Tuesday, July 13, 2010

The comedy of elegant product design - Apple vs. Microsoft

One of my team sent me this hilarious video on how Microsoft would have designed the packaging on the original 2005 iPod.



This is something we deal with every day in the design of FirstRain. We strive continuously to simplify, make our product (both visible and invisible aspects) more elegant and it is an ongoing, never ending discipline. There is Great Art in making something very complex (like a high quality digital music device and music store - or intelligent business search) deceptively simple. It is a wonderful thing to see.

And this is not something Microsoft is any good at!

2 comments:

Tom said...

Funny video, but it is so true. Apple, as like as Google, is aware that simplicity play key role in good branding.

TheOtherOpinion said...

It is agreeable, and sounds true and very logical on the initial impressions. However, I've found myself looking for information on the box (of any product) to know what am I really buying inside the box. And I do not spend hours researching each item via other outlets (internet, word of mouth, or borrowing before buying).

This ONLY works for Apple-fanatics, or those who have done ALL their homework at home and know EXACTLY what they are getting - or plan to figure it out and not worry about the cost.

It is a difference of target demographics. Anyone vs. Fans. How frequently do you go to store and buy a camera that has just a picture of camera and one bit of detail - e.g. Zoom lens. Or better yet, buy an LCD tv just based on screen-size. Pick one... Let me try to sell you a GPS unit that advertises the satellite it'll communicate to.

If you still think Apple's product packaging gives you ALL you need, then you are not choosing the product, you are choosing the brand. In fact, it means you already will not want to hear anything negative about the brand you just chose. And when you do that, you're subconsciously making an emotional decision than an intelligent or calculated one.

There was an error in this gadget