For Ive, it often was. Ever thinner MBPs? Why, if not for appearance given the weight didn't change. No ports on PRO computers? Why, if they didn't bother his aesthetic sensibilities. Charging your mouse disables its use because the ports on the bottom? Why if not to hide the port for looks? He spent most of his time at Apple trying to make things pretty. Your comment may be true for "design" in the abstract, but as someone who spent plenty of time studying design and architecture, let me assure you, many of the people I studied with who are now industry veterans never cared about much more than aesthetics, even in architecture where engineering and building science are major factors. Again, sure, theoretically true for "design" but hardly true for Ive.

Just because you don't know the reasons doesn't mean there weren't any.

Certain people who call themselves designers could do with learning this. Bring back brutalism, I say!

Alternatively: Form follows function. Or: Good design takes into account the medium.

Many forms of saying it or a very similar statement. If only these words transformed into something beneficial in the minds of flying air castle designers.