Jonathan Ive on Apple's material obsessions

Many Apple product rollout have had issues. Early adopters are their de facto beta testers. What I think no one foresaw was how many people would buy this. The website crash indicates this.

"He says that the glass on the front and back is 'scratch-resistant aluminosilicate glass...'"

My front-side glass received 3 hairline scratches after one day. I simply put the phone in my pocket (just like I did my 1G phone for 3 years).

Scratch resistant it is not, folks. Not a deal breaker, but FYI.

Apple isn't doing anything magical for sure, they've got industrial designers pretending to be engineers and wonder why the iPhone 4 didn't "just work"

Take the time to read an analysis from someone who actually understands function. Anand, as usual, has done a thorough job of stepping past preconceptions - and neurotic reviewers - including disassembly and one-man testing in a geographic area where he's already established reception norms.

Yes, two separate antennas. How people can debate that is beyond understanding.

Yes, the phone performs better than previous versions. Har!

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3794/the-iphone-4-review/2

I'm not sure what's going on at Apple but their seeming focus on form over function is not doing them any favors.

I've bought four Macs since 2001 but last week had to return my new Macbook Pro as the sharp edges really made it unpleasant to use. Now this. I was going to get an iPhone 4 (I currently just have an iPod Touch) but I think I'll go for the previous model, or at least wait to see if the problems can be fixed.

When Apple fans like me (someone who checks in to TUAW several times a day) are getting fed up then that's not good. Being told that (for my Macbook Pro) that "I'm not typing correctly" or now for the iPhone 4 that we're not holding it the "right" way doesn't really fill me with confidence that my needs as a consumer come first.

Perhaps an "obsession with function" might be a good idea...

Now what about those broken or should I say shattered iphone 4? Design or flaw in design?

Materials matter. A lot. I agree with Apple 100%. Anyone who laughts this off as pointless or obsessive is a fool. A fool with lot of broken, scratched, cracked, defective junk laying around, I'll bet.

That being said, no matter how great the materials are, proper beta testing is imperative. There's no excuse for signal loss when the iPhone 4 is held a certain way. Blaming that on an "obsession with materials" misses the point. The problem is not an obsession with materials but a lack of obsession with beta testing. Proper beta testing is just as important as anything else (materials, OS, aesthetics, ergonomics, damage resistance, smell, feel, sound quality, storage capacity, speed, ease of use, etc.).

A lot of confusion over a very simple issue.

The antennas are in two pieces. The seam on the top and the left are both "real" in the sense that they are where the antennas are separate. The seam on the right is cosmetic in the sense that it doesn't indicate a true break in the circuit.

HOWEVER, Ive is referring to the PHYSICAL continuity of those sections, not the electronic continuity. Look very closely at an iPhone 4, and you'll see that the "seams" have a black filler (presumably of a resistive material) that is completely continuous with the steel sections. So in that sense, none of the seams are gaps; run your finger over them and it feels almost completely smooth.

Actually the cosmetic is only the RIGHT seam, to make both sides symmetric.

I love Ive's aesthetics, but to be honest this article would be more meaningful and timely if they had just released a piece of industrial perfection, rather than a compromised device that sports half a dozen + fairly obvious flaws. That doesn't make it any less interesting to crawl inside the designer's heads, just seems a little ill timed...