Google and the Resurgence of Italian Design
The Italian peninsula has a way of inspiring people and has done so for a long time. I was living in Italy when I became interested in graphic design, which I then learned from Milton Glaser — who was also inspired by his time in Italy — through his classic book, Graphic Design. Milton is still going strong at almost 90. Here he is, drawing: https://vimeo.com/6986303
And his essay, Ten Things I Have Learned, has valuable work advice: https://www.miltonglaser.com/milton/c:essays/#3
I think the world would be a better place if big companies making things that change the world like Google and Apple hired more artists.
heh, I came here thinking about Olivetti.
Two things about this company:
It kinda was the Apple of the bureaucratic era. They had advertisement about how their furniture and machines would make work heaven on earth. All this for a bit of modular desks and drawers. Ok and nice electromechanical calculators. But the marketing speech is exactly the same as today. Buy our stuff so you feel you reached the top of the world of the year <insert any year>. [1]
Other thing, Olivetti invented a bunch of things in the days of early calculators, they were HP competitors. I remember the Olivetti living room TV computer and thought how come they missed the computer turn that much and died ? Well they didn't, capitalism pushed them into the grave. The Benedetti family, owner of Olivetti, did some stock acrobatics in the early 80s and failed massively, so they had to trickle down the loss just at the time Olivetti needed financial support to ramp up personal computer research and production. Bye
[1] computer chronicles demo of Windows 2 was the same idiocy. Now it can do backgrounds, and custom color so YOU can have YOUR own computer. Just like smartphones. It so much always the same it makes me physically sad. Chasing our own tails ...
In fashion it is about being non-mainstream. Check eg https://fashionista.com/2017/06/ugly-fashion-mainstream-tren... on ugly fashion.
Within tech there is still not so much "dare". A few exceptions are:
+ Spider routers: https://www.theverge.com/ces/2017/1/5/14182306/asus-rapture-...
+ These "smart" hairbrushes: https://www.theverge.com/2017/1/4/14169564/ces-2017-beauty-t...
+ Power outlets: http://www.libbywilkiedesigns.com/2017/09/new-must-electric-...
+ Countless wearable thingies: https://iwastesomuchtime.com/95685
Maybe you have your own favorite hideous tech thing of last year. Would be fun to see. It says just as much about the time or even more than the top brands that just have to stick to their aesthetic style.
I love Material Design language. But never would have made the connection with Italian "Mod" style of the 1960s. For me it's more about bringing tactile sense and physicality back to digital interfaces.
Another touch stone of inspiration for me is Mid Century Modern Danish design. Consider this "Valet Chair" by the legendary Hans Wegner. It isn't just that the seat lifts up to form a rack for hanging your trousers. Or that the backing hides a jacket hanger in plain site. It's the final reveal: a mini compartment underneath the seat for "storing ones cufflinks and tie pins" ;)
The functionality of the chair is modelled upon the world it aspires to inhabit. It's a design for living.
Hans Wegner Designed Mid-Century Valet Chair
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/roadshow/season/18/baton-rouge-la/ap...
As an Italian this makes me happy and sad at the same time. We had so much talent and so many great ideas, I'm glad that they're still around in the world, it's just a shame we couldn't understand their value and promote them around the world
> Central to Olivetti’s philosophy — and also to the designers that it hired — was that technology needed to be humanistic, not domineering
Today's Google is very bad at this. Their every product is creepy, cold, dumbed-down and surveilance-based. Maybe they are trying to somewhat fix that by visual aesthetics? Their hardware surely look great, and UIs in Android look good too, but UIs in their web apps look dull and authoritarian.
Google Photos is just "we exfiltrate all your photos and use machine learning on them". Its UI is like designed for monkeys. Compare that to Flickr or their old Picasaweb. Few buttons, no functionality except "we get your photos now you can look on them". I have lots of photos dated in future (from old camera which had bad clock) and there's no way to fix it (except to edit date on each photo).
Google+ was so cold and dead and creepy. Modern Youtube is just a stupid TV. Most "account settings" pages look like I'm viewing them on giant phone. They are saying "you don't need desktop computer, just use phone, you need only play and pause buttons". Their design is highly political. It feels more like eastern bloc's high modernism, not like Olivetti.
Great article, highlighting some great design history.
Google's new design also kinda reminds me of trends in the outdoor/sports apparel & footwear industry from about 2-3 years ago. Contrast stitching and zippers, muted tones with bright pastels, resurgence of 1970's bright colors and mountaineering styles. Patagonia's catalog from 2014 would be representative, as would lululemon around that time, and Nike and UnderArmour shoes and casual sport.
Tech is putting a new spin on it, but many of the themes are similar. I like it! The diversity and experimentation, with respectful nods to the past and adaptation for current trends is a great thing.
Not to be overlooked is Italy's heritage of graphic design. This comprehensive digital archive project by Nicola-Matteo Munari may waste hours of your time, if you are inclined to visual design.
There's a subset of Italian Design called Memphis which this seems to be based on.
The point of Memphis was to create funky colour combinations in living spaces filled with extravagantly geometric objects, not to decorate utilitarian objects with odd colours because "design".
Memphis was a big influence on early-90s graphic design, which - ironically - gives these designs more than a hint of early-Internet "What is this company called Google?" nostalgia.
I'm not sure if that's deliberate - and if it is deliberate, I'm really not sure it's a good look to be aiming for in 2017.
Windows Phone promoted colors. Constructor colorfully answered: Nokia Lumia, HTC 8X & 8S, etc. RIP.
This is encouraging.
One of my pet peeves of late has been the ubiquity of black, grey, and white colour schemes.
Here in NZ and Australia, almost all new apartment buildings are some combination of those colours. It's not just new buildings - people are giving their houses the grey treatment when it comes time to repaint.
My own theory is that this has gone hand-in-hand with the shift from seeing houses as homes (and therefore as an extension of personal character) to now seeing houses as investments. No one seems willing to choose a colour scheme with character for fear of limiting the pool of potential buyers.
On top of that, new cars seem less likely to be any colour other than black, silver, or white. But maybe that's just my perception...
And what is so special about this? Companies like Teenage Engineering have been doing this for years and same could be argued for dirt-cheap headphones from Urban Outfitters. For a company like Google, I'd rather expect them to develop their very own stringent signature style after years of visual self-discovery and a hodgepodge of mediocre results.
> And then, almost every tech product became white, silver, gray, black, flat, square, round, and minimalist. Boring.
But there are hints that this is changing. And one of the leaders of this change is, somewhat improbably, Google.
It seems consistent with their logo. They've had a colourful, playful identity from the start.
> The innovative rubber membrane and the “volcano” shape to the keys has been called “the most influential button design ever”, and combined with the eye-popping orange color, makes this a really stunning piece, especially when seen and held in person.
These kinds of rubber membrane buttons were popular because they were incredibly cheap.
They also suck.
(At least, every example I’ve ever tried was functionally terrible compared to real switches; I’ve never tried the Olivetti originals, but I would expect them to also suck.)
Olivetti were quite unusual in their corporate patronage of Giovani Pintori.
They effectively brought him on as an employee and let him create art that doubled as adverts for their products.
Does anyone else know of similar examples where companies supported art beyond the usual exhibition sponsorship and board room art?
The image results here give you an idea if how much closer to art than advert they were:
Might be useful to mention this article, and that maybe Olivetti's care for design also inspired the modern Apple store. http://www.italianways.com/the-olivetti-store-set-to-conquer...
Unfortunately they still design their phones so that it turns off when I grab it. Because I have human hands with opposable thumbs and the power button is right there on the side where you grip it. I wonder what lifeform Nexus phones are actually designed for.
Those colorful buttons are real nice though.
Why does the calculator in the photo have two "=" keys, one black and the other white?
Who is this being marketed to? Do people want funky, colourful "gadgets?"
Personally, I've an aversion to anything that looks like it might've been designed with the focus on its appearance rather than its function.
wow the author was really stretching it.. to draw a connection between the two, based on a few isolated examples.
I see the google products as a physical extension of the design language they've started with material design.
I feel like the iPhone 5c followed along similar lines.
I don't see much Italinanness in their designs a all
Apple copied Swiss (or Porsche) Design for MacBooks, Google copied Italian. Everybody "borrows" ideas these days.
> This isn’t a knock against the Braun style — there are many beautiful products that have sprung from that well.
A slight nit-pick, but does anyone else shudder a little when people use the adjective of 'beautiful' as an objective description of a particular design?
Not reading this article but I don't think there's anything to this. Pretty much all the most-lauded product designers have been continuing in this tradition ever since it was born - that it's not ubiquitous is attributable to timid and price-conscious clients. I don't think Google has any internal ideology whatsoever that is pushing this - they're just a company new to the hardware space who has lots of resources and a desire to build brand cachet, and they see hiring respected designers and getting out of their way as an effective way to do that.
I wonder if we will finally go back to hardware design principles that prioritizes functionality over look.
The Design Of Everyday Things gives examples of great designs:
* Rotary dial phones were designed in such a way that when a phone felled on the floor it not only survived, but the ongoing phone-call was not hanged. Today countless users brake their smartphones glasses and yet the mainstream smartphones to do not incorporate any design elements that would make it harder to drop the phone or that would protect the glass from the impact. Such elements would make the designs less minimal, so are discarded.
* Cars, a complex machines that can easily hurt others, traditionally have controls designed in such a way that you can enter a car model that is totally new to you and comfortably operate it within minutes. You can operate most controls without a need of looking away from the road. Today, we are ditching this proven design in favor of a single touch screen, because it looks so much more elegant and modern.