In making his argument, Manovich looks at computer operating systems and cell phones over the last 10 years and notes that as these technologies evolve, they not only grow more powerful, but they become more and more integrated aesthetically.
For example, where you once had a cell phone that was essentially a monochromatic brick with push buttons that allowed you to make calls. The aesthetic design of the phone was a separate consideration in the functionality of the phone.
Now, modern cell phones have all the functionality wrapped up into a singular unit where aesthetics are now (arguably) of equal consideration. In the case of the iphone, we see the functionality of the phone entirely wrapped up in it's user interface. There simply is no separation of functionality and aesthetics when it comes to the user experience.
In a previous blog post (also about Manovich) I talked about the separate agendas of art and science and the necessity for art to meet science. That is, it's up to artists to bring science to people in a useful manner. To be clear:
- It takes an artist to make something beautiful.
- It takes a special kind of artist to make cutting edge technology useful for the masses,
- It takes absolute artistic genius to make cutting edge technology useful and beautiful at the same time.
In the world of computer technology, they are the absolute quintessential artistic geniuses of our time. No other company in the world has done as much for the aesthetic evolution and integration of form and function than Apple Computer.
Does your cell phone have a touch screen? Thank Apple. Does your computer have icons on it? Thank Apple (ok, maybe Xerox...). Does your computer look as cool as your car? Thank Apple.
Thanks Apple!
Bravo! I worked for an Apple Computer call center in Austin for a couple of years and was there when the white iMacs were first released and at the unveiling of the first generation iPod. Holy Cow! I agree that it takes a very special kind of person (people) to create technological genius and make it aesthetically pleasing. When I bought my Palm Pre (after my last final last semester) part of my decision was based on how it looked. I was originally attracted to Verizon's Droid but my Palm was the one that made the cut...it's rounded, sleek and shiny look beckoned to me!
ReplyDeleteI have evaluated your posts and comments (where applicable) for assignments #5 & #6. Before Tuesday 2/23 I will have written summary comments about the assignments and posted them on the course blog.
ReplyDeleteTotally agree Maurice, allow me to elaborate. First of all, you said that "It takes absolute artistic genius to make cutting edge technology useful and beautiful at the same time." I absolutely agree, and would like to add that some science, or more technical fields can also be an art, though members of such fields rarely, if ever, refer to themselves as such.
ReplyDeleteAlso, despite the fact that I am, shamefully, an Apple fanboy, they really have hit the nail on the head. Manovich's point, that you likened to the iPhone craze, is so valid, it's scary. The exterior design, smooth corners and glossy screen is totally echoed in the icons and buttons of the user interface of the iPhone OS. Additionally, the "Apple" look of Snow Leopard, i.e. the "aluminum" looking gradients, and simplified, yet aesthetically pleasing menus and screens are totally echoed in their industrial design i.e. my Macbook Pro.
Perhaps this is the result of Apple controlling the ability to manufacture their machines though. No one else is allowed to pre-load a machine with OS X (just ask Psystar). With PCs, the story is a little different, so there is less cohesiveness I guess, or at least less "sameness" between manufacturers and their operating systems.
Oh well, awesome blog. Good content.