Trends in General Design Technologies
(from the Autodesk site during March 2000)
Designed in Milan, Made in Nanjing
Better Design Tools
Back to the Future
Share the Wealth
World Wide Web of Design
Evaluating New Technologies
Designed in Milan, Made in Nanjing
Good design turns heads and helps differentiate similar products and services. In today’s
economy, where business crosses borders and products increasingly are built from standard
components, good design is more important than ever. As the Internet gains popularity,
evaluating the aesthetics of various designs is as fast and easy as a few mouse clicks. In this
environment, the quality of a firm’s designs is becoming widely regarded as a key competitive
advantage. Smart designers worldwide are placing a greater value on tools and practices that
improve their ability to deliver innovative design.
"O writer, with what letters will you describe with such perfection all that is depicted here in
drawing? . . . don't try to convey to the ears those things that pertain to the eyes, because the
painter will be vastly better at it than you . . . Therefore it is necessary to draw as well as to
describe."
—Leonardo da Vinci
Better Design Tools
In the beginning, designers scratched their ideas in dirt or on walls. Later they used scale models.
It wasn’t until Leonardo da Vinci and other Renaissance artist-engineers discovered the laws of
perspective that drawings took over as the preferred form of technical communications. Their
techniques of cutaway, exploded, and rotating views pioneered the working drawing.
With the invention of computers, many designers made the transition from paper to digital
drawings. In the last decade, millions more improved both drawing precision and productivity
with feature-packed CAD and graphics applications. In the next one, you’ll continue to benefit
from higher-quality design tools. From general-purpose 2D drafting and diagramming to
completely integrated solutions for specific disciplines, software will be more affordable, easier
to learn and use, and more powerful.
1
Back to the Future
Prior to the Renaissance, design and construction were based almost solely on scale models—
real 3D models—fashioned by the hands of artisans. The graphic innovations of the Renaissance
led to the increased use of paper drawings because they were quicker, cheaper, and more
portable; they made it easier to transmit design ideas across distances. Thanks to technology
improvements, especially solid modeling software and object-oriented code, there is a growing
trend back to model-based design—but with a modern twist.
Today’s 3D digital models are portable, and they make it easy to generate any number of views
and drawings. Models also have more intelligence. Object-based models contain smart elements,
or objects, that behave like their real-world counterparts. And in addition to geometry, models
can include nongraphical information like specifications, cut lists, cost data, even assembly
instructions and maintenance schedules.
With all these advantages, 3D models are once again becoming popular in many fields of design.
Recent studies estimate that about 1.25 million seats of 3D CAD software are in use today,
increasing to 3 million seats in 2003.
Share the Wealth
Awareness is growing that the ability to easily access and reuse design data is central to realizing
the productivity potential of new technologies. The intelligence designers build into their models
represents intellectual capital that can help shorten time to completion, improve design quality,
and drive other business-related functions like accounting, sales, and operations. As a result,
software vendors are developing new ways for designers to share design data and collaborate
with colleagues and business partners inside and outside the firm.
World Wide Web of Design
Rarely has an innovation come along with so many capabilities. The Internet is the newspaper,
reference library, mail system, conference room, and marketplace all rolled into one.
The Web and related technologies are transforming design disciplines. Designers now access and
drag design elements directly into drawings. Designs include embedded links to other drawings
and databases. Project websites serve as virtual studios where design teams can meet and
collaborate as needed for the duration of a project.
The Web is also enabling the trend toward industry-specific portals and marketplaces that bring
together people with similar interests. These online communities make it easier for designers to
look for jobs, post Requests for Proposals, find suppliers and subcontractors, share design
techniques, and much more.
Designers in all fields are finding that the Internet helps them add value to designs, improve
client satisfaction, and increase profits.
2
Evaluating New Technologies
To succeed in today’s competitive and increasingly global economy, you need tools that help
you produce innovative designs. But you need to adopt new technologies in a way that won’t
disrupt your business. Look for solutions that enable you to improve and extend your skills—and
accomplish many of your daily design tasks—while building on the assets you already have. Try
new products and services to make sure they work for you before implementing them throughout
your company.
-------------------------------------------When Design Misfires
Designers and engineers are just as much modern explorers of human society—adventurers and
risk-takers who push the frontiers of human endeavor—as any team that treks up Everest. And
their influence is far greater. So when a design misfires, what’s your best option? To Dr. Moira
Gunn, host of NPR's Tech Nation, the only real failure is “not learning from your mistakes." In
other words, get up off the floor and go another 10 rounds.
Fortunately most failed designs don’t have lethal implications (you could have designed the
Titanic), merely representing the loss of capital and the death of what seemed like such great
ideas. Autodesk, too, has had to kill off a few of its own ideas that didn’t work out as intended.
Let’s take a stroll through some of the more interesting design misfires of the decade we just
ended—products and projects that will be remembered for their overblown budgets and
underwhelming public response.
That said, the following four projects and products are among the biggest and most controversial
design misfires of the 1990s, some of which made it to market before their time, but ultimately
paved the way for better product development.
Gravity Gets Newton
The Denver Airport: It Cost How Much?
Jubilee: London’s Silver Line Has Its Clouds
Fuzzy Logic: AT&T’s VideoPhone 2500
Gravity Gets Newton
Stroll past the cafes of Silicon Valley on a Tuesday night and you'll probably run into a group of
SNUGlers (Stanford Newton Users Group) crying into their cappuccinos and swapping tips on
how to buy a used Newton Message Pad 2000. Self-described "Newton evangelists" have had to
turn to each other for support and information ever since Apple CEO Steve Jobs fired the arrow
that knocked the company's Newton OS-based products, including the MessagePad 2100 and
eMate 300, off the Apple cart forever.
"This decision is consistent with our strategy to focus all of our software development resources
on extending the Macintosh operating system," said Jobs. "To realize our ambitious plans we
must focus all of our efforts in one direction." (From an Apple press release, February 27, 1998.)
3
That direction was the highly successful iMac, but it left thousands of Newton users clutching a
machine that had no support and no future.
The Original MessagePad
Courtesy of Apple Computer, Inc.
Everything but the Kitchen Sink
Apple's Original MessagePad, first launched in August of 1993, promised to make life easier for
everyone from busy parents to navigators. The $500 product had an appointment calendar, an
alarm, an address book, and a screen with an electronic pencil for handwritten notes or sketches.
It had a port to send and receive e-mail and track phone calls, and it could interface via cable to
any Macintosh or Windows-based desktop computer for data transfer. It probably could do
dishes, if you had a programmable dishwasher with a SCSI port.
About 80,000 customers bought the Newton within its first three months of production,
according to Ross Rubin, vice president of Research and Development at Jupiter
Communications. He says buyers and technical analysts thought the product concept was
brilliant, but the execution was never quite as convenient as it promised to be.
"It was too big compared to today's Palm Pilot [from 3Com]. It was bulky. There was no good
place to carry it," said Rubin. At eight inches tall, four inches wide, and weighing more than a
pound, the Newton didn't tuck conveniently into a jacket pocket, and it only comfortably fit a
hand owned by Michael Jordan.
4
According to Rubin, the main problem initially was Newton's inability to decipher handscrawled notes. But he hastens to add, "About a year and a half after the initial launch, the
Newton 2.0 had vastly improved handwriting recognition even against today's standards."
Ultimately, Apple only sold about 150,000 Newtons. Rubin thinks the company should have
stuck with the product, scaled it down, and worked out the bugs. But by 1998, Apple simply had
too many irons in the fire to continue developing a losing product.
iMac to the Rescue
So focus it did, on its major innovation, the translucent, multicolored iMac. The decision to go
see-through brought up some interesting manufacturing challenges for Apple. iMac designer
Jonathan Ive says: "Every minute detail was considered from internal structure and fixing right
down to the product labels, for which we used a new printing process that has never been used
on product labels before. We even had to design the shape of the circuit boards as they became
an intrinsic part of the product's appearance."
Courtesy of Apple Computer, Inc.
iMac DV, grape
To create the iMac's vivid hues the company teamed up with a partner who did a lot of work in
the candy industry. Says Ive, "These guys have so much experience in how you control the
compounding and a great understanding of the science of color control."
Ultimately, the Newton turned out to be anything but wasted fruit for the world of computer
design. Apple's experiment helped inspire other companies to develop more portable and more
efficient pocket organizers like 3Com's Palm organizers and Hewlett Packard's Jornada.
Apple's efforts whetted consumer appetite for a handheld computer, creating demand for a
technology that benefited thousands of people. As for the Newton lovers—those who didn't flee
to other hardware makers—they’ve devoted themselves to creating websites, T-shirts, and
fanzines to honor the fallen Newton.
5
Websites for Newton Lovers
Apple
Stanford Handheld User Groups
Stanford Newton User Group (SNUG)
Michigan State Palm Top Users Group
See also Defying Gravity: The Making of Newton by Markos Kounalakis, Doug Menuez
(October 1993) Beyond Words Pub Co; ISBN: 0941831949.
-----------------------------------------------Denver International Airport: It Cost How Much?
Utter the words Denver International Airport to any professor of architecture or urban planning,
or to anyone who owns a suitcase for that matter, and you're guaranteed to elicit peals of
laughter.
The vast $4.9 billion dollar airport opened February 28, 1995—two years behind schedule and
$300 million over budget. It was the first major airport built in the United States in 20 years and
was to replace Stapleton International Airport—a facility that was suffering from air traffic
congestion and noise problems. Instead of making Denver the king of the frontier states, it nearly
wiped it off the map.
Alan Hess, architecture critic for the San Jose Mercury News, calls the design "Piranesi meets
Escher. It's exhausting to get around. It's like the image in Toy Story 2 of suitcases going every
which way with not a human in sight."
A Bumpy Landing for Baggage
Indeed, the leviathan baggage-handling system seemed to be the main problem. Operating bugs
in the automation delayed the airport opening four times.
The $200 million system, built by Britain's BAE Automated Systems Incorporated, was
supposed to carry luggage all the way from the terminals to the planes. It relied on photo cells
and radio frequencies to direct baggage along 17 miles of track to its correct destination. Instead,
televised test-runs showed baggage flying off conveyer belts, leaving passengers wondering if
that bumpy landing would be their plane running over a pair of skis. Project managers were
forced to install an alternative baggage-handling system at a cost of $51 million. The problems
didn't end there. The airport closed three months after it opened to undergo another round of
costly repairs when engineers discovered they'd failed to install rebar under runways. Added to
that, flight information screens inside the airport didn't work, and about 25 security doors failed
to seal properly.
A Modern-Day Teepee on the Plains
Even the architecture came in for a drubbing. The public and press ridiculed the 126-foot-high
draped roof, calling it a giant circus tent or a cluster of teepees. From some angles the spires
6
appear to emulate the Colorado Rocky Mountains in the distance. Airport officials defended the
transparent fiberglass and fabric roof, not for its esthetic, but by saying it cost $6 to $10 million
less than a conventional roof and virtually eliminated the need for electric lighting during the
day. Heaven knows they needed to economize somewhere.
The Denver International Airport is currently the eighth largest in the world, carrying 96,000
passengers a day, with 1,200 daily flights. For now, it seems to be outrunning its bad press. But it
will be some time before the project pays for itself. Most Denver citizens say that if they had the
opportunity to vote for the project again, they'd vote "no." For Rolf Pendall of Cornell's
department of regional and urban planning, the airport's 23-mile distance from Denver "will
undoubtedly spur more urban sprawl from a regional planning point of view. Who knows what
judgment's going on. Maybe the advantages of these disasters is that they allow us to not make
these same mistakes in the future."
----------------------------------London's Silver Line Has Its Clouds
London's seven million residents enjoy one of the best public transportation systems in the
world, served by an intricate network of trains, buses, and subways. Alas, travelers who wanted
to hop on London's newest underground, the Jubilee Line Extension, known as the JLE, had to
wait more than a year and a half for a train.
The original Jubilee Line (depicted in silver on the London Underground map) first opened in
1979, to commemorate Queen Elizabeth's 25th anniversary on the throne. The ambitious $3.4
billion JLE is the Underground's first major expansion in 30 years, linking some of central
London's oldest stations with the eastside suburbs, stopping at 11 new stations along the way.
Opening Date Goes Down the Tubes
However, several years into construction of the high-tech tube, it became clear that the March
1998 opening date was a pipe dream. In 1994, the project was stalled for about a year when a
tunnel collapsed in an unrelated project at Heathrow Airport. JLE managers wanted to be sure
that the same Austrian tunneling method they were using would not imperil the JLE.
It would take an another year and a half, another $2 billion, and a whole new team of engineers
to bring the immense task to completion.
The problem, says Peter Hall, Professor at University of London and author of Great Planning
Disasters, was that London Transport and the system's designer, Westinghouse, decided to use a
brand-new train-moving technology that had never before been used in a major metropolitan
subway system. "It was called Moving Block Signaling, and they wanted to move the train along
in electronic envelopes. About a year before it opened it became clear it wasn't going to work.
They decided to put in conventional color light signaling, which the line was not designed for."
As technical problems and costs began to spiral out of control, Britain's government decided to
bring in San Francisco's Bechtel Corporation to do triage. Bechtel project director, Clifford
Mumm, blamed the system's problems on the critical planning phase.
7
"The old rule is that eighty percent of the cost of a project is affected by the design phase. If time
had allowed we would have got a better design,” says Mumm.
Bechtel took over the project and completed the line to open stations in phases. But, according to
London University's Peter Hall, the system still isn't performing at a hundred percent. He says
signaling failures have caused trains to stop at random, rendering timetables unreliable. Hall's
warning to future transit engineers: "If you retrofit a design, you're going to have component
failures."
Bumpy Road Leads to Technological Improvements
Despite its construction snafus, Peter Hall says "it's a very elegant modern railway. The stations
are beautifully designed. They're going to become architectural monuments."
The six new stations are larger and airier than any others in the London Underground. They also
include safety features heretofore unseen on a major subway, including sliding doors on the
platforms to prevent passengers from falling onto the tracks. And there are special
accommodations for disabled passengers.
JLE spokesperson Ann Laker defends the system's delays as "weaning problems." She says the
line's state-of-the-art computer software stalls or shuts down the trains if there are any warning
signs. And she believes that the new signaling system will eventually enable the Underground to
run more many more trains than a conventional system.
A few months into its operation, the JLE already has more than a quarter of a million riders each
day. Laker's conclusion: "Those people wouldn't be using it if it didn't work."
Indeed, London Transport learned a $5 billion lesson about building a 21st century subway line.
Senior Supervising Engineer Mike Jenkins told Britain's New Civil Engineer Magazine: "When
you consider what has been achieved, it has been an astounding success. We have laid down new
safety standards ... and introduced a whole new section of the capital's population to the Tube."
------------------------------------Fuzzy Logic: AT&T's VideoPhone 2500
Why would anyone pay more than a thousand dollars to see wobbly, fuzzy moving pictures of
relatives and business associates? Millions of consumers asked themselves that very question as
they resisted the urge to rush out and buy AT&T's VideoPhone. The communications giant
pulled the product off the market in 1994, when it realized that the only people buying it were
grandparents in France and Japan. For everyone else, it was an enticing idea whose time and
affordability had not yet arrived.
8
AT&T’s VideoPhone
Courtesy of AT&T archives
“It never caught on because the price was extremely high,” admits AT&T spokesman Burke
Stinson. Not only did the VideoPhone retail for about $1,500, but to use it, you had to know
someone with a companion phone. That meant families had to buy not one, but two VideoPhones
to partake of the interactive experience. And for that price, they could buy quite a lot of
Kodachrome.
In Touch but Not in Sync
The appeal of the VideoPhones was obvious. By the time it hit the drawing board, it had long
since captured the popular imagination. The Starship Enterprise had video communications, Dick
Tracy had a wrist phone, so it seemed only a matter of time before Jane and Joe Schmoe got one
too. AT&T made the fantasy a reality in 1964 when it showed off its first Picture Phone to great
acclaim at the World Trade Show. But it was 20 more years before the company produced the
VideoPhone 2500 for the masses.
The unit plugged in to a regular telephone line. It had a small, square screen and camera that
transmitted staccato images reminiscent of Max Headroom. The sound was consistent with a
regular phone, but the face moved out of sync with the voice.
The technology wasn’t quite ready says Ross Rubin, vice president of research and development
at Jupiter Communications. The main problem was bandwidth. Before fiber optics and digital
technology, analog telephone lines could only carry part of the visual information. “You were
never able to get anything remotely approaching television-quality video over standard phone
lines.”
Furthermore, its size didn't make it easily portable. It could sit wherever the phone cord reached,
but the user had to be facing it. Once the novelty of being able to see the other person wore off, it
was just plain boring, admits AT&T's Burke Stinson.
9
“When you and I are together in an office, we look at each other’s body language. However
when you’re talking on the VideoPhone we’ll like it for a good three or four minutes, then we’ll
get that uneasy feeling that we can’t put our finger on. It’s not changing. There’s nothing going
on.”
Most people discovered that they'd rather preserve their privacy, says Jupiter Communications'
Ross Rubin. So unless they were talking to loved ones, they'd turn off the screen. "People are on
the phone a lot at home, when they’re not ideally as they would like to be seen.” Rubin says
people would rather have less interaction than more, hence the popularity of e-mail.
VideoPhone Solution: More MTV
Early in 1993, AT&T dropped the price of its VideoPhone 2500 by $500. It even offered an
interest-free installment plan, overnight rentals, and free use from videophone booths in AT&T
stores. AT&T won't reveal how many units it finally sold, except to say that the product simply
sat on store shelves.
AT&T’s Burke Stinson thinks the VideoPhone's failure was partly a "generational problem." In
the 1980s, the consumers who could afford the product weren’t used to jumping in front of a
camera like today’s MTV babies. “The new generation is very forgiving, they grew up seeing
visual representations of audio, when they hear a song, they also want to see the video.” Rubin
thinks cellular phones will eventually incorporate video technology, as well as function as handheld computers.
For now, AT&T has sidelined development of a better VideoPhone, but Stinson still believes its
day will come. “Picture phones have been sitting around waiting for the right time. Maybe 2004
will be the right time.”
------------------------------------A Millennial Cornucopia of Designs
British Prime Minister Tony Blair revitalized his country’s Design Council in 1997 when he
launched a kind of design contest to produce "Millennium Products" promoting and recognizing
innovation across the UK. Over 4,000 submissions were received over the life of the project,
which closed in December 1999. The Millennium Products are now on display at Skyscape next
to the London’s Millennium Dome—and on the Web.
The products submitted cover a vast design range—from Rolls Royce engines to a mortgage plan
offered by the Bank of Scotland. The online exhibit changes periodically, but we’ve captured a
few for our readers to get a feel for the site.
Far and away the majority of Millennium Products falls into the category of general design, and
in some cases stretch not only the imagination but also the very definition of design.
10

Many of the innovative products are practical. Adaptive spectacles enable wearers to
correct vision without the need of eye tests (somewhat like focusing binoculars). This
eyewear is of particular value in developing countries. The Cellopore is a self-contained
pouch that purifies microbiologically unsafe water making it safe for drinking of
reconstituting dehydrated foods. The wind-up lantern, from the makers of wind-up radios,
provides light wherever you are after a simple wind-up stimulates charging units.

Some Millennium Products fill formerly unrecognized needs. The cow’s waterbed results
in fewer injuries, better bovine hygiene, and lower veterinary costs, not to mention
greater comfort. A flat flashlight the size of a credit card called the Eon boasts long life
using energy efficient white LEDs. The Anywayup Cup, a child’s training cup with a
patented valve allows liquid to flow only when the child sucks. The Oasis Turbotable is a
fancy ironing board with a fan that sucks steam through the garments being ironed.

Several newly design products enhance life’s pleasanter pursuits. A "Soloist" coronet
with interchangeable lead pipes incorporates several instruments into one body to
accommodate various playing demands. The Buddy Aqualung extends diving time for
amateurs and professionals.

The medical world has gained from a number of innovative products. A needle-free
injector enables users to self-inject medicines without pricking the skin. A rough terrain
wheelchair designed specifically for handicapped living in rural areas also gained
11
Millennium Product status. And the Design Council awarded Millennium Product status
to the drug Viagra.

A few winners stretch the definition of design: The Bank of Scotland’s sharedappreciation mortgage enables homeowners to release cash tied up in their houses for
zero percent interest payments in return for a share in any appreciation in value realized
at the time of sale. A CD about virtual homelessness designed to warn would-be
runaways of the harsh realities involved in street living also won listing as a Millennium
Product.
A rotating display of Millennium Products can by viewed on the Web at www.millenniumproducts.org.uk. The site offers a fun and informative browse, and links to the product
manufacturers when available.
--------------------------------------Neural Networks for Business
Mimicking the biological nervous system, miniaturized computer connections can be hooked up
into neural networks. They’re already being used to predict business and marketing trends, and
to monitor performance patterns in mission-critical infrastructure.
Frank Dzubeck, president of Communications Network Architects consultancy in Washington,
D.C., says that neural network logic does not require an existing knowledge base, as do
traditional statistical inference engines that predict system failures. Instead, neural agents called
neugents "learn" about the behavior of a system they’re monitoring and give warnings when
situations develop that have caused problems in the past. The neugents are taught the parameters
of correct performance so they can detect threatening deviations. They perform trend analysis in
a number of industries, including telecommunications and electric utilities, where disruptions can
grow faster than humans can respond.
Banks are adopting the technology to identify high-risk credit customers. And Standard and Poor
(S&P) now uses a neural network–based system called Decider, from Neural Technologies (UK),
to launch an Internet-based credit rating system. Decider develops a credit score on a candidate
company and analyzes a list of variables S&P wants answered. Typically a bank would charge
$40,000 to develop a thorough credit rating on a company: Decider does it for about $400.
Performance like that is one reason the worldwide market for predictive modeling tools in
financial services is growing at 21 percent per year, three times the growth rate for other
financial industry applications.
"What neural nets offer that pure statistics don’t is the ability to elicit results when working with
incomplete data that’s specific to an organization," says consultant Richard Gordon at Predictive
Systems Inc., in New York. This ability of neural networks to deal with incomplete data is
greatly enhanced when joined with 3D visual technology.
------------------------------------
12
Why We Buy
by Charles Fishman
Photographs by Catherine Ledner
first appeared: Fast Company issue 29 page 282
Computers are a commodity: They're all the same shape and color. The iMac changes all of that.
Jonathan Ive, designer of the iMac, describes the rules behind design that has power, passion,
and purpose -- design that makes us buy.
About the tamest description offered of Apple's saucy iMac computer is that it is "postbeige" -- a
neat phrase that is simultaneously descriptive and hopeful.
More typically, the 15-month-old iMac has inspired a blossoming of puns, metaphors, colorful
language, and just plain silliness:
The iMac is egg-shaped, gumdrop-shaped, pear-shaped, hood-shaped, and beach-ball-like.
It is cute 'n' jazzy, retro-curvy, funky and snazzy, and extremely friendly.
It is a glowing, fruit-hued, Lifesaver-colored, trendoid status symbol.
It is an accessory, not just a tool.
You want to touch it, to hug it, to tickle it under its chin.
The iMac has put the crunch back into Apple. It is electrifying the entire computer industry. It is
a design breakthrough.
Buying an iMac makes you feel hopeful again. It is a revolution in a box.
The iMac's design evokes such an emotional response that it even fires the imaginations of its
critics. Tom Wolfe, who might have been prefiguring the iMac when he wrote "The KandyKolored Tangerine-Flake Streamline Baby," recently grumped that the iMac symbolized the
death of 20th-century American design. The iMac, he said, is a "blobjet." On its own Web site,
Apple calls it a "rocket computer."
Call it what you will, the iMac is indisputably successful. In its first year on the market, 2 million
iMacs were sold. During most of that time, the iMac was the number one -- selling computer
model in the country.
And, not surprisingly, the computer has had a direct impact on Apple's bottom line: The iMac
has helped pull Apple back to profitability for two years in a row and has helped boost the
company's stock price from 15 to 70.
As no computer has done since the early days of Apple computers, the iMac has captivated
consumers. Apple claims that one-third of individuals who bought iMacs never owned a
computer before; independent surveys cut that figure in half. Either way, it's an amazing statistic.
People have been moved to purchase a first computer because of the image that the iMac
conveys -- because of its colors, its approachability, its simplicity. The iMac has even managed
to silence the decadelong crossfire -- PC or Mac? Apple seems to be winking broadly at that
question and asking one of its own: Which color? It may be difficult to believe, but until the
13
iMac came along, no manufacturer had produced a computer in a rainbow of colors. Colors pose
inventory problems. Who needs the extra hassle? Khaki computers work just fine.
The iMac won a spot in popular culture almost instantly -- it has come to represent all turn-ofthe-century computers. On shows like "Ally McBeal," office workers use iMacs simply because
their appearance says, "I am a cool computer in a cool office."
The iMac's role as icon is no accident. Orchestrated by Steve Jobs, Apple's cofounder and
interim CEO ( iCEO ), the iMac is the labor of Jonathan Ive and the industrial-design group that
he heads. Ive, 32, a Brit, started his career in London, designing everything from washbasins and
bathtubs to TVs and VCRs for Japanese companies. As a contractor, Ive also helped design
Apple's early PowerBooks, and he headed from London to Cupertino, California to join Apple
full-time in 1992.
Almost everything that's striking about the iMac -- its unassuming shape, its candy-shop colors,
its inviting cable cover -- had been carefully calculated. A case in point: Ive himself talked to
companies that produce translucent candy to make sure that the iMac's translucence worked just
right.
Ive's development group -- which also produced the iMac's new sibling, the iBook -- is intensely
secretive. Reporters aren't allowed to interview Ive in his office because there's too much cool,
futuristic stuff lying around. Ive won't say how many people work in industrial design, and he
won't hint at what will come after the iBook, except to say, "We feel that we're just getting
going."
Fast Company talked with Ive about the design principles that infuse the iMac, the iBook, and
the ongoing work of his design group. From bathtubs to computers, here are some of Ive's
fundamental rules for creating a design that sells.
Good Design Starts a Good Conversation
The right conversation is one that's meaningful to customers. Part of that is about design. And a
lot of that is about making the design understandable. Because the technology is powerful, and
because we're very confident about that, we don't have to obsess about trying to communicate
just how powerful the iMac is. We can be more overtly concerned about, and put a lot of energy
into, other attributes.
When people shop for an iMac, I love that the discussion is now much more egalitarian, more
accessible, and more open, instead of being about technologies that many people don't
understand. I like that you can go into a store and have a discussion about which color you want.
That's something that the whole family can do. That's exciting. We've made the whole process of
buying and using computers more accessible.
A Computer Is Not a Teacup . . .
The iMac is a holistic product. The price is right, the performance is right, and the combination
of those two attributes, along with the design, has made it a well-balanced, relevant product.
But design alone would not have been sufficient to make it successful. It's important to
understand the contribution that design can make. It's significant. But if factors like performance
and price are not right, then design would be fairly irrelevant.
14
One thing that is in the genes of Apple Computer, the company, is connecting people with
technology in a friendly and accessible way. If you've got technology on the one hand and you've
got people on the other, then an object's design -- no matter what that object is -- defines the
nature of that connection.
That's particularly true of high-technology products, because the internal workings of the
machine are enigmatic. The majority of people simply do not understand how those things work.
And there is no physical expression of the object's function. Unlike, for example, a teacup or a
comb, which are what they do.
A washbasin is a good example; that's something I've actually designed in the past. A
washbasin's form and function are exactly the same. The object's appearance and meaning are
completely accessible: It looks like a washbasin, because that's what it is. You look at it, and you
think, "Okay, I understand that." People make an immediate connection with it.
With technology, the function is much more abstract to users, and so the product's meaning is
almost entirely defined by the designer. I think that's an incredible opportunity, but with that
opportunity comes an enormous responsibility. If you are designing an object, you are defining
what it means to people: You are conveying what the object is, what it does, how it does it,
where it does it, and how much it's going to cost. So especially if you're dealing with incredibly
compelling technology like computers, the responsibility is to make the relationship between
people and the technology as effective, as natural, as accessible, and as enjoyable as possible.
. . . But a Computer Might Be an Entire Tea Set
When we started designing the iMac, we were wrestling with the question, What is the function
of a computer? One thing that really struck us was that a computer's function can change
radically: It can be a digital video-editing station, a content browser, or a typewriter. That's a
unique ability -- for something to change its function so dramatically. So we were wrestling with
the fluid nature of the object. At the same time, we were trying to make the technology as
accessible, as friendly, and as nonthreatening as possible. That involves focusing on a couple of
levels.
The first level we focused on was the overall form of the product. It absolutely needed to be
about tomorrow, and we really wanted to define something new. But something dramatically
new can actually alienate people. That design challenge represented an interesting paradox for
us: how to create something for tomorrow that people are comfortable with today.
A lot of energy went into defining an overall form that was in some senses "strangely familiar"
but that was also about tomorrow.
Design Is All about Understanding
We didn't come up with an architectural solution. That's one of the things that struck us about
how a computer's function changes. The design should be something that feels fluid and
dynamic. I think the iMac looks like it's just arrived or is just about to leave. It's not something
that's grounded permanently to the surface that you put it on.
15
A number of details reflect that sense as well. The handle, for instance, clearly makes the iMac
something that's not permanent. It makes it approachable, accessible. Obviously, the primary
function of a handle is to be able to carry a product around. Another thing about the handle is
that when people see it, they immediately understand its purpose. It unambiguously references
your hand. So when you first meet the product, you understand something about it, and it
understands something about you.
People don't necessarily understand the internal components and the essential function of the
machine. But they can look at its exterior and actually understand elements of it immediately.
Beyond understanding the iMac, people want to touch it. When you see a handle, you want to
use it: That reaction is instinctive, immediate, and universal. When you look at an object like a
handle, you instantly form subconscious opinions about it.
Another attractor is the nature of the surfaces. The surfaces look like they'd be good to touch.
There's a real unity to the iMac. There's no traditional front, top, back, and sides. I think that
makes it inviting. Most design tends to focus on an object's front -- as the one surface that people
will address themselves to. But inherently, when you present the front, people assume that the
front is better than the back. The back is merely a consequence; it's just hanging on for the ride.
One of the things that we've accomplished with the iMac is to create a design that gives integrity
to the shape of the whole: The computer's back and sides are as interesting, arresting, and
important as its front.
Also, there's the nature of the translucent material. Most computers are made of materials that
keep everything on the surface. But with the iMac, you get this fluid effect, the way the light
transforms the material and the color. It's not just about surface, it's about depth.
Sometimes a Designer Has to Think inside the Box
The primary purpose of the handle, of course, is to make the product easy to move, which is
what we knew people would want. But it also suggests something else: When you can move
something, you dominate it. Making it easy to move helps people feel less intimidated by the
object or by the technology, which many, many people are.
In fact, one of our goals for designing the packaging was to have the handle be one of the first
things you see when you open the box. The idea is that the first piece of packing foam you pull
out becomes a little table for the manual, the keyboard, and the accessories. After you remove
that piece of foam, you see the handle. You know what to do next. That's the great thing about
handles: You know what they're there for.
Once you take the iMac out of its packaging, you can put the accessory box on the little table.
You open that, and it's clear what to do next. One cable is for power, one is for Internet access,
and one connects the keyboard.
It sounds simple and obvious. But often, getting to that level of simplicity requires enormous
iteration in design. You have to spend considerable energy understanding the problems that exist
and the issues people have -- even when they find it difficult to articulate those issues and
problems themselves.
So when you ask why the iMac has been such a success, the answer is, the design combined with
the Macintosh interface. It's just how easy the product is to take out of the box, set up, and use.
16
That simplicity is about removing the obstacles that have made so many people intimidated by
the technology in the past.
Before It Persuades Customers, a New Product Has to Persuade Its Own Company
What drove the design of the iMac was a vision and a commitment to create the best consumer
computer that we could. In other words, we made the needs of the customer our highest priority.
And when you do that, it places significant demands on different parts of the company.
For example, we found that the right place for a lot of the cable connectors was on the side of the
iMac, which is where they are more accessible. You don't have to get up and go around to the
back or move the entire machine to get to them. That was an example of trying to address issues
of utility and function.
But from an engineering perspective, the easiest place to put connectors is on the back. Putting
them on the side was actually very difficult and would mean elevating the concerns of the user
way above those of the engineers. That drove having an easy-to-adjust keyboard and also the
flip-out foot. It's sort of intuitive.
Another example: We knew people wanted a choice of colors. But if we offered people one
color, we knew the next question would be, When can we have other colors? That poses a
number of significant challenges for manufacturing, distribution, and managing inventory -especially if you have demands for a certain color. Color options have never been offered in our
industry.
In that sense, I think the iMac reflects the original mission: to create a great consumer product.
More broadly than that, it stands as a testament to a company that not only shared the same
vision but could also implement that vision. Somebody asked me how we'd convinced the people
at Apple that what we were proposing with the iMac and the iBook was the right thing.
The more I thought about it, the more I realized that we'd spent zero energy trying to cajole the
people at Apple into believing that what we were proposing was right. We'd put all of our energy
into coming up with the content and into creating just the right design. We'd been incredibly selfcritical. And as a result, it took us many iterations to get to the right solution -- the one that we
ultimately wanted to develop and to market.
But, by genuinely trying to design a product for people in a very natural way, people were
intrigued by the product -- whether they were our managers or our customers.
What You Can't Measure Is Often What Matters Most
The computer industry is immature; it has been preoccupied with technology and driven by
technologists. In some senses, the value proposition for consumers has degenerated into an
argument that "Five is a greater number than two." Go back a year, and the value proposition
was, "Our machine has a larger hard drive than yours," or "Our machine is cheaper than yours."
There was an obsession with product attributes that you could measure with numbers. And that's
an easy value proposition to articulate: Five is a bigger number than two. It's much more difficult
to articulate the value of product attributes that are less tangible. I think it's at the heart of Apple,
in the genes of the company, that these other attributes do matter.
17
A lot of that is knowing how an object elicits an emotional reaction from people. The response
can range from a perception to a physical reaction. That is, people touch it and pat it. One of the
things we've seen repeatedly with the iMac is that people in stores want to touch it.
There are a number of simple ways that you can physically connect with the iMac. You can pick
it up by the handle. Or you can open the door on the side to get to the connectors. When you
open that door, you discover that it's a really simple circle -- a hole. It's obvious. You put your
finger inside the hole to pull the door open.
Now there were lots of solutions we could have used to open that door, including discreet,
technical latches. But there was something so simple and so human about the solution we
eventually pursued.
These are the less-tangible product attributes, but they're still important. We made some major
life decisions based on stuff that's difficult to assign a number to.
With the iBook, we're trying to engage people even more. If you think about people touching an
object, the iBook takes that experience to another level. We're combining materials with different
attributes and properties. We're combining rubber with polycarbonate to get strength and
warmth.
We're doing those things because when we started working on the iBook, we defined a list of all
the attributes that we wanted the product materials to have. That list ranged from robust, strong,
structural, and hard, to attributes like soft, yielding, and warm. We included those attributes
because the iBook is something you'll be taking with you. That makes it a highly personal
product; you're going to spend a lot of time carrying it.
That list of attributes contained polar opposites. Although we couldn't find one material with all
those properties, we found that by developing some processes to combine materials, we could
design a case that really did have all those properties.
Another example of less-tangible attributes is the sleep light on the iBook. When traditional
products go into sleep mode, the light blinks on and off. That solves the functional problem,
which is to describe a state the object is in. But we felt that a blinking light did it in a
machinelike way.
For the iBook, we developed a sleep light that glows on and off. When people describe it, they
say that it looks like the computer is breathing or beating. Rather than just having it switch on
and off in a very mechanical way, the iBook breathes on and off. It's actually been remarkable
how many people have commented on that. The design of that one feature has made the iBook
seem more fluid, more organic.
That light illustrates the difference we're seeking to make in the industry. The traditional blinking
light works; it addresses the functional imperative. But I knew that we could find a more organic,
human solution. When you see the iBook, when you pick it up, when you turn it on, or even
when you put it to sleep, you get a sense that it was designed and manufactured by a group of
people who care -- maybe fanatically -- about the details.
Do we acknowledge that it's not functionally critical to care about all those details? Absolutely.
We know that. But we also know that we've got overarching design principles that we're seeking
to express: simplicity, accessibility, honesty -- and enjoyment. We're really seeking to design
products that people will enjoy.
18
Why does it matter whether you enjoy using something?
Because it makes you happy. And it's good to be happy.
Charles Fishman ( cnfish@mindspring.com ), a senior editor at Fast Company, set up his mom
and dad's iMac. You can read more about the iMac and the iBook on the Web (
http://www.apple.com ).
19