iPads and Apple computers

Pretty much everyone I know have been criticizing how stupid and useless the idea of an iPad is. They were all complaining about the design and whatnot, saying how lame would it be to have one, and that they will never ever purchase the new Apple product. I agree with them, I don't think I will ever buy an iPad because I don't need one. However, I think that once Apple starts selling these products in April, people who first find it stupid will start purchasing it. Similar to the iPod and iPhones, people who didn't like it at first ended up buying them. Even I, who used to own just an iPod and a cell phone, ended up having an iPhone and now I can't live without it.

We talked about the iPad in my social science class (Consumer Society in World History) as well, we came up with some interesting conclusion as to why people who criticize it will end up buying one. It has something to do with conspicuous consumption. iPad is brand new, it's high-class technology, and because of that, by using the product maybe in a coffee shop, the customer not only shows that he/she has the money to purchase the good, but also that they are up to date with technology. It also shows intelligence consumption, in which the user has the leisure time to spend and learn how to function this product. Most people who use iPhones and Blackberries are businessmen or those of middle-upper class. Knowing how to function these technological devices shows intelligence and wealth.

Apple almost seems like a cult – people look forward to new Apple products, every time Steve Jobs introduces something new, people go wooo and ahhhhhh, writing reviews and talking about having the latest product first hand. I believe that Apple succeeded this way because of their distinct unique style (which many other computer companies are starting to follow), and the whole company's service. It was not just about the design of the product, but the design of the service. iPods came as a package along with iTunes and iTunes gift cards. It revolutionized music purchasing. It's like if you have a MacBook, you should have the rest of the Apple family as well... iPhone, iPod, iTouch, iPad, iWhatever...

In response to William Morris' preface to The Nature of Gothic by John Ruskin, I highly agree with what he said about 'In those days science also may be happy; yet not before the second birth of Art, accompanied by the happiness of labor'. Science itself is never enough, art must also come into play. Although science can improve lives through technology, it cannot function without art/design. For example, Amazon – consumers are able to purchase books without visiting a bookstore, they can simply go online, register, follow a few steps and have the product sent directly to their mailbox. This technology developed by computer scientists indeed made our lives a lot more convenient. However, the layouts of the webpages, the interfaces and the flow of the buying process are created by designers. The work of web designers here are crucial to make sure consumers are able to interact with the website easily. In other words, design is needed to make sense of information overload.

I recently attended a lecture give n by John Maeda in Hong Kong. He mentioned about STEAM education instead of STEM education. Many institutes around the globe, many countries invest in STEM education (Science/Technology/Engineering/Maths). But having these four element isn't enough, like what the article writes about. In order to be truly innovative, ART must be included -> STEAM. Without the Arts, everything will simply be robotic, we are no different from machines.

Being a 'designer'

Something that I found sad and interesting - when you introduce yourself as an artist or a designer, people are usually like 'Oh... hmm... ok I'm gonna talk to somebody over there'. Whereas if you say you're a lawyer, people's reaction would be 'Oh wow, hmmm i should talk to you then'.

Why are artists and designers perceived as unimportant people in society? I was introducing myself to someone at a party as a graphic design student. The initial reaction I got was 'wow you're so lazy." I instantly got confused, why did he relate laziness to graphic designers, and how did he make such assumptions. I then talked to somebody else, and this time the person asked me "Oh okay.. so what exactly do you do? I mean, what kind of job do you do in the future?"

I told him that graphic designers design posters, CD covers, book covers, signage, business c

ards, logos, we help build corporate identity, we make advertisements to attract customers etc." He seemed puzzled, as though this is not a real legit job, as though this is something that doesn't need to be learnt. Why does this happen?

I came across this 'Good typography is invisible, Bad typography is everywhere' poster on the internet. I think that the general public takes good design for granted, good design is everywhere, they merge into our lives so seamlessly that nobody really notice them. Whereas with bad design, people can immediately point out and criticize it. Is this the reason why people don't 'get' graphic design because it is everywhere?