|
|
|
|
|
by jonhohle
5594 days ago
|
|
I'm talking less about the physical design and more about the functional design. Apple products are extremely minimalist as a design decision: only include what is necessary, allow the form of the device to reflect what is necessary and the material chosen that expose that functionality. I mean design from a "how things work" perspective, something more objective than just how the thing works. The designs of other companies appear to be aesthetic or functional primarily without regard for the other: design the look of the object and then fit as much functionality in as possible, or the opposite, get as much functionality as possible, and wrap it in some plastic. In either case there is little interaction between form and function, and often complete neglect between one or the other. And even in the great case where both are considered, say Sony's line of VAIOs (I formerly owned a VAIO desktop), the build quality is low, or semifunctional (opening the case on my VAIO was a pain). As others have noted, ThinkPad's may be the best counter example. They are extremely utilitarian. Their good looks, in my opinion, comes from their purely functional approach. |
|
Now don't get me wrong, Apple makes some fantastic product, and Sony makes a ton of crap to go along with its gems, but Sony can still go toe to toe with the company its aesthetic sense inspired.