Formally, they are similar in visual style, and I wouldn't be surprised if Dyson got the idea from Apple—but Dyson has design built into it's DNA just like Apple. The question shouldn't be, 'why did Dyson create a product walk-through like this?' ...rather, 'why wouldn't they create a page like this?'
Now if Samsung had created a page like this, it would be yet another point against them in a bad track record on biting Apple designs. ;-)
Also, no one exists in vacuum.
You begrudgingly get an upvote for that pun.
I see what you did there...
'why wouldn't they create a page like this?'
- because it doesn't match their brand at all?
- because it's wildly inconsistent with the rest of their site?
- because their other product page templates are actually pretty great?
- because it's nearly identical to the mac pro's page?
- because scroll-jacking sucks?
just a few reasons off the top of my head.
Brand-wise, the page is consistent, specifically the typography. It still feels like a Dyson page.
The 360 Eye page is the only dark-themed page on the site—the same as the Mac Pro page is the only dark-themed page on the Apple site.
The fact that both Apple and Dyson have solitary black pages doesn't mean they're wildly inconsistent or off-brand.
i don't think the typography brings the brand through at all... button style, use of color, overall layout, and especially photography is very different from the rest of their stuff. maybe it's just me?
though to your point, mac pro is their only black product; hence, the page is black. further, apple doesn't really have a set template for product pages. each is product is pretty different. dyson on the other hand is highly templated.
If you've been working client-side or agency-side and haven't heard someone say "... like Apple's website" in your career – then I'd be very surprised.
Everyone borrows. I agree with Jonathan that I think it diverges enough to not be called plagiarism.
The dyson site actually works though.
Similarities aside, at least Dyson went responsive.
Plagiarism is taking someone else's work and passing them off as your own. Is this plagiarism? Maybe?? I honestly don't know. But what I do know is this: there's a thin line between inspiration and just plain copying and this appears to be the latter imho.
The only difference between the two sites is that they are different products and the text placement. The black background, the thin font in the header, the thin grey line separating the header, the button placement. the navigation on the right are all nearly identical.
They didn't show the fundamental principle of design -- how it works in real life.
Apple made the whole nice technical walkthrough because customers are usually very nerdy and geeky (in a good sense). They like to know all the underlying technologies running their computer, esp. when considering buying a machine like that. It was a way how to impress them.
I'm not sure if Dyson potential customers are the same. I know they care about the design and how it works but I doubt they are really into all new Dyson Technology™ described in detail without actually seeing how it performs. Visually nice but for me, the site didn't deliver the sense of real value.
They like to know all the underlying technologies running their computer, esp. when considering buying a machine like that.
I dunno about that. My guess is that the majority of Mac users don't even know what kind of processor they are running.
If a customer actually did care enough about all those specs, they are at least somewhat knowledgeable of computers. That means they are going to be more likely to go PC and build their own damn computer when they see the price/performance difference, or they need a Mac for work or whatever.
Not plagiarism, but it's the same concept: Show off the engineering that went into this thing. They're two companies that care deeply about the internals just as much as the externals.
I wouldn't think so. Its definitely inspired but its different enough to feel like a spin off not a copy. IMHO
I feel like Dyson actually did it better.
I think it is more of an overall concept copy than design. The scroll hijack showcases the breakdown of a product and both are identical in that matter.
The menu functionality at the top and its similarities bug me the most.