Ken Segall has an excellent book detailing the time he spent working as an advertising executive. As the title of the book implies he has done extensive work with Apple Computer including lots of interaction with Steve Jobs. Actually Ken worked with Steve at Apple and NeXT while at different ad agencies, so he has insider knowledge on how the obsession that drove Steve Jobs wound up driving NeXT, PIXAR, and Apple. His experience with other companies during that same time period -- such as Intel, Microsoft, and Dell -- allow him to draw some comparisons between the approaches of these very talented organizations.
As far as design and brand loyalty are concerned Apple has clearly won. Many try to emulate that success yet they don't understand what it was that led to their success. It wasn't just clever marketing. Even though the other companies hired the exact same ad agencies as Apple they couldn't mimic their success. This is also why the iPhone 5 is selling out even though it has been panned by the tech press.
What is so hard for other companies to emulate, or for them to even understand if I'm being frank, is the importance of the complete package. Everything is derived from the desire to simplify. Many people can intuitively use an iPad. This is not easy to accomplish because every detail is important. This desire for simplicity impacts every aspect of design including the unboxing and the marketing. Apple has done such a good job of this that it's almost impossible to improve upon what they've achieved. Almost.
The success of this design philosophy is of vital importance to the fields of Architecture and Urban Design. What Apple has proven is that people are willing to pay more for quality design. However this isn't news. BMW has proven that, Dyson has proven that, and Braun has proven that time and time again. What has been problematic for architects is understanding how this applies to the built environment. This is where the simple stick comes into play.
Steve Jobs would always hit everything with the simple stick. It's well worth reading the book to fully understand how the simple stick was used. What I've noticed is that there is a certain zen to the application of the simple stick which can be seen across industries. For BMW a car is a car. For Braun a shaver is a shaver. For Apple a computer is a computer. For Dyson a vacuum is a vacuum. There is a quintessential quality they are aiming for that guides the design. This is the simple stick in action.
Imagine what this simple stick method would mean for architects. A house is a house. It's not a warehouse. It's not an office building. It's not a container. Yet most of the houses that have been built in recent times look like anything but a house. This is the classic mistake. They've missed the forest for the trees.
Instead they should have started with a house. Found out what makes a house a house. Then improve the design. Make it user friendly. Trim the fat. Make it simple and elegant. Detail can always be added. This is where I see the simple stick of Steve Jobs' minimalism meeting the Classical Ideal. Robert Adam's book on Classical Architecture has a great chapter on the layering of detail. This is not too unlike the modernist use of collage, but Adam's approach has already been hit with the simple stick. The notion of collage needs a good bit of stick to be on par.
With this in mind, take your favorite house plans and spend the next couple weeks hitting them with the simple stick. That's what I've been doing with my KHASA series of plans. All the designs are from my previous catalog of homes. I've been hitting them with the simple stick. It's been an interesting design challenge, to say the least. In following this approach, however, I've found tremendous clarity.
Try it. It will change your life.
No comments:
Post a Comment