Apple abandoned iPhone with curved glass, iPhone mini over cost and comfort concerns
The deposition by Douglas Satzger, who served as an Industrial Design Creative Lead and Industrial Design Manager at Apple from 1996 to 2008, notes that there was "strong interest" in crafting the first iPhone with "two pieces of shaped glass" but the technology at the time proved too prohibitive and expensive.
Although Satzger, who now serves as VP of Industrial Design at Intel, couldn't remember exactly why the "0355" iPhone prototype called for contoured glass to be manufactured in two separate pieces, he did note that technology "in shaping the glass, the cost relative to shaping the glass at the time, and some of the design features of this specific shape were not liked" by members of the team, and pressumbly late company co-founder Steve Jobs.
"The qualities of the glass at the time had a lot to do with it," he added. "These are models — I'm trying to remember a time frame — that were before gorilla glass and before a lot of the other factors."
iPhone prototype "0355" with curved glass.
As part of the same testimony, Satzger also disclosed that Apple had indeed developed a much-rumored iPhone mini based on the design of the original iPod mini (below, right). However, the device never made it past the prototype stage because it failed comfort and connectivity tests as a mobile handset.
"My recollection of it was that to get the extruded aluminum design that was applied to the iPod to work for the iPhone, there were too many added features to allow it to be comfortable and to work properly," he said. "If you put an iPod up to your ear, the sharp edges, because of the processes, aren't comfortable, and you can't get antennas to work properly in a fully enclosed metal jacket."
The bitter legal feud between Apple and Samsung over who copied who's mobile product designs has recently unearthed fascinating images and descriptions of dozens of early iPhone and iPad prototypes that Apple ultimately tossed aside. It's also peeled back the curtain to provide a rare glimpse into the thought and design process at one of the world's most tight-lipped corporations.
For more on the high-profile case, see AppleInsider's Apple vs. Samsung information archive.
17 Comments
Not surprised there really was an iPhone mini prototype. Many are not surprised it never happened, either!
so when does Samsung show off the design process and process they go through to bring new phones or product to market, many years and Millions of $ they spend doing concepts and research to being the prefect product to the masses.
If Samsung can not show an equal level of design and process, this may put the pin in their balloon.
[quote name="Maestro64" url="/t/151720/apple-abandoned-iphone-with-curved-glass-iphone-mini-over-cost-and-comfort-concerns#post_2161043"]so when does Samsung show off the design process and process they go through to bring new phones or product to market, many years and Millions of $ they spend doing concepts and research to being the prefect product to the masses. If Samsung can not show an equal level of design and process, this may put the pin in their balloon. [/quote] They have and they've tried to show even more but those pieces of 'evidence' were not allowed (for some odd reason)... and if they did show that they used a similar 'design process' as Apple, Apple'd likely try to sue over that too :-/
[quote name="DaHarder" url="/t/151720/apple-abandoned-iphone-with-curved-glass-iphone-mini-over-cost-and-comfort-concerns#post_2161048"] They have and they've tried to show even more but those pieces of 'evidence' were not allowed (for some odd reason)... and if they did show that they used a similar 'design process' as Apple, Apple'd likely try to sue over that too :-/[/quote] "For some odd reason"??? You know exactly why they were not allowed - Samsung failed to follow the procedure required by the court for admission of evidence. There are rules and Samsung's obvious contempt for the court (as opposed to contempt OF court) bit them in the rear. Besides, you're ignoring the fundamental differences in the two processes. Apple: Brainstorm Come up with a bunch of concepts Build a bunch of prototypes [I]Test them heavily, relying on your experience and knowledge to choose the best one[/I] Build it and sell it. Samsung: Brainstorm Come up with a bunch of concepts Build a bunch of prototypes [I]Choose the one that looks the most like Apple's product[/I] Build it and sell it.
The software patent process should be more like academic instructors grading student papers. Plagiarized material is just that- and the consequence is failing the course. There are none of this bogus squares, attempts at obfuscation, and all kinds of BS designed to detract from plagiarism. On the other hand, as per an Economist article, I wonder if fake MBA degrees is just as rampant in Korea as much as it is in China.