[ezkcdude]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/alicetru...rtner=yahootix

Acclaimed French designer Philippe Starck revealed he is working on a “revolutionary” Apple product which will be unveiled within eight months, according to a radio interview with France Info, as reported by Le Figaro.

What do you think it is? And if you say "Apple TV", what form do you see it taking? I still find it hard to believe they want to get in that business.

[hmurchison]

Revolutionary is such an overused term my eyes glaze over. Revolutions always come from smaller groups that are not in power. The impact of the revolution is changing the Old Guard.

With that in mind Apple could revolutionize something like entertainment but I've got my doubts on that seeing as how it's cheaper for me to just order a movie or buy a paperbound book from Amazon than grab a digital version.

I won't hold my breath on this one.

[El Gallo]

It's a dinosaur, and I'm riding mine to work.

[chucker]

Let's remember that Starck is the idiot who thinks this is design.

[thegeriatric]

Touch sensitive Keyboard and trackpad combined. Bluetooth and wired versions please.

[hmurchison]

If I was going to look at an area of weakness it would be Airplay. Right now it's expensive to wirelessly send audio and video around and keep everything in sync. Right now at an affordable level Sonos tends to do this better than most companies.

With faster 802.11ac routers coming later this year and going forward the ability to stream multiple channels of AV content will get a boost. A second generation of Airplay could enable speakers that are easy to install and are totally wireless save for the AC cable to the wall.

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by thegeriatric Touch sensitive Keyboard and trackpad combined. Bluetooth and wired versions please.

I still think there's a great idea in this realm, now that iOS and touch/gesture use has become so common and accepted.

I simply imagine an iBoard, roughly the size of the wired aluminum Apple keyboard. But, like the iPod and iPhone, it's basically a large screen that can become whatever you need it to be, based on what you're doing. A keyboard when you're typing, or an artboard/palette when in art-oriented apps, a musical keyboard or drum pads when in GarageBand, etc.

I just always though, for several years now, something like that would be cool. And because it's all digital/illuminated, there's your standalone illuminated keyboard from Apple that I've wanted for about 4-5 years now. You can select brightness, contrast or even color, based on your room conditions, eyesight, etc.

But you could have a couple of octaves of life-size (musical) keyboard keys right there where your hands already are. It would be a Magic Keyboard, in that it would recognize, and self-configure itself, based on the app one was working with at the time. Launch GarageBand and you're able to swipe from typing keyboard to musical one, drum pads or even other instruments (take those strings/frets from the iOS GarageBand and put those here so you can play guitar/bass on the larger keyboard design).

That being said, I don't think this guy has done anything of the sort and when are these people going to learn to just keep their mouths shut and let things unfold naturally? Someone's always blabbing about unreleased stuff, and I honestly have to wonder if a lot of it is attention-seeking or bragging points.

If this guy is working with Apple, it'll come out eventually, when the product is released, and he'll get all the necessary acclaim and press then.

I just don't buy some of what he says, however.

[SpecMode]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 I just don't buy some of what he says, however.

Neither does Apple, apparently.

[709]

Originally Posted by chucker Let's remember that Starck is the idiot who thinks this is design.

Oh fuck you. I'll agree that Starck is a over-worshipped blowhard, but his juicer is utterly delightful and fantastic. That's the last object I'd put up to discount this rumor.

But, I think that what does discount this rumor is the idea that Apple would hire Starck. They wouldn't.

[psmith2.0]

Yeah, something about "visiting Steve monthly" and still being in contact with his widow just seemed iffy to me when I read the story this morning. Why would someone feel compelled to mention that? My gut tells me he's full of it. Sorry. Why bring in this guy, or any outsider, at this point? It's not like Ive and crew suck, or constantly "come up short" and "need help".



I think he's a self-serving braggart and just out for a bit of press. I'll gladly retract if proven wrong, but something tells me I won't have to worry.

If he was truly in cahoots with Apple on some "revolutionary product", then surely he's been briefed/advised on how they work and approach this stuff? Chief among them, of course, being "keep your pie-hole shut and don't talk about, or hint at, unreleased stuff. Especially if you're an outsider who we can drop at a whim if you piss us off. You're not authorized to be putting this stuff out there, so watch your ass. Remember, we're the company that tossed out its founder...what do you think we'll do to your big mouth?"

[709]

Originally Posted by SpecMode Neither does Apple, apparently.

Ah. Well there you go. See above, file under "blowhard".

[psmith2.0]

Human nature, I guess. Everyone wants to be on the popular, winning team...even if, to some, it means having to make stuff up and lie about it.

For all we know, he might've been involved (I still doubt it). But he went and opened his mouth and received a phone call from Phil or Tim earlier today and got the boom lowered. That's how Apple can deny it now...because they dropped his butt about 4-5 hours ago?



EDIT: Is it Steve's yacht, mentioned in Isaacson's book? That makes a bit more sense, if you consider the background history (and why he may still be in contact with Steve's widow). I can kinda buy this angle a lot more than "working with Apple on a revolutionary product".

A yacht, no matter how cool, isn't gong to be "revolutionary" because not enough people will ever be able to see, own or use one for it to become an iPad-level hit.

[709]

Sure, but when any of us see "product" mentioned we (like anyone) think, y'know, product.

I could totally see Steve hiring him to design a yacht. Because, yacht. PS is really good at putting his touches on an already defined thing and calling it his own. And really, he's done sone phenomenal design back in the day. chucker be damned.

But at the end of the day, this is simply Starck trying to be relevant again.

The 80's/early 90's were good to him, but when you really think about it, that time was bad for everyone - some music (not much of it) excluded.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by 709 I'll agree that Starck is a over-worshipped blowhard, but his juicer is utterly delightful and fantastic.

Maybe. I just think it's a perfect example of art and design being two entirely orthogonal things. This one isn't design. Its looks haven't made it easier to use, but rather harder.

Now, granted, Apple sometimes overreaches on æsthetics, like when placing the iMac's power button and ports where nobody will ever see them and nobody, consequentially, will ever easily be able to use them, or when making apps skeuomorphic when a plainer UI may have been boring, but much easier to use. But even that iMac example is one of making the device easier to use most of the time: there's so few distracting elements on the front that you can focus on what's on the screen very well.

I'm not sure Starck has an understanding of that. But, more importantly, were Jobs the CEO, I just wouldn't be able to see how some guy from France is allowed to leak info about a future products. Steve would be livid. He'd probably cancel the project and find someone else to work with.

[709]

Originally Posted by chucker Maybe. I just think it's a perfect example of art and design being two entirely orthogonal things. This one isn't design. Its looks haven't made it easier to use, but rather harder.

(I'm just quoting this top bit, because everything else in your post I totally agree with).

You couldn't be more wrong, imo. Starck's juicer is about as minimalistic as you can get for a non-powered object. You place your orange/lemon up top, you twirl/squeeze, and the juice flows along the lines to the glass below. It's brilliant, and it's sexy to boot. Even the angled legs serve a function - by angling up you can be sure no juice gets lost in limbo, and it all drips down into the glass. It has 3 legs so it'll never tip over. And it looks like a rocket. And goddamn it chucker I like you and why can't you see the genius of this?

It's a hand-powered juicer. I'm not sure how one would design it to be more minimalistic. Or less arty-er, for that matter.

[chucker]

Because this one is much more stable, much simpler, much more obvious to use.

Originally Posted by 709 And goddamn it chucker I like you and why can't you see the genius of this?

You didn't get the "you're supposed to hate chucker" memo, I take it!

[Robo]

I doubt that Apple will collaborate with Starck on an Apple product, simply because for Apple, Starck would be a step down.

And I love Starck. The Aprilia Moto 6.5 is one of my favorite designs of anything, ever. But Apple already has the best design team in the world, and they've all been working together — and with the rest of Apple — for a long time. What could Starck possibly bring to such a collaboration? Star power? Apple doesn't need that. In fact, Apple wouldn't want to sell, say, an iPod by Starck. They want people to buy their products because Apple designed them, not because Starck designed them.

The time for Apple to partner with Starck would have been in the nineties, before the rise of Ive & Co. But Jobs recognized talent within Apple and sought to cultivate that instead.

I'd be interested to see an Apple-Starck collaboration, don't get me wrong. But I just don't think Apple would be interested in partnering with Starck.

Still. +1 Juicy Salif I think it is easier to use: it removes a step from the operation of traditional juicers like the one chucker posted. Instead of the juice going into the juicer dish and then being poured into a glass, the juice can go right into the glass.

And it looks damned cool doing it.

[709]

Originally Posted by chucker Because this one is much more stable, much simpler, much more obvious to use.

How pedestrian. But, whatevs, we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't want a conversation about juicers to derail the thread.

[709]

Originally Posted by Robo I doubt that Apple will collaborate with Starck on an Apple product, simply because for Apple, Starck would be a step down. . . . . . The time for Apple to partner with Starck would have been in the nineties, before the rise of Ive & Co. But Jobs recognized talent within Apple and sought to cultivate that instead.

This.

Starck is fine, maybe even a genius. But his genius layed in coming up with cool shit for two decades ago mentality and taste. His name was on the tongue of everyone way back when. Not to say some of his designs won't stand the test of time, they will. But, well, I guess the best parallel I can come up with off the top of my head is Madonna. As an artist she rocked it decades ago, and some of her tunes will be with us forever. MDNA? A catastrophe of epic proportion.

I guess what I'm saying is, some people just don't know when to hang it up and ride their good name out.

[Matsu]

Wouldn't it be cool if there was some level of collaboration right up to the point they "Steve'd" him for breaking the first rule of Apple product revolutions? You don't talk about Apple product revolutions! Makes me feel a bit warm and fuzzy that Cook and the boys would do that - somewhere Steve is smiling at them.

So, while I'm leaning towards the true story being just a bit of hyperbole about a yacht, if this really were about an Apple product, I'd guess "iProducts", or maybe TV sets and home A/V and Starck having nothing to do with either, but rather some accessories. Clothing in the case of the former, maybe really nice, fashion forward modernist jackets, coats, gloves, bags, and even hoodies with completely invisible, seamless, and somehow standardized iPod/iPhone integration. In the case of the latter, furniture with clean lines and a couple of clever conveniences like cabinet lighting, internal wiring for your other A/V and RF repeaters so you can hide all of it behind/beneath your shiny Apple product.

There's at least a reasonable chance he was held in high enough esteem to get a glimpse of something Apple was working on, and given the company's blessing/invitation to develop complementary products for it.

[billybobsky]

Originally Posted by 709 (I'm just quoting this top bit, because everything else in your post I totally agree with). You couldn't be more wrong, imo. Starck's juicer is about as minimalistic as you can get for a non-powered object. You place your orange/lemon up top, you twirl/squeeze, and the juice flows along the lines to the glass below. It's brilliant, and it's sexy to boot. Even the angled legs serve a function - by angling up you can be sure no juice gets lost in limbo, and it all drips down into the glass. It has 3 legs so it'll never tip over. And it looks like a rocket. And goddamn it chucker I like you and why can't you see the genius of this? It's a hand-powered juicer. I'm not sure how one would design it to be more minimalistic. Or less arty-er, for that matter.

Yes the juicer is quite nice, but its not as if Starck discovered surface tension...