To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
That's the thing missing from this debate. That the very act of redoing or copying (if you must use the term) can lead to innovation.
Just the act of redoing someone elses work allows you to understand their thinking and allows you to introduce your own.
Far to many people believe in the singular designer or creative talent that works in isolation and plucks amazing ideas out of thin air.
We all build on each others work. Sometimes those building on others aren't of the same skill, but we still allow it all the same.
Ive's designs are clearly built on the work of Dieter Rams, only an idiot would argue otherwise. However Ive's added his own thinking and I utterly defend his right to do so.
Apple is a trendsetter, we accept trends and artistic movements with ease in other fields why is it so hard to accept in the tech industry?
Ive's designs are clearly built on the work of Dieter Rams, only an idiot would argue otherwise. However Ive's added his own thinking and I utterly defend his right to do so.
Dieter Rams works were also highly derivative and not particularly unoriginal. His ideas can be readily traced back to the minimalist designs of the early 20th century. These in turn were derived from ancient Japanese design principles.





Member since:
2007-01-13
In both examples the copies were better in a number of ways than the originals. The Nissan engines were much cheaper to build and lighter than the originals without sacrificing perfomance or reliability. The MX-5 was far better built and far more reliable than the Lotus