May 24, 2012

Steve Jobs: Concept Precedes Design

Among the many tributes to Steve Jobs on his passing, perhaps the most common theme is the man’s prowess as a designer.  And, indeed, from the Mac to the iPod to the iPhone to the iPad (if not so much Newton, or Lisa, or iTV, or …) Jobs’ talent for matching form to function was nothing short of astounding.  Asking his successors at Apple to maintain the standards he set is asking a lot.  But for arguments’ sake, let’s assume they can do it.

Unfortunately for Apple, meeting the design challenge will only get them part way home in terms of living up to their now departed leader’s legacy.  Because as good as Jobs may have been as a designer, he was even better as a conceptualizer: which is to say, his conceptual prowess was at least the equal of his design flair, and while I can – well, sort of– imagine that Jobs’ successors at Apple can design a better iPod, iPhone and iPad, I really struggle with the idea that they will be able to conceive of the next, well, iNext.  And, ultimately (which is to say probably within a year or two or maybe three at the outside) Apple will have to come up with a compelling iNext to keep the Apple juggernaut on top of the tech world for the next few years after that.

Design, ultimately, is a craft, and Jobs was a superb craftsman.  The ability to conceive something utterly new in function as well as form, on the other hand, is the mark of true genius.  Making a better iPad is a big task, but not as remotely challenging as conceiving the notion of the iPad in the first place.  Even conceding that Apple has the talent to live up to Jobs’ standards in the design of the next iPhone, it strains credulity, I think, to believe that anyone at Apple can match Jobs standards and timing in conjuring the iNext.

Look at it this way.  Suppose you had to rank three teams in terms of how likely each was to conceptualize a blockbuster iNext.  Team one was the Apple team with Jobs.  Team two was Jobs, and team 3 was the Apple team without Jobs.  Go ahead, rank them.  Doesn’t your ranking (we all came up with the same ranking, right?) tell you something about Apple’s likely longevity as the center of the consumer technology universe – or at least as the most valuable company on the planet?

© MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP

About the Author

Of Counsel

Paul Jones is Of Counsel to the Business Practice Group and a member of the Venture BestSM team. His practice concentrates on representing emerging technology and life sciences companies in financing and other strategic transactions as well as general corporate matters. He also represents venture capital firms and other investors in emerging technology and other high impact businesses.

608-283-0125

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.