When it comes to industrial design arguably the leader today is Apple.  Their design is minimalist, by intent, and they aggressively practice the art of removing things from their systems within a design and between designs.  For example on their servers there aren't any bezels at all, their LEDs that signal things like their camera in operation disappear when the cameras aren't in use, etc.  So for Apple their key design criteria, I think, is best summarized by making the functional elegant and integral to the form of the design, or said another way form follows function.

There are also other complex issues that come into play, for example business intent and the message of the brand that you want convey for the long term — like say for 100 years.  Also in this era of increasing focus on sustainability having a brand that radiates persistence, arguably, may be more valuable — this is my opinion. Another area of balance to focus on is beauty versus usability, where the sexiest design is not always the most usable.  In fact as someone who is schooled in quantitative and qualitative usability testing sometimes it is an ugly design that is the most usable, which may seem counterintuitive.  

So in conclusion, while I would like to see sexier things, it is necessary to strike a balance with engineering, industrial design and usability to achieve what is best for the end user.

Thanks for your comments.

But why settle for one or the other when both (form AND function) are easily achievable!?

Nigel

If you're concerned about your data, and making sure it's highly available, secure and the system won't break down – who would you trust with your data?  The system that looks good but runs terribly, has too much down time or down-right fails, or the reliable, secure and available one?

Just some food for thought. 

Thanks for your comments and I totally agree. I suppose my comments should have been more along the lines of “when announcing new products and rev’s of existing products……”. Key is that when making announcements focus should be less on improved feeds and speeds improvements and more on integration with products and services higher up the stack.

Thanks for your comments.

Fatima,

I think we’re on the same page. Integration higher layers in the stack is the key, Im just suggesting that VMware seems to have the momentum at the moment.

I also agree that the vendors ignore the other hypervisors at their own peril. Personally I can only see the other hypervisors start to catch-up with VMware (Hyper-V especiallly).

Nigel

If it looks cool then it should also give the person who is showing it off – be that a dc manager / techie or a mkg geek (pun intended) something to help them do their job. I've worked in the past for a vendor who's lights on the front actually sold more kit – those lights told you how the box was performing – and yeah they went red when it was .. in need of help.

It looked cool, sold more and helped when you needed confirmation – a bit of design thought and … spark could act as a visual catalyst  to any well designed storage "box"…

(btw:  badges from those said boxes are now  sought after )

Techmute. I appreciate that its not the most important thing about an array. My point is that its a quick and easy win.

Matthew, thanks for pointing out the link to the skins- top quality!  Also thanks for pointing out that these discussions are happening elsewhere.

Nigel

But the two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. We try to keep the cabinet design folks from writing software. And the marketing folks, for that matter.

The systems need a door, so its not a big expense to make it attractive. And indeed, the block gloss on the VMAX door was inspired by the polished look and feel of common handheld devices…