Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 3rd Nov 2012 01:11 UTC, submitted by Panajev
Apple "Earlier this week Apple fired Scott Forstall, the architect of its iOS platform, and handed his duties over to the company's chief industrial designer, Jonathan Ive. Ive and Forstall had an infamously chilly working relationship, and one of their biggest disagreements was over the role of so-called 'skeuomorphic' design in Apple's products. Forstall, like his mentor Steve Jobs, favored it; Ive disliked it. To many observers, Forstall's forced exit looks like a vindication of Ive's stance. But if he wants to continue Apple's enviable trend of innovation, he'd be a fool to throw the baby of skeuomorphism out with Forstall's bathwater." Hoped for a thorough article on the benefits of skeuomorphism - got the age-old and intrinsically invalid excuse 'because it sells'. Windows isn't he best desktop operating system because it sells so well. Lady Gaga isn't the best artist because she sells a lot of records. This argument is never valid, has zero value, and adds nothing to what should be an interesting discussion.
Permalink for comment 541007
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
StephenBeDoper
Member since:
2005-07-06

If skeumorphism sells... let's use it!


Problem is, there's no real reason to believe that skeumorphism does sell. At most, it's an aspect of the product that Apple sells; it not the product itself or even the primary feature of that product. At best, it could be concluded that skeumorphism doesn't appear to substantially impede sales of Apple's products... without specific evidence, anything beyond that is a stretch.

Of course, it could be the case that Apple's products would be selling even better if it weren't for the skeumorphism. Not that I think that's particularly likely, but it's just as likely as your interpretation of how skeumorphism relates to sales figures - in that there's no definitive evidence for either possibility.

Reply Parent Score: 2