Monthly Archives: April 2006

Say what? huh?

Posted on by
Reply

In Japan, keeping your ears free from wax is serious business. I saw this in Engadget and had to laugh.

It says, “Though it’s not really a common topic of dinner conversation in the States — “Who’s been cleaning your ears at Yale, Son?” — the Japanese have a certain fondness for the act of ear cleaning.”" If you havent figured it out, its an ear pick with a mini scope so you can see all the amber goo in your ear!

The reason this is so funny is that a friend told me a story of her first trip to Japan. She brought back these really cute figurines on the end of a sticks. She thougth, wow look at all these cool characters, so she bought a bunch to bring home. Little did she know, she was buying ear picks! She showed them to me and when I told her what they were used for, she got grossed out and had that :( look on her face. She got over it and kept her ear picks, I just wonder if she’s using them for ear cleaning or something else. Be careful of what you buy overseas, I guess it could have been something more embarrasing.

Personalization

Posted on by
Reply

This one is for all Vespa lovers. I wonder if all these lights work? I barely get any light out of my one headlamp on my old P200. This must have 20 batteries, somewhere!

On a serious note, does personalization equal passion equal the need to express oneself? Passion coming from the “end user” that is. (i hate that word, user, its not like we’re not talking drug users here) Anyhow, think about it, when someone really loves something inanimate, like a car, or a laptop or a vespa, that’s when they take the object to the next level by making it more their own, by customization. You don’t see too many people customizing their Camry’s do you, just not inspiring in the first place. That said, seems like passion begets passion.

Razr tech

Posted on by
Reply

This post is a response to a debate about the Razr antenna location. Here’s my educated guess.

The parts shown at the top are listed as the antenna cover and the antenna itself is assembled in the same space over the speaker assembly. These parts are from CNN as the links show. The external antenna connector would seem to confirm that the antenna is located down at the bottom of the phone and not the top.

The antenna is down low, just another reason why this phone is so different from the rest.

Steriods done right!

Posted on by
Reply

Here’s a classic done right. From Ducati’s website “The 750 Imola Desmo is one of the most famous bikes in the world. It is best known, and, of course named for, its victory with Paul Smart and Bruno Spaggiari in the 200 mile race at Imola in 1972 – one of the most spectacular in racing history.” This bike put Ducati on the map in the racing world and from there, Ducati quickly became a force to be reckoned with.

This is the new Imola. The details are impeccable and it captures the essence of the original bike. One thing that’s clear is it definitely brings modern technology into play. The new tech shows through, which makes the bike different, but doesn’t detract from original design. It’s raw AND refined. It’s a skillful execution taking a classic and creating a modern reproduction. (maybe I’m biased since I own a Ducati?!) Read my post about “life after steroids”. Let me know what you think.

Life after steriods

Posted on by
1

Back in the 70s, Dodge made cars on steriods. Barracuda, Hemi Cuda, Roadrunner, Charger all stuffed with Hemi’s and 440 was the displacement to have. Throw on dual quads and you’d be getting, about 3 miles a gallon! Mopar defined what it meant to be a muscle car. Big engines, bold style and tasty chrome treatments. Fast forward to 2006 and we have the new Challenger.

Let’s look at the design. Its really, really close to the original, but different. Its softer, the belt line is now just a tiny little crease to catch a highlight. That line used to be so pronouced, you could just about place a beer can on it. The front end has lost its aggresive, shark like, i’m going to eat you alive look. Now it looks like a cute baby shark that hasnt had its first taste of surfer yet. And where’s the chrome? I have to say, i’m dissappointed. It looks like Barry Bonds coming off steriods, the outline is there, but what defines the muscle has faded and is turning into fat.

I feel like with the Big 3 are running out of new ideas and have lost the guts to create what made legends: Mustang, Camaro, Firebird, Corvette, GTO and the list goes on. Today, we just get a range of ok to bad reproductions with working A/C.

What has the better design? The original or updated Challenger?

  • I like the orignal (100%, 2 Votes)
  • I like the new version (0%, 0 Votes)
  • They both suck, why can't car companies do something original? (0%, 0 Votes)

Total Voters: 2

Loading ... Loading ...

Converging thoughts

Posted on by
Reply

The saying goes great minds think alike and designers should also know that while you’re thinking of one thing where ever you’re sitting at this moment, someone else is thinking the same thing. So I guess it’s a matter of what company can actually produce the thing first.

I just saw this interesting product from Playaway on the Gizmodo website. Basically, it’s an electronic audio book and hardware device all in one. No need for the ipod or mp3 player, just the content. Neat idea, but without actually using the product, here’s my initial thoughts. Each book costs about $30-$50. (DaVinci code $50, on Audible $20) That’s a lot of money for one book. It also looks like each package has its own ear buds. Seems wasteful if that’s the case. Let’s talk about the package, which in itself seems wasteful, open it to get to the player, throw away the PETE. This product seems like a netflix model could work here.

So back in 1999, the idea above was initiated by Tad Toulis while at Lunar Design. He called it Service as Product. The basic premise was that you buy or rent the service or content but not the hardware. The thought was that you could buy for instance, travel guides or a book at the airport, use them on your trip, then return them after you are done. Another scenario could be one where you pick the book up at Safeway, “listen” to it, and then return it later. The manufacturer could reuse the electronics and just implement graphics changes to match content changes. This was also a greener solution in that the packaging itself, was the product exterior. Just plug in headphones and press play. It’s sort of like disposable cameras in a way, buy the pictures, not the camera. (Re: the disposable cameras manufacturers do reuse many of those parts; it’s a pretty amazing process) Yes this “concept” wasn’t perfect either, look how big this thing was back in 1999!

I give the folks at Playaway kudos for actually getting something like this to market as I do believe that in the future, we will be buying more content and less hardware. We’re doing it already, prepaid cell phones, city share cars and netflix. What’s next?

Ugly gets attention

Posted on by
Reply

Can this be a good thing? Here are two things that started out ugly upon intro, then turned into classics and created brands that still exist today. What’s the cause of this? Was it a tipping point? Or some disruptive technology? Or some designer trying to be different. Or just a component of time and dumb luck? Maybe a mix of all.

1985 Air Jordans, if these shoes were on Quinten Dailey, would they have done so well? In Jordan’s book, Driven from Within, one passage goes something like this. Tinker (of Nike) shows prototype shoes to Michael (and I think they were the black versions, even uglier), MJ says, these shoes are ugly; I’m not wearing these on the court. Tinker convinces him to give them a try. A week or so later, MJ says, man, these shoes feel great, they’re light and provide great support, but everyone on the team are laughing at the way these shoes look, Tinker goes on to say, but MJ, they ARE looking at your shoes, right??…Michael got it and went with it. A big part of the success of Jordan I’s, they got noticed. Sure it helped that MJ went on to be the best player ever in the NBA (my opinion). Regardless, a brand is born.

1985 Suzuki GSXR 750. This bike was just not a nice looking bike. This was the same year Kawasaki came out with the Ninja and everyone wanted that bike, even the name “Ninja” and the ad campaign, samurai’s cutting things up, was that bad ass or what?! Long story short, the GSXR cut up the circuit in the amateur ranks and quickly became THE bike to have if you were serious about riding. The bike went through some “aero” redesign in 1988, but the GSXR legend had been established and a brand was born. Yeah, one might say it’s still ugly, but take a close look at the 1996 Ducati Monster tank and overall design. Slightly odd sculpting and proportions, and with the GSXR fairings off, lots of similarity. I’m not saying the Italians ripped off Suzuki, but maybe were inspired by something in the past. (That is if you think the Monster is a nice looking bike)

Seems like sometimes ugly can work. But ugly can’t stand on its own. Performance, it has to be there. Oh, and strong advertising helps too, like Spike Lee said, “its gotta be the shoes”. That said in today’s world, beauty can’t stand on its own either. In a perfect world, things would start off beautiful, have the performance and/or depth to back it up AND get the right stories told about it. The world isn’t perfect but here’s something to think about. As nature proves, some things start off ugly, but reach a state of beauty, like butterflies or babies! (Come on, babies right out of the chute, not so nice!!) So that must mean there’s always hope for things, ugly.

Designers rejoice!

Posted on by
Reply

Windows on a Mac, you knew this had to happen! BOOTCAMP For most die hards Mac users, this won’t matter since most microsoft apps run well if not better on a mac, (expect powerpoint). But me, i can’t wait, pc games, a few weird, but good windows apps, oh yeah, say goodbye to my PC!

[add 4/11] Some friends of mine are going to try running Alias on a Mac, will let you know what happens.

Asymmetry, ooooh, polarizing!

Posted on by
Reply

Why is it when designers propose solutions that are asymmetrical, non designers (and some designers as well) get scared? Is it because the human body is predominately symmetrical? Is it because of da Vinci’s fascination and documentation around proportion and symmetry outlined in the Vitruvian Man? Or are people just scared of something that isn’t centered?

Here are two examples of asymmetrical designs, one good and one, not so good. The good one has great fluidity and dynamism. Despite its symmetry, the forms and detail have a great sense of balance. The bad example, looks like it may have started off in the right place, with a nice sketch, but then someone got scared and forced some symmetry back into the design. Notice how the keypad layout just doesn’t feel right with the asymmetrical gesture of the product. The end result is just bad.

“Designers” get bad reputations for producing a “bad design” when products like this hit the market. It’s unfortunate that the designer probably lost a battle or two in the process, resulting in a mixed message of design languages. Could it have been the March Marketing battle of 02 or the Stage 4 Showdown with UI? Since I don’t really know how this all went for Kyocera, it could have been the stubborn designer holding on to his or her “design gesture” from the sketch and desperately pushing it through, just to get it to market. If so, bad call.

Check out some nice concept work from KDDI, a Japanese phone manf working with the likes of Naoto and WaterStudio. Penck has a Pebl gesture. Dont know which one came first. Neon is the newest of the concept series. Hexagon is the phone I have shown above. I like the study; it’s bold AND simple at the same time.