Product Design Under the Microscope: Paying the Ultimate Insult to Our Profession
The Fine Line Between Innovation and Exploitation: Scrutinizing Apple's Design Philosophy
As a designer, the allegations against Apple strike at the heart of our craft, questioning our commitment to innovation and ethical standards. These claims overlook the noble purpose of design: to empower people and enrich their lives through thoughtful and familiar interactions. It's disheartening to see our pursuit of creating seamless, people-centric experiences misconstrued as manipulative.
Our work, exemplified by Apple's achievements, is driven by a passion for excellence and user trust, not by the ulterior motives these accusations imply. Defending the integrity and artistry of design is essential in maintaining the trust and progress that define our profession.
Apple veterans, alumni and former Apple designers need to start speaking up about the importance of the Apple design team having autonomy is because mobs who think they have the right to tell Apple what to design next are trying to compensate for the fact that they do shit work by getting Apple to bow to their substandard way of building.
The allegations against Apple are an attack on the history of our profession in product design being an honorable profession. Anybody who sees a designers art as a noble art would take offense to this as well.
1. Legacy of Innovation: "These allegations overlook the history of product design as a force for innovation. Designers have long pushed boundaries to create products that enhance lives, a noble pursuit that should be celebrated, not condemned."
2. Design Ethics: "Accusing Apple of manipulative design practices is an affront to the ethical standards that guide our profession. Product designers adhere to principles that prioritize user needs and ethical considerations."
3. User Empowerment: "The notion that design inherently traps consumers is a misinterpretation of our work. Good design empowers users, providing them with choices and enriching their experiences, something that Apple has consistently aimed to do."
4. Competitive Integrity: "Suggesting that designers intentionally degrade other people's product experience to suppress competition undermines the competitive spirit that drives us to innovate and improve. Our work aims to elevate standards, not stifle them."
5. Privacy Advocacy: "Designers are advocates for user privacy and security, crafting solutions that protect users. The allegations unfairly paint the profession as compromising these values for profit, which is contrary to our commitment to user trust."
6. Economic Realities: "Product design operates within the economic realities of the market. The investments and financial decisions of companies like Apple are necessary for sustaining innovation and should not be misconstrued as prioritizing profit over progress."
7. Ecosystem Integration: "Creating a cohesive ecosystem is a testament to the skill and vision of product designers, ensuring compatibility and ease of use across products. This is a hallmark of thoughtful design, not a scheme to trap users."
8. Market Dynamics: "Designers contribute to a dynamic market where competition and user choice drive progress. The success of products like the iPhone is a result of meeting user needs, not monopolistic practices.
—
Apple vs. the U.S. Department of Justice: What You Need to Know
Read the full lawsuit: Apple v. DOJ
Thank you all so much for coming out and covering such an important topic.
Apple has FOUR jobs:
1. Invent new product categories that change the way people relate to each other and enrich those people's lives.
2. Validate the learnings about ways people are using those products to improve upon them for a next iteration.
3. Work around the clock 24/7/365 to ensure that the people who use those products are supported and safe.
4. Try and ignore all of the demoralizing press always generated by people who haven't the first clue about what types of conditions are needed in order for real product innovation to take place.
When carrying out #4 becomes impossible because of mob rule or people think they understand how Apple's product design processes should work better than Apple does, the conditions for doing product design like Apple are not only inhibited internally at the company but everywhere else in the world where real product innovation is taking place.
The case against Apple sets a precedent that sends people who understand the conditions needed for real product innovation to take place back into the stone ages.