Jonathan Ive Interview on Design

iphone-4-abilla-shmula-lean-six-sigma There is a great interview with Apple’s head Industrial Designer, Jonathan Ive, on the relationship between design, material science, and usability. What is fascinating about that interview is that he settles the false dichotomy that often appears in the form of: manufacturing or design, sales or service, usability or aesthetics, user experience or efficiency, etc.¹.

The point is this: to create beautiful user experiences in both product design and service design, we need to embrace the totality of human experience and cannot be pigeon-holed in any one discipline or place any individual discipline above the other. The facts are that we need whole knowledge, not just niche know-how.

Indeed, knowing the Apple iPhone Supply Chain is good, but it’s not enough.

Here’s Jonathan Ive’s interview. Enjoy.

“A big part of the experience of a physical object has to do with the materials,” says Jonathan Ive, Apple’s Senior Vice President of Design, during a brief chat with Core77. “[At Apple] we experiment with and explore materials, processing them, learning about the inherent properties of the material–and the process of transforming it from raw material to finished product; for example, understanding exactly how the processes of machining it or grinding it affect it. That understanding, that preoccupation with the materials and processes, is [very] essential to the way we work.”

“Those three black splits are co-molded in, and then the band goes through more processes,” Ive points out. “So it’s assembled first, the band, and then the final machining and grinding are performed, so the tolerances are extraordinary…. Whatever people’s feelings are about the actual design of the product is of course subjective. But objectively I can say that the manufacturing tolerances are phenomenal. And we determined this, we designed it from the very beginning to meet those goals.”

“The best design explicitly acknowledges that you cannot disconnect the form from the material–the material informs the form,” says Ive. “It is the polar opposite of working virtually in CAD to create an arbitrary form that you then render as a particular material, annotating a part and saying ‘that’s wood’ and so on. Because when an object’s materials, the materials’ processes and the form are all perfectly aligned, that object has a very real resonance on lots of levels. People recognize that object as authentic and real in a very particular way.”

While [design schools today may have] sophisticated virtual design tools, the danger in relying on them too much is that we can end up isolated from the physical world,” he says. “In our quest to quickly make three-dimensional objects, we can miss out on the experience of making something that helps give us our first understandings of form and material, of the way a material behaves–’I press too hard here, and it breaks here’ and so on. Some of the digital rendering tools are impressive, but it’s important that people still really try and figure out a way of gaining direct experience with the materials.”

“It’s very hard to learn about materials academically, by reading about them or watching videos about them; the only way you truly understand a material is by making things with it,” Ive explains, going on to add that years upon years of making his own models with his own hands is what gave him a deep understanding of the materials he’s worked. “And it’s important to develop that appetite to want to make something, to be inquisitive about the material world, to want to truly understand a material on that level.”