I tried to buy a MacPro this weekend… It was a nightmare… This is my complaint to Apple below.
“Apple needs to rethink it’s whole supply chain strategy. It is absolutely unbelievable that a company of its size could spend all this time and money marketing to consumers about how Apple is better than a PC… and then when a PC consumer comes to Apple to purchase a system, be treated like absolute garbage and be given a cold shoulder. I am a PC user, and I decided to switch to mac because I am a designer and the only thing holding me back is that Solidworks is made for PC. I hear about how Apple is now on Intel and they have Bootcamp and decide to get a mac. First off I go to the Apple Store (Santa Monica) to be ignored by 4 staff members chit chatting in the corner for 20 minutes. Then when I finally intrude to have them help me, I ask one simple question: “Will Solidworks work on a macpro with bootcamp and XP installed?” The response I get is like I’m the stupidest guy in the world… The attitude of the people of the Apple store is insane. It’s like PC people are the bottom of the barrel and not worth their time. Furthermore, I don’t understand how you have all these stores and no product? I went to three different stores who when I called and asked if they had a MacPro in stock with an Airport and a video card upgrade and they all said yes first then no… Finally I asked one of the associates how long it will take for the computer to ship if I get it online. The Sales associate was animate about it only taking 3 days to ship… He even set me up at the store on one of the demo computers. The website said will ship in 24 hours… I ordered the computer with the sales associate to only find that it was going to take a month. A month? I called the 1-800-My-Apple to find out what’s going on and they said it was because of the video card was back ordered. I said fine, can you send the computer with a basic video card now, and send me the video card seperate when it becomes available? The response was “it will still take the same time.” Why would it take a month to configure a computer? The answer I got was “Because it’s assembled in China.” Mind you this whole time I’m asking for the supervisor because it seemed as if I was bothering the lady on the phone. Turns out the supervisor isn’t available or doesn’t want to talk to me… Well I wouldn’t have to talk to the supervisor if your phone staff could answer the most basic questions. So after this whole ordeal the final verdict is that I must wait a month no matter what unless I want the crappier standard MacPro with no upgrades. Sounds like Apple wasn’t ready for the market are pulling some bait and switch tactics to sell what they have on hand. How do you expect to compete with Dell with service like this!”
dow317 is talking about the MacPro, not the Mac BookPro, so the marshmallow roasting is n/a.
The point (1) is the MacPro is new and to customize it takes time. I saw that as well when I built one online and saw when I changed video cars the delivery time changed from 24hrs to 4 weeks (or whatever it was).
The point (2) is all programs will now run on the Mac/Intel computers… all.
The Point (3) is that Sony is the supplier of Dell, and Apple laptop batteries and the party responsible for all the roasting going on lately.
the point (4) Apple makes producs people love (some people love anyway), and that allows them to get away with things… it is not rational, and has nothing to do with logic. If their competitors operated at that level, it would force quality up, but apple has a monopoly on lovable computing… it’s the kind of design that can’t be outsourced (industrial design might be dead, but good industrial design is pretty healthy)…after 3 years my ipod battery won’t hold a 10 minute charge… I’m going to get another one on lunch though… don’t worry…
I don’t think you understood my point wrt to this issue: Apple is more about product and experience design than industrial design. In fact, of the companies out there, I’d venture Apple designers have quite a bit more say in the processes they use to achieve those “lovable” products; more than most. Industrial Design wasn’t established for the purpose of having designers say “let’s make something that’s really cool using process X”. It was established to make products designed through the most profitable processes then available to a company (as determined by finance types and internal expertise and available machines) as inoffensive to the consuming public as possible. In the future, the whole “industrial” tag will be removed entirely.
I totally understood, I was just poking fun at your iconoclastic and provocative “industrial design is dead” statement… the sarcastic tone didn’t come across…
Apple is more about product and experience design than industrial design.
Wouldnt you want to be in the business of designing “experiences”… since people are not slaves to products but instead feelings. I would argue that industrial design is not dead, but just evolving. Its not about the box but how you relate to it.
It’s been evolving for decades. How many more significant improvements can you throw into “mold” technology? The new tech is here. Now. Time to shed that restrictive industrial skin. It’s a worthless tag going forward. It’s confusing. And it doesn’t help the profession. We should all dump it now. Holding onto it is like holding onto gas-guzzling cars. Its days are numbered.
In total agreeance… the problem is replace it with what? How will we get everyone to agree? Now that business is starting to know what industrial design is, by changing the name, do we just confuse them further? Lot’s of engineers don’t work on engines… don’t some drive trains?
As mentioned in the other thread, replace it with Product Designers (and then have subsets under that: Toy Design, Transportation Design, etc)
And I disagree - business hasn’t really figured out what ID is. A few articles in BW isn’t going to fix that problem. And many of them out there already use the tag “Product Designer” anyway. It makes more sense.
As to “engineers” and “engines”, no one confuses the vocation.You’re using the wrong definition for the occupation:
engineer_ing_ (as a field): the science of making practical application of pure sciences, as physics, chemistry, etc
One can engineer a hostile takeover and be a businessman, not an engineer. Their occupational field wouldn’t be Engineering. There’s no confusion. And the problem with Industrial Design is a) it’s confusing and b) it’s outdated.
By the way, we could also have “Stylists”. There’s nothing wrong with the tag. So we might have:
My point is only that the word “engineer” is not semantically linked with what they do. Industrial design is a title, no need to get hung up, explain what you do through your work.
Yes it is. To “engineer”. To develop ingenious solutions. The word comes from the French I think and goes way back to builders of war machines, I believe (that would be long before combustion devices we call engines).
If Industrial Design is only a title, then why hang on to it? Why argue over changing it? I say we eliminate as much confusion as possible.
my view is that it is just a title, why worry about changing it? It is our roots and 400 years from its origins will be a hot topic for 30 seconds in some virtual inter galactic holo chat room… if the human race is still alive… bigger things to fret over…
You would think. Only I don’t see many IDers fretting over the future of their profession and you’d think that would be worth fretting over, wouldn’t you?
My view is that the old title is indicative of a larger problem. It doesn’t stop with the word “industrial”, but extends to an old-fashioned mindset. This is a Design issue. This issue includes outdated instruction at universities more interested in tuition income than in training people for the field. It includes mixed messages about what a designer does and what’s expected of them. It’s about being the leaders instead being led. It’s a lot of things. Not just a title. Would a company like Apple settle for poor packaging (and that’s what this is)? Would Steve Jobs settle? Would Nike??
If you think it’s good enough to have an inaccurate, outdated and misleading occupational title and all that it implies about who we are and what we do - especially when technology is changing things so fast and having such a huge impact on the products we design - then maybe we part ways on a fundamental level.
I feel the work we do defines us, not a word. Personally I don’t like any quantifier in front of “Designer” at all, and thats all it says on my card… but I’m not worried about it because I don’t think a word limits the future of my profession… and I don’t think there is a need to get a wedgy over it…
