Comment by colonelspace a year ago
> Dieter Rams is the man behind Apple's design philosophy.
Rams and his work at Braun may have inspired Apple's products via Jony Ives, but Rams never worked on an Apple product (as far as I'm aware).
It's a bit like claiming "Thomas Edison is the man behind Tesla's motor technology".
I think the point is that "the man behind" connotes direct responsibility, not indirect inspiration. It's misleading wording.
You might try "Dieter Rams inspired Apple's design philosophy."
I'd go with "Dieter Rams is the inspiration behind Apple's design philosophy".
Well, you can be as firm as you like about the claim, it's still reads as if Dieter Rams worked for Apple.
Dieter Rams no doubt had significant influences and admiration for those who shaped his work and design philosophy, should we credit those people as being behind Apple also? How far should we go? Perhaps we need to point out da Vinci is also one of the men behind Apple's design philosophy.
Seems reasonable to suggest "the man behind" is generally understood to mean "the person directly responsible for".
Jony Ive specifically has said he looks up to Dieter Rams and his philosophy