APPLE MAC BOOK, stupid hard exterior casing edges!!!!

I have never owed a Mac, (I can hear all the glasses dropping) but I am not a hater, I am actually waiting on the purchase of a new iMac. But one thing I have always noticed through using all the Mac books owned by my friends and class mates in recent years is the stupid, annoying sharp fold line which surrounds the top edge of base. May I point out for anyone who has not experienced this is that it happens to sit right on your wrist and after about half an hour of typing your left with a nice red mark that then makes everyone think your an emo.

Compared to other PC's on the market, the Mac seems to be the only one which Has this problem. Other makes like Asus, Dell, and Hp all have edges which curve down, or have a softer radius. So why have Apple done this, was it done for a reason? I have done a quick bit of research and all i could find was a bunch of forums where people were complaining about the problem and offering suggestions on how to fix it (I did actually see someone write "sand paper helps"........).

I know Apple have a very conservative house design style, and that they are renowned for being very different and making it easier for the user. Now, I have two bones to pick with that last making things easier statement. #1, this is a problem that makes user interaction uncomfortable = BAD!  #2, there are always circles of middle aged people in Apple stores who are being taught by a genius! on how to use their new ipones the surf the foreign  interweb...

 

 After close inspection to the Mac Book, underneath it has a slight radius on all the edges, did Apple ever think to reverse the body, that would fix the problem... or mabey the tool maker was too busy playing angry birds and put the die in upside down...

 

Tom G

Phone Interfaces

It's probably something that most of us do multiple times a day and has now become just another part of our daily lives...texting.    

I love the idea that we can send someone a message instantaneously that doesn't rely on the receiver being available to take the call like a phone call would. It also gives the user a sense of privacy; only you and the recipient can see the message and texting in a public place may be much more appropriate then a phone call.

Even with this in mind I've never been a fan of texting on a mobile phone. This may be because of the phones I've owned but I find myself constantly frustrated that it isn't as easy as using an actual keyboard. I know this may be almost technologically impossible but it still annoys me.  My current phone is an old nokia that's about 4ish years old, one where each button is either three or four letters. While this can be absolute pain to type out longer messages it's great for quick little texts. Because each button does numerous functions, less buttons are needed and it means that we can also have larger buttons. Even people with stubby fingers can easily press each button without pressing down any other unwanted letters, a problem many people can have with smart phones and blackberry style phones.   

 We have since got phones that have full QWERTY keyboards and smart phones that use a touch screen keyboard. I've used all of these interfaces and still have to say that the interface that my phone uses is my favourite. All these are other methods of texting are trying to emulate a keyboard but are falling short in comparison with a real keyboard.  While the touchscreen keyboards let us tip the keyboard sideways to access a larger keyboard, I believe that as users, feeling the button move when pressed is something that definitely helps the user interact with the product .

Stefan    

i CAN open this!

Something I think seriously needs some interface improvement is the CAN. While cans are pretty easy to hold, recyclable, and quick and easy to produce, they're pretty difficult to open. When I was little and had tiny hands (even smaller than now... wow!) I would always spill my drink - or whatever else was in the can - because I wasn't strong enough to open the pull tab lid. While this can be good as it kind of childproofs the can, it is still difficult for adults - you have to hold the can very steady to avoid knocking it over, and it's very hard to do with just one hand - especially if you have small ones like me. However one thing I do need to say in the pull tab's favour: that snap sound as you open it - love it!

I'm not entirely sure on how this interface issue could be improved to make the can more user-friendly, as other types of can openings are just as difficult - for example, a can that needs to be opened using a can opener. I don't know about you guys, but with these I still manage to spill everything out the side - maybe I'm just super uncoordinated? But the jagged edges aren't all that user-friendly either. 

The big plus for the aluminium cans is definitely not the opening of it, but its disposability and recyclability, and that's why, despite me spilling a little of my drink almost every time, I'll keep using them.

Holly

something i found interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7Y0zAzoggY

Confusing Exercise Bike

Fwd: Designs by tools, for tools!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Robert Schoch <rdsch1@student.monash.edu>
Date: 8 October 2011 17:31
Subject: Designs by tools, for tools!
To: robbienapper.design@blogger.com

Tools designed by tools.

Disclaimer: before I begin the main point of this post I would like to acknowledge the fact that this mechanism has been revised by many companies in order to work out the bugs of the original design, however many of these original mechanisms are still being manufactured currently.

I own two multi-tools. One Leatherman (~$100) and one generic (~$10). There are notable differences in quality of the steel and general build quality in the hand etc. however there is one aspect both of these tools have in common.

The foldout tools enclosed in each handle are sunken deeply in the grip and the foldout mechanisms in both tools are extremely tight (by default). This combination of hard to reach tools and a tight mechanism boils down to the multi-tools being hard to use and the opposite of convenient. I find myself looking for another screwdriver or thin object to unfold the multi tools which at this point I believe is a flawed design. You shouldn't need another tool to access a function of a device that is supposed to be convenient and standalone.

As previously mentioned this design has been revised in many different ways that look much more user friendly however they are often priced at a premium rate and there are still hundreds of the original design floating around for sale in shops and online at this very moment.

-Robert Schoch

light sensor lamp

As we all know, energy issues become more and more important in our daily life.In this way, a lot of sensors are designed to save energy. Light-sensor lamp is one of the most typical implications of sensor. It has a wide range of usages both in public area and private area. Firstly, what is a sensor? A sensor is a device that measures a physical quantity and converts it into a signal which can be read by an observer or an instrument. For example, a mercury-in-glass thermometer converts the measured temperature into expansion and contraction of a liquid which can be read on a calibrated glass tube. Athermocouple converts temperature to an output voltage which can be read by a voltmetre. For accuracy, most sensors are calibrated against known the standard. Then what is a light sensor? A light sensor is a device that is used to detect light. There are many different types of light sensors, each of which works in a slightly different way. A photocell or photoresister, for example, is a small sensor that changes its resistance when light shines on it; they are used in many consumer products to determine the intensity of light. A charged coupled device, transports electrically charged signals, and is used as a light sensor in digital cameras and night-vision devices.  The light sensor Lamps are used widely in our dalily life such as streetlights, house door lights, front lights of cars and so on. On one hand, t hey give out excellent light, save energy and look great. A hat-trick of benefits from compact fluorescent lamps. They consume much less electricity than conventional incandescent lamps, they last much longer and they can be used in place of almost any ordinary light bulb because they are so compact.On the other hand, They save a lot of huamn resouces and brought a lot of conviniences for everyone's daily life. As a fornt lingt sensor of a car, it makes drivers much safer than before. People will forget to turn on all kinds of light in the car sometimes, in which case, the driving is very dangerous. But，with light sensor front light, drivers dont need to worry about that anymore. But light sensors in car are expensive, only expensive cars have those devices, to work out a cheap light sensor for every car has great meaning to every driver. Further more, Light sensor cannot be very acurate sometimes, which means people will drive in dark situation sometimes and it's hard to tell a standard light on the street. So to make the light sensor more acurate is a very important thing for designers to consider. Overall, light sensor lamps are great energy saving devices in our daily life Aodong Wei

Too many buttons on micro oven

Micro Oven

The discovery of micro oven was not intended. In World War 2 two scientists invented magnetron which produces microwave. The only reason that was invented was to search for Nazi's warplane. By accident, several years later, It was discovered microwave can also cook foods. Since that moment microwave has been used, and now it becomes one of the most popular cooking tool.

I have a Micro oven at home, MS2647GR from LG that is pretty good and working well. I literally use that every day. As an Industrial student, I don't have enough time to cook. So once I cook, I cook much of food and keep them in refrigerator and warm it up when I need it. I just loved every functions of my micro oven.

However, in terms of interactions, there are few things that make me wonder. First thing is about how many buttons it has. I not only use few of buttons but also most of users actually use only few: Start, stop, open buttons. I have never used the others, except defrost button: I rarely use it. But my microwave has 15 buttons.   

Wouldn't it be better without many of buttons and simply designed with 3 or 5 buttons. That will probably makes people well understand the micro oven. Moreover I cannot find any differences between few buttons. I can warm up food by pushing start button. However there are button for auto warm up which I have never used.

Interaction is about how to react the product from users' requires. But when there are so many choices to choose, users become confused, not become happy with choosing one of those.

Soon Myougn Suh Richard

Got the wrong end

Before product drawing class this semester I had never used Copic markers so when I first started I was constantly taking off the wrong end cap from the one I wanted. If I wanted the chisel tip, I'd get the brush tip and if I wanted the brush tip, I'd get the chisel tip, I'm sure some of you have experienced the same problem.
 Now before you all get up in arms, I am well aware that there are two ways that the marker alerts you as to which end is which, the little picture of the nib on one side of the marker and the visible 0.7mm wide ring of either grey or dark grey in between the cap and the marker. After almost a full semester of use I now always pause before taking off the cap and check that I am taking off the right end.
 As I use Copics more and more I'm sure that it will be come an automatic, almost subconscious response to the grey rings under the caps. Also I appreciate the fact that Copics are tools that require years to master and therefore should not be expected to be instantly understood. However, in terms of user interface, the system of nib differentiation is not ideal.
 I can see several solutions to the problem which wouldn't change the overall aesthetic too much. Perhaps increasing the width of the grey rings from 0.7mm to 1.2mm would make them more easily distinguishable. Another solution would be to put the nib icons on another face of the copic, so that they stand out, rather than being lost amongst the clutter of the barcode and brand name. Would these changes drastically increase the cost of production and hence retail value? Probably, but if it reduces the times spent on each rendering AND we all know time = money, then you'd save money in the long run (although to be honest if Copics cost any more than they already do I would be living in my non-existent car).

Sam F

Plug Problem

After the death of my iPhone I had to revert back to one of the old Nokia mobile phones I had lying around the house and with this came the search for the charger. Once finding the charger I realized that it blocked anything plugged in on the left or you had to unplug all your devices and re-plug them so that the Nokia charger would stick out left and not obstruct anything. Or in some cases just leave one item unplugged while your phone charges. All these aspects make it a very difficult interface to work with efficiently.

This Nokia charger is not the first device I have had a plug problem with, it has happened with other device chargers, speakers and even modem devices. The fact that a majority of these products are designed for in home and office use means that you are using your device in an environment packed with meters of cabling and multiple plugs, this design flaw makes the space a lot less efficient in an area where space and accessibility is vital. I feel that a lot of these devices have been made this way to stay compact but have in some way ignored how it will actually be used.

A reasonable solution to this problem would be to separate the current converters/Amps away from the wall socket like many laptop chargers or perhaps position the electrical components in a different way so that they are not obscuring the other sockets.

 

Igor Jovanovic.

Dreadmill vs. Treadthrill

Physical activity and exercise is the fundamental key in enhancing and maintaing our physical fitness and overall health and well-being. Many of us, including me, require a lot of motivation in approaching such tasks.  Poorly designed gym equipment are not only a hindrance, but they also become ugly deterrents. Before you know it, home treadmills quickly become big and expensive coat racks.

SEG T-350

A couple of years ago, my dad purchased a cheap treadmill that was on sale. I quickly came to realise that this was one foolish mistake made on my dad's behalf. Not only is the SEG T-350 not very sturdy and often mechanically and electronically faulty, the product interface is very poorly designed. Firstly the buttons are flat and all lay underneath a thin printed sheet of plastic. They lack a tactile response and require a lot of effort to operate them. When you're puffing and out of breath, running on the treadmill, you want the buttons to be easily accessible. Secondly, the emergency stop magnetic key system, is also very bothersome. I often found myself accidentally stopping the machine by getting my arms caught on the string of the clip. The heart rate monitors are inconveniently placed on the sides. Running with your hands on these side rests creates unwanted stress on your shoulders and provides an awkward and unnatural feeling. The treadmill also has two bottle holders. Although this creates a nice balance and symmetrical appearance, having two bottle holders is quite unnecessary. The treadmill is also very noisy, which makes it almost impossible for me to hear anything coming from my lounge room television. Finally the treadmill has multi-function displays and it is very inconvenient having to switch between display outputs. The treadmill is so poorly designed, I have resorted to joining a gym and using their cardio equipment instead.

Technogym 900 Visioweb

My local gym are equipped with several Technogym 900 Visioweb treadmills. It is clearly obvious that these treadmills are expensive and come from a high-tech generation. Careful consideration into the design of the interface has been taken into account. The treadmills large touchscreen interface allows it to be more user-friendly. This techno-age piece of equipment has internet connectivity, T.V. functionality and iPod/iPhone capabilities. This provides personal entertainment and allows users to be mentally distracted from their strenuous workout. The large screen displays all the information without it being too cluttered or convoluted. The information displays can also be hidden if desired by the user. Users can increase/decrease speed and incline with easily large and accessible yellow levers. Heart rate monitors are positioned on a bar in front. Running with your arms in front is a more natural position. A large red button located in an obvious position allows the user to stop the machine in case of an emergency. The treadmill also has a larger storage space for not only your water bottle but also your phone, wallet, etc. Technogym have focused on making a gym experience enjoyable and as most comfortable as it can be. Therefore I believe that their treadmills are more successful and better executed designs.

-Phi Do

Resources:

http://www.technogym.com/gb/products/cardiovascular-training/treadmills/excite-+/run-now/3859

YIFU

YIFU

Interface, wear glasses.

I am one of the few people who wore a glasses in the class. The eyeglasses were firstly introduced in Europe and then spread to Asia. I found out that the supports of glasses for European and East Asian are different because bridge height of the nose are different. However, i am sure you are aware of this, a lot asian people are wearing glasses that manufactured according to european noses. The interface of such glasses is really bad, because of the lower nose bridge height of Asian users, people need to rise up the glasses  frequently in order to place lenses right up with their eye level. Some users adapt such move after they wear glasses and think it is cool to do so, but in general that extra move is unnecessary especially when you are focusing and do not want to be interrupted . What makes even worse is that users who are suffered from this problem are tended to look up with their head so that the eyes matches with the glasses vertically. It really seems like they are struggling to see things, which they are not mean to. 

To design a new type of wear glasses can be difficult. It is not only the concern on support height of noses but also a reconsideration on a different face structure(Asian people's face is tend to be fatter than European's). That is why we often see people from East Asian wear glasses that have black frame and big lens. That design gives a visual balance of the face and looks nicer, which i don't regard this as the only solution. I have seen one of the Japanese wear glasses like the one in the picture (not exact the same), the connecting part of two lenses is designed at the bottom mid instead of top mid, it is a bold decision to make, because i think that breaks some kinds of limitation on glasses design (visual aesthetics?) and you don't see such design very often. Nevertheless, it is a creative idea, at least it solved the problems that i mentioned.

I am surprised to know how a simple product can change the way of people's looking by user's reaction of the products. It also will be great interest to solve this problem and make it easier for people who wear glasses.

Lids – Good concept, why still bad execution?

So there are a lot of different containers that we use in our daily lives, and for many applications these need to be resealable, or at least close-able, so we have invented the lid to fill this need. We have invited a large variety of lids to be used with our large variety of containers, with different systems for opening and closing. They are a clever machine, solving the problem of sealing a container, but also allowing it to be opened with relative ease. But there are a few that I believe are harder to use than others, and some I think stand out as good solutions to a usability problem.

Bottle Caps
By this I mean the pry-off bottle top, used mainly for beer bottles. I know its cooler to pop off a bottle cap, and it appeals to some kind of tradition, and after some quick Googling we can find that they are apparently cheaper and better for freshness (I'm a little cynical about that). However, should I really have to cut my hand on every bottle's serrated edges before I find out it is not a screw top? I'm not a big drinker, but I do happen to carry around a bottle opener on my keys. I doubt many other people do, and to me, the idea of needing a tool to open a bottle is a bit over complicated. We started with a normal bottle, no lid, then added the lid tool to seal it all in. I'm okay with that. But who decided it was a easier to make the bottle only open-able with another tool? To me it is making problems where they need not be. They shouldn't be serrated and they shouldn't be indistinguishable from screw caps, if these changes were made I could almost live with pry-off caps. A screw top seems perfect to me from a usability perspective.

Childproof Caps
These are just as hard for an adult to use, especially if the child can read the instructions printed on the cap.

Corks
I have to drink the whole bottle in one sitting? Sure if I have some friends over, but what about my (hypothetical) lonely nights at home with the cat and a microwave dinner. I can't be expected to waste a whole bottle of wine on Grey's Anatomy. (Spinster woman cliché used for comedic effect only). Also another lid that needs a special tool to be opened.

Stiff jar lids
We all dread the day when we have to call our grandchildren to come and open a jam jar because of arthritis. Manufacturers need to realise that a lot of people have strength limitations, and that it they need to come up with a way to adequately seal food in, without it being difficult to open. This is a problem that I wouldn't mind being solved by the use of some tool.

Lids are seemingly a simple device, and an old invention. How come we still can't get them to work properly?

I know there are other lids that are difficult to use, please comment :)

Scott Everitt

Books

Talk of product interface has got me thinking about books, and more specifically - books vs. e-books.

Whilst I feel interface is an important concept, I believe it is only one side of the design pyramid and therefore it cannot be unquestionably prioritised over things like function or the environment. For example a car has a wonderfully comfortable interface, however public transport, whilst less comfortable or personal, is a much more environmentally friendly concept.

The printed book falls into a similar vein as public transport. A printed book has very low embodied energy, lasts for decades if not centuries, and can be entirely recycled. The hardware required to read e-books however have a very high embodied energy, contain toxic heavy metals, and are only somewhat recyclable. 

The interface of the printed book seems a little cumbersome in comparison to say an e-books ability to allow word or phrase searches and provide access to hundreds more books. But at what cost? I think in this case, at least until the hardware can be made sustainably and open-source software, the printed book represents a far better solution.

Nicholas Avery

http://sustainabilityhallofshame.wordpress.com/2010/02/02/will-books-only-be-useful-as-kindling/

Control switches

We all use them, and they seem like they'd be as simple as a flick of the switch, but in reality it's not the case, is it? I've lived in my house for 16 years and there's this one panel of light switches in my dining room that still manages to get me every time, and I'm sure it's not the only one. It's a 2 x 2 light switch panel - all the light switches are identical and are symmetrically positioned, with no indication whatsoever as to which room a light switch illuminates. This results in the on and off flicking of all the light switches in the panel before finding the right one. You'd think it would make more sense if the light switch to the room directly to the right of the panel, was on the right side of the panel, but it's positioned in the most unlikely place - the bottom left.

Just when you thought this was bad enough, this particular light switch panel has light switches for rooms/places not even visible when standing at the light switch. One of the light switches illuminates a light near my front yard. There's just no logical relationship between the switches' layout and the environment.

To make this light switch worse than it already is, none of the light switches tell me whether I'm flicking in the on or off direction. This isn't so bad when were dealing with lights, but becomes a major problem if it's a power switch (like the one found in my lounge room).

--

Cynthia

Petrol Pumps and remote controls.

/Start Rant.

I have a problem with petrol pumps. The older ones anyway. They are hard to use, and do not give enough user feedback in my opinion. The gap between the trigger and the handle is too far away on many of the pumps. Now, I have normal sized hand (I think), and sometimes I still struggle to reach the trigger to pump the fuel into my car. I feel I have to virtually stretch my hand to it's maximum hand span just to get my fingers around it. And when I manage to do this, I can only just fit my fingers around the trigger. Imagine someone with small hands trying to use this! They would almost have to use two hands. Additionally, the trigger does not push far enough in, leaving the user questioning whether the fuel is actually being pumped into the tank or not. Some of the newer, updated fuel pumps are better, where the user actually feels like they are doing something, however not many petrol stations have been updated. Also, the fuel pipe is not flexible enough. Sometimes I have to contort and pull and twist the head of the pump just to get it into the mouth of the tank. I may be being pedantic, however if I am having troubles with this, then I can only assume other people are having trouble with this too. Pumping fuel into one's car is a regular occurrence, and therefore should be designed for the user a lot better. Further more, petrol stations are just plain ugly. There is no aesthetic appeal in to a petrol station what-so-ever. It is industrial and boring and is an eyesore in the community.

My second rant comes in the form if my television control at home. I have a Sony Bravia in my living room. Now I am not saying this is a bad T.V, not at all, in fact is is a very good T.V and I feel very privileged to have one, however the user interaction of the remote control is horrible. Firstly, there are too many buttons. Way too many buttons. The user is lost in just turning on the product. Secondly, there are two on/off buttons. One is to turn on the television, and the other is to turn on the amp. The two buttons are only differentiated by the shape. Way to create even more confusion for the user!
Secondly, the T.V is controlled by the amp, even though the amp does not need to be on. Because the entire system is linked up, the amp must be on the 'T.V' setting to turn on the actual T.V. other setting include radio and DVD player and Foxtel etc. Another major flaw in this remote design is that the volume control buttons don't work unless you press the "T.V" button at the top left hand corner which glows red when you do. This takes a considerable amount of learning from the user, and first time users are completely out of their element. I think the reason why it is so complex is that Sony have tried to pile all of the user interface to control every system, from the T.V to the surround sound system into one singular remote and at the same time make it as small and compact as possible. However they fail at this because the size of the remote is huge. It is very very long and inconvenient. And it does too many things, and does not do them successfully either I feel.

These are only two products that have bad user interaction that I feel are suitable for this topic. I could continue, however I won't.

/End Rant.

Razan Sappideen

MyKi – Man, Your Kidding…

Now everyone knows about MyKi and the constant debate about the system and peoples opinion about the massive amount of money that has been wasted on this project, which was not even needed. Well In my opinion MyKi is actually a good idea, in theory it is made to speed things up and it is also made to be easier to use, and much more environmentally friendly, but this system I believe is the one of the worst executed products I have ever seen. The theory of the product seems great! But in reality the product just doesn't work as well as the current system, and people prefer that!

 

Now the reason for this is that the MyKi follows a concept, which relies on developing technology. The technology is meant be a 'touch system' where you just touch on instead of validating your ticket. Now MyKi Was meant to be presented as a very simple system and a fast and easy to use system, but I think validating a ticket once for a trip is better than touch on and then touching off again!! This basically brings everything backwards! Very well done MyKi! The second thing is that MyKi is supposed to be cheaper by giving a cheaper fare by calculating the distance between the arrival and destination and the time it took to get there. Fair enough seems pretty simple but again, MyKi gets the math wrong! MyKi calculates the fare, but sometimes it can't judge the time or distance properly and then snatches excess money or leaves you without deducting any money! (Actually the fact that sometimes it doesn't deduct anything is pretty handy!).

 

MyKi has cost victoria a fortune, both to set up and to run. MyKi costs a total of around $1.35 billion. $494 million for start up and $50–55 million per year to run the system along with other associated costs. That is a lot of money! Another example of poor execution of the product. The testing should have been considered a fair bit and more research should have been put into the product to make it work.

 

The unsuccessful results and the demeaning opinions of people about the MyKi system tell them that it was a very poorly executed product, but had a great idea in mind which could have been made much better with a bit more thought and testing.

 

Even though I have criticized MyKi's design I just want to say that I actually use a MyKi myself, mainly because it's cheaper than Metcard, but MyKi still does have potential is still a good product, just not better than the current system.

 

Bishavjot Singh

 

Acr

I have had the Acer Aspire TimelineX notebook for about 2 years now and have been very pleased with its performance and features. Overall it is a great laptop that i believe is one of the nicest looking laptops around. The only issue i have with it, is that it was obviously designed with an importance on aesthetics rather than usability.
The computer interface or the Keyboard of this notebook is so poorly executed that it makes it incredibly hard to type passwords and write documents. The main reason for this issue is the absence of casing around the keys. As you can see in the closeup picture there is a gap in between each key, which means alot of dust can go in and is hard to get out, making the pressing of some buttons difficult.
Additionally the buttons are mounted centrally in a small area causing them to tip over when pressed on the side. This means that the buttons click sounds when it is not actually pressed.
I have asked others who had different models of Acer notebooks and they have also experienced the same problem.
With both of these issues of interface execution, typing an essay is near impossible and has resulted in many Acer customers being dissatisfied.
Shaun Turner

iPod Click Wheel

Photos of the iPod Third Generation (top) and iPod Nano Third Generation (bottom)

The iPod Click Wheel

Yes, I know what you are thinking. Maybe this is just another rant about apple product, and you would probably be right. But hear me out for a minute.

 

The click wheel currently used on the iPod classic was first introduced in 2004 on the iPod Photo and the iPod Mini. This click wheel was a culmination of the third generation iPod (2003), which featured a scrolling dial and four buttons as separate. This interface worked quite well as the user could change the song, return to the menu or play/pause with the press of a button. The volume was controlled by this circular wheel like button, which took up a good third of the front face of the iPod. The interface on the third generation iPod was neat, and with only 5 ways that the user could interact with iPod, it was simple. These two factors are fundamentals of good design. Acording to industrial designer Dieter Rams, good design has ten governing principals. "Good design is as little design as possible…. Good design makes a product understandable…" Dieter Rams. These are just two of the principals that Rams used to form many of his iconic designs. Another principal of Rams' was that "Good design was aesthetic…". Here, Rams referred to not just the fact that the product looked good to the user, but looked good in the context that is was designed to be in. The context for the iPod was not really known, as the competitors designs such as the Sony Walkman looked nothing like this. The release of the iPod changed the way that people look at personal music devices, not only because of the flawless design of the body, but also the design of the user interface. The four buttons and volume control dial where unlike any other product on the market at the time. The volume dial felt more instinctive to people who where interested in music appreciation, and provided them with a more satisfying feeling of changing the volume of the song they are listening to. It harked back to the audio system people have in their home, and the way they change the volume, with dials. This proved to be a lot more satisfying than pressing a button to increase the volume, and left the competition far behind when people came to deciding on a product to purchase. 

 

Apple developed this interface further with the release of the iPod Mini and Photo in 2004 (as mentioned above). The development of the click wheel not only made the iPod interface easier, but it also made the product look simpler and even more clean and refined. The four buttons that once sat in a line on the top of the iPod third generation now sat in on the click wheel, where the user could change the volume, scroll, change song, play/pause and return to the menu, all on a circular section of the iPod! In terms of having control over a product in the simplest and most effective way, I think the current iPod click wheel does an exceptional job. Sometimes I think when I use my iPod that, sure it is not the most straight forward way to use the product, like regular buttons may be, but we have all learnt to use this interface. We have sort of adapted to understand this interface. We do this with all the products that we interact with, figuring them out so we can use them instinctively. I think that this interface allows people to use it easily without any experience for the first time, but also challenges the user to play with it more in order to figure it out.

With the development and refinement of touch screen technologies, physical buttons are appearing less and less in not only Apple products (as evident with the current iPod Nano), but also with many other products. I myself sometimes think that a touch screen interface feel more natural and easy to use, but I will always have a soft spot for an actual working button. While touch screens tick most of the boxes in Rams' ten principals of good design do they really make a product understandable? They can sometimes seem overwhelming with the amount of possible actions they can perform.

 

There is something about the satisfaction of pressing a button that appeals to me more than a touch screen button. I find it easier to press the wrong button on a touch screen device than on a device with tactile buttons. I think this may have to do with the fact that the amount of buttons is massive on a touch phone when compared with a phone with physical buttons. This relates back to learning the interface and buttons of the device, which is done more effectively if the product interface is simple!

 

I hope this is not too much to take in, and that I didn't stretch too far away from the topic. Thanks for reading :) 

 

  

 

RIP Steve Jobs

 

 

 

Matt Harding

 

Ps. I strongly suggest looking up Dieter Rams' Ten Principals of Good Design…
http://www.vitsoe.com/en/gb/about/dieterrams/gooddesign

 

 

 

PUSH OR PULL?

Alright, this might sound like a bit of a fussy one, but I've often
gone to push or pull a door only to find that it involved using the
other action for me to walk through. Very frustrating!

When we move to open a door we look for signs as to which direction it
should be opened, a handle, a bar or even a simple plate. They are
usually located in the right spot so I've got not qualms with that -
if the door was to open in a clockwise, right arc the handle is
located on the left. All good. My issue is with the handle design.
When a door has a nice, matte finished steel handle bar in a verticle
orientation one would generally pick up on the signs the door is
providing and react with a pull motion. And get stuck. It happens time
and time again, where a push action is required and the designer has
specified a handle that indicates otherwise.

On a similar note, bars that span the entire width of the door in
diagonal or horizontal direction. These give no indication as to
whether the door opens to the left or right. Look at the second image
above, which side would you push on?

Handles, plates and bars are such a simple detailing in the overall
scheme of the building and are often less well thought through. We
have beautifully designed interior finishing products but by simply
installing it in the wrong place users can over look their aesthetic
appeal and instead become frustrated with the functionality of it. All
in all, you're generally only saving a few milliseconds of time by
using the correct motion and only have a passing sense of frustration,
but still something that is quite easily and simply avoided.

Steph Tan

Logitech Trackman Marble Mouse

I had the unfortunate pleasure of using this mouse roughly 5 years ago at a friend's house. My main issue with this product is that the human interaction becomes too inconvenient when you compare it to using a normal scroll mouse. While the innovative concept is definately there in the design and interface, it comes off pointless if it cannot work as easily and smoothely as its predessor.

The Logitech Trackman Marble Mouse's main function is the trackball situated in the middle of the mouse. This effectively acts as the cursor which the user uses to navigate themselves on the computer. Two buttons are positioned on the side acting as the left and right buttons. Next to each lies another smaller button which act as backward and forward buttons during web surfing. The advantages of using this mouse would be that less wrist work would be required as the trackball controls the cursor; this also offers a larger curser range due to its flexible movement. It is also an ambidexterous design meaning both right and left handers can use it.

 

So, what's wrong with it?

 

Firstly, the product lacks a scrolling function. The scroll becomes very useful in terms of internet surfing and reviewing documents. There have been reports that this mouse can be reprogrammed so that it can scroll, however that's one extra step which could have been resolved in the product design itself.

Secondly, this mouse would rely heavily on past experience. The creative concept of using a ball to navigate a cursor would take twice as long to adapt to compared to using a standard computer mouse. This alone can put off any customer as it requires twice the effort to use something that achieves the same result with half the effort of another product. Particularly in gaming, this mouse would prove very difficult as the accuracy relys on a steady finger than a steady hand.

The original mouse uses a planar cursor field, wheras the Trackman Marble focuses on a 360 experience- This I don't get. You're already working with a planar screen, why would you need to introduce a 360 medium if your work is 2D? It baffles me. Also I don't experience that much wrist pain when I use a standard mouse but I do believe it goes both ways; if you use any muscle excessively, it will eventually grow tired. You may avoid wrist fatigue but I'm sure if you use you move your finger around for hours on end, it's going to get tired regardless.

Because the trackball requires a lot of movement, the gap in between is open to dust and other bacteria which could interfere with the optical reader, therefore it needs to be cleaned every 4 - 6 months.

The positioning of the buttons were quite awkward as well. Being so used to using my index finger to click the left mouse button, the user is now forced to use their thumb to select. Once again, this is another step for the consumer to get used to making it inconvenient and unappealing.

 

 

Overall, I understand this design aimed to introduce a new and innovative way to control the mouse. It has a few good advantages but compared to its number one competitor, the Logitech Trackman Marble lacks in usability and consumer popularity.

 

 

 

Karen Ly

 

 

 

Resources:

http://www.productreview.com.au/p/logitech-trackman-marble.html

http://www.logitech.com/en-us/mice-pointers/trackballs/devices/4680

http://reviews.logitech.com/7061/4680/logitech-trackman-marble-reviews/reviews.htm?page=2

 

This week's post - product interaction, the good and the bad

Today in class we spoke a little about the difference between concept and execution. Having a good idea is one thing, but pulling it off is another.

A good example of this is the current iPhone - great concept, but the execution is actually flawed - the steel edge interferes with reception, and we all know how delicate they are.

This week, the blog is about product interaction. As you're all detailing your designs, I'd like this issue to be at the front of your mind. HOW are people going to interact with your product?

The post itself is quite simple - I'd like to see examples and discussion of products with good (or bad) interfaces, and critically, WHY you think so!

Coffee machines, phone interfaces, doors, etc, there are heaps of products which could be so much better (in execution) except for their interface.

So don't pull any punches here folks, if you can think critically about interface, you're on your way to being a designer who can make the world better!

Robbie

--
Dr Robbie Napper
Lecturer
Industrial Design
Monash University