Flipboard CEO: Apple's iPad 'created a revolution' for beautiful Internet content
Speaking at the Global Mobile Internet Conference in Beijing on Friday, McCue encouraged entrepreneurs and mobile app developers to sometimes "ignore the data." He challenged designers to consider emotion and "soul" rather than pure logic when building their products.
According to the executive, content for the PC Internet has been designed with an eye toward data, rather than beauty. He pointed to browser interfaces, Website navigation, and the current state of Web ads as clutter that makes online content less attractive than print publishing.
McCue pointed to Apple as having created an opportunity for publishers to bring design and aesthetics to the mobile Web, as the multi-touch capabilities of the iPad allow for the removal of much of the navigation controls.
"When Apple introduced the iPad, it really created a revolution. And weâre just now starting to realize how big that revolution is," he said. "With an iPad, you can actually navigate through content in a beautiful way that feels a lot like print...This is what "Flipboard" is all about: enabling publishers to present their content this way on devices like the iPad and the iPhone."
Flipboard CEO Mike McCue speaking at GMIC in Beijing.
During his presentation, McCue also explained that Flipboard had targeted China for its first international expansion because it believed the country "will be the largest mobile internet market in the world." The Chinese version of "Flipboard" launched last year with support for local social networking services like Sina Weibo and Ren Ren. The app had previously been disabled in the country last year because it allowed access to blocked sites like Facebook and Twitter.
Flipboard expects the number of Chinese downloads will soon exceed the number of U.S. downloads. The upcoming release of an Android version of the app should also help the company expand its install base in the country.
The iPad "revolution" has made the device Apple's fastest-selling product. A total of 67 million iPads have been sold as of the end of March, with sales of 11.8 million units in the March quarter alone. The company released the third generation of its touchscreen tablet in March, adding a Retina Display and a quad-core graphics processor.
17 Comments
True. It actually started with the 'rainbow' iMac and OS X.0 if you consider the web and app in general. Apple first 'aquafied' the PC and it continue to evolve ever since. Generic PC users, creators tend to see black and white (data with rudimentary looks) whereas Mac users see liberal arts; aesthetic with the data still intact.
When Steve Jobs said that Bill Gates had "no taste," I think he was also making a greater point about technology. The same point Mr. McCue is making. That exceptional design and great aesthetics are far more than eye candy, they are critical elements for both hardware and software. That it is not enough to create something that reasonably works, that is good code, and can be quickly pushed out the door onto the market. That how the user perceives the product, interacts with the product, and how the product responds to the user--in short, the user experience--are essential to effective technology. To me there is no clearer example of this than the iPad. Apple spent many years of testing and trying out ideas in developing both the software and hardware of the iPad. The idea of a tablet was even shelved for a while waiting on the necessary technology to become available. Everything about the iPad was created specifically to work together, integrated to accomplish a single goal--the desired user experience. On its introduction, the iPad was a runaway success. Contrast that with the tablets introduced before and after the iPad. The former slapped a poorly modified copy of Windows on tablets that had immature, inadequate technology. The latter slavishly copied the looks and specifications of the iPad, and slapped in an unsuited Android operating system designed for smart phones, not tablets. Both ignored the user experience in favor of just shipping something to market. The result: utter failure.
Bill Gates was an excellent programmer and Steve Jobs was not. Bill Gates was the logician, Steve Jobs the artist. Steve Jobs had good taste and Bill Gates didn't. I think the take away is today's great technology needs both Bill Gates and Steve Jobs (symbolically).
Completely agree and that's why iOS is beating Android in the app design. The New G+ app and the old is the best example hopefully Goggle will finally get design and some more competition will give the user even better apps...
That exceptional design and great aesthetics are far more than eye candy, they are critical elements for both hardware and software. That it is not enough to create something that reasonably works, that is good code, and can be quickly pushed out the door onto the market.
You would never, ever, be able to convince a nerd or geek of this. Like Gates, nerds and geeks have no taste and that's why a company like Apple is anathema to them. This is why they hate Apple.
When Steve Jobs said that Bill Gates had "no taste," I think he was also making a greater point about technology. The same point Mr. McCue is making. That exceptional design and great aesthetics are far more than eye candy, they are critical elements for both hardware and software. That it is not enough to create something that reasonably works, that is good code, and can be quickly pushed out the door onto the market. That how the user perceives the product, interacts with the product, and how the product responds to the user--in short, the user experience--are essential to effective technology. To me there is no clearer example of this than the iPad. Apple spent many years of testing and trying out ideas in developing both the software and hardware of the iPad. The idea of a tablet was even shelved for a while waiting on the necessary technology to become available. Everything about the iPad was created specifically to work together, integrated to accomplish a single goal--the desired user experience. On its introduction, the iPad was a runaway success. Contrast that with the tablets introduced before and after the iPad. The former slapped a poorly modified copy of Windows on tablets that had immature, inadequate technology. The latter slavishly copied the looks and specifications of the iPad, and slapped in an unsuited Android operating system designed for smart phones, not tablets. Both ignored the user experience in favor of just shipping something to market. The result: utter failure.
Bill Gates was an excellent programmer and Steve Jobs was not. Bill Gates was the logician, Steve Jobs the artist. Steve Jobs had good taste and Bill Gates didn't. I think the take away is today's great technology needs both Bill Gates and Steve Jobs (symbolically).
Was Bill Gates an excellent programmer? MS-DOS, which catapulted Microsoft, was licensed from someone else. After that, how much did Gates program? I believe he was a good programmer, but we cannot know if he was excellent.
What he had was the vision that software alone could be a very successful business model.
Likewise, was Steve Jobs really the artist? He didn't really do the design. Sure he contributed ideas and triaged them. But I liken that to a homeowner working with an architect on the design of a new house. At the end, the architect was the architect, not the homeowner. That won't stop the latter from telling everyone he designed his own house. Jobs did have a great appreciation for art, or rather design, and a strong vision that combining technology with great design could be a powerful business model.
So I don't see Jobs and Gates as great artist and programmer respectively. They might well have been, but their body of work does not demonstrate that. Instead, they both did something more significant - they formulated a vision and made it happen.
My two cents.