Blog Pattern Language
By Sam Martin - January 27, 2010
The announcement of the Apple iPad elicited passionate responses at frog design, the innovation firm that created a prototype tablet for Steve Jobs and Apple…in 1983. The retro designs didn’t quite make it to market (though they did come close), but the design language that frog Founder Hartmut Esslinger created for the company — known as the Snow White computer language — was used for Apple’s groundbreaking Apple II computer series from ‘83 and ’84. Now, it seems, Jobs is responsible for yet another game changer with the iPad, and Esslinger and frog were eager to weigh in on the design, technology, and strategy behind the device soon after the announcement.
“I love it,” said Esslinger from Vienna, where he teaches “convergent industrial design” at the University of Applied Arts. “The iPad is the beginning of a new category — one that is hyper-convergent and humanistic.”
Blog Pattern Language
By Sam Martin - February 5, 2009
I’m no patent expert, but it’s clear after a little research that patent laws were put into place for two reasons: 1) they want to encourage secretive inventors to stop stashing their cool ideas under a mattress somewhere and make them public and 2) they want to rock the boat.
Apple has never been accused of keeping new ideas under wraps, but by securing their new patent for “multifunction” touch technology like pinch, rotation, and swipe, they have certainly rocked the boat.
We won’t know how or if the boat will be righted until a few million dollars are spent on lawsuits, but those in the mobile and consumer electronics industry seem to be either ignoring the issue (using the lawsuit reasoning stated above) or they have the knee jerk reaction that Apple is ruining it for everyone – that the company is reverting to Pre-Open-Source, Big-Meany Corporate status.
And yet, isn’t Apple doing us a favor by rocking the boat? The reason behind the existence of patents is sound – to spur innovation and excite competition, the argument being that if there was no payoff for new products, services, or technologies there would be less incentive to push for change and improvement. Instead of ignoring the issue or getting angry about it, companies ought to be putting their energy and resources into coming up with something new. If Apple owns “touch,” what’s next?
