The Real Problem With Apple: Skeuomorphism In iOS
|
|
|
No, I’d never heard of it before either but it means something like archaisms in designs. And when it’s explained one can see what they mean with reference to that upcoming Windows 8 and iOS.
What’s skeuomorphism? If you’ve ever used an Apple product, you’ve experienced digital skeuomorphic design: calendars with faux leather-stitching, bookshelves with wood veneers, fake glass and paper and brushed chrome. Skeuomorphism is a catch-all term for when objects retain ornamental elements of past, derivative iterations–elements that are no longer necessary to the current objects’ functions.There is, at times of transition, a rather large value to such archaisms. Take the motor car for example: we still measure engine power in horsepower. Less so outside the US but it’s still common enough. When engine powered vehicles first started out it made some sort of sense to compare their output to something that people generally knew: the output of a horse. “8 hp” had a real connection for a farmer considering a tractor, or truck: he knew how much a horse could pull or plough and so the comparison made near instinctive sense to him.
Nowadays the closest most of us get to a horse is the Budweiser ads during the SuperBowl. Our being told that we’ve got 250 hp or 400 under the hood doesn’t really connect with anything therefore. It’s an archaism that made sense at one time but increasingly less as time goes on.
This is what designers are complaining/commenting about in iOS and comparing unfavourably with Windows 8. This skeuomorphism, this continued survival of what might have been useful archaisms but which, possibly, are becoming actually harmful rather than just charming reminders of the past.
One that’s mentioned is the idea that contact databases are based on the Rolodex idea or design. That may well have made sense twenty years ago, when most in the world of work were familiar with the physical world example. It’s quite possibly less so now when a goodly chunk of the labour force have never even seen one. And the perpetuation of this organisational form might be limiting innovation in more modern ones.
Others are more trivial, iCal’s faux-leather stitching (or is that faux-stitched leather?) just consumes graphics power rather than limits anything more important being done.
This is interesting too:
Inside Apple, tension has brewed for years over the issue. Apple iOS SVP Scott Forstall is said to push for skeuomorphic design, while industrial designer Jony Ive and other Apple higher-ups are said to oppose the direction. “You could tell who did the product based on how much glitz was in the UI,” says one source intimately familiar with Apple’s design process.When one of the iconic designers of our time is complaining about such archaisms in design it might be a good time to sit up and take notice.
At heart the debate is about transition. One of the great phrases about design is that “form follows function”. And in the early years of a new method of doing something it can be helpful to mimic the forms of the previous ways of performing that function. But at some point perhaps the transition should occur and we should base the current form on the current, rather than archaic, methods of performing that function. This is what the designers are saying about Windows 8, that it’s making this transition in a manner that iOS isn’t.
Which I find a fascinating point for someone to make: that one of the great and famous designs of our times is in fact out of date.
No comments:
Post a Comment