03-03

...Turing was gay, and as such, England pushed him to suicide. Read his real story :/

Kochise

Reply Score: 2

RE: Don't forget that...
by M.Onty on Fri 27th Apr 2012 12:11 UTC in reply to "Don't forget that..."
M.Onty Member since:
2009-10-23

Turing was revealed to be gay at almost exactly the worst time to be outed in English history. Previous to the Oscar Wilde case, a hundred years before, the law had largely turned a blind eye. Since then it had become increasingly strident in its prosecutions, and it was still over a decade until decriminalisation. A very sad moment in the country's history. There was, however, an official appology by the Prime Minister three years ago.

Reply Score: 2

Worthless Poll
by nicolasgoddone on Fri 27th Apr 2012 15:23 UTC
nicolasgoddone
Member since:
2009-04-20

Who on earth chooses the candidates!!??

Why just not throw Pasteur, Einstein, Maxwell, Tesla, Steve Jobs, Jesus and the Tooth Faerie all together!!!???

The problem is the universe of voters, who know close to noting about the candidates, practically illiterate in computer science and it's history, why not ask Ive's himself how he feels about the result or how he fairs against the other contenders?

Reply Score: 3