Every day, we are surrounded by many items that someone has designed. Some people notice the design and see how smart the designer has been in the pedagogical or functional design, making it easier to use the item. This also applies to digital design.
Others don’t seem to care about this at all. Maybe they see that something looks better than something else and believe that design is a question of looking good. Others don’t even see if something looks good; they think anything can do… Often it’s very hard for people like us that works with designing print and websites, to understand that so many people don’t seem to care a bit about whether it’s possible to read information, if it makes sense, if it’s possible to find what you look for and if it feels nice and interesting to read. Design takes part in every part. Design supports function.
The old wailing about Apple was built upon the idea that the devices looked good, but didn’t work so much better than a PC – well, the PC people did, of course, believe that PC was a lot better because of a lot of technical functions that they were babbling about frenetically. Then it all changed. Apple is the most valuable company in the world. That’s because they work holistically, so that technology and design walk hand in hand to give customers a good user experience. You can’t just go for technology and neglect the design. Over and over again, Apple has shown that they care deeply about design. And it pays off.
It’s interesting to see that the PC and Android people don’t seem to have understood the meaning of how technology and design lead to success – working together!
Friday’s verdict, when the Californian court made it clear that Samsung has copied Apple in several ways, shows it so well. Some of it is, namely, about the design, for example, the shape of a square icon with rounded corners. I think that the Samsung people would better understand that the part of their copying that consists of more technology would be important, but that they haven’t thought about design as ”really important”. I think they put a lot of effort into solving technical issues, and then the design was just a little cherry on top, something you add in the end. Nothing important. ”Just do something that looks good! Apple seems to have a good sense for design – try to make it similar!” Just like that. And it got even funnier when they copied Apple’s boxes, but without thinking about whether they would be easy to open…
I wonder if they now understand how it all goes together? Or do they only think that it’s unfair?
