Innovative Designs and Devices

Patrick Griffin writes "When it comes to product design, the significance of aesthetics, the way its design looks and feels, determines the choice of the customer once the functionalities of multiple devices are more or less similar. If supported by sound user interface and a well-tested, clean implementation, innovative design solutions can drastically enhance the user experience. The article Innovative Designs and Devices presents innovative, futuristic gadgets, devices, designs and concepts which can become reality in 2008 or over the next few years." Some of the designs are real, others are stupid, and some are just dreams for the future. But some of this stuff is really cool.

Comments

the Dual Music Player

[techpawn]

I like the concept, but, umm without the cover to protect the spinning CD (or you from it) that just seems like a HUGE design flaw.

Also the Apple remote is neat and really pays into the popularity of the Wii-mote for interaction? So you think Sony would really place people into that mind set?

Re:the Dual Music Player

[IBBoard]

Design flaw? No, it's a design advantage.

Imagine the scene: You're walking down the street, listening to your music and a hooded yob-youth is coming towards you. He stops you and demands your music player.

Normal response: Aw crap, he has a knife/gun and I've just got an MP3 player. I don't want to get killed over it so I'll hand it open.

New response: "What, this thing?" *swing spinning CD up in an arc and slice hoody's face before running while he recovers*

Now you get music and personal protection in one :)

.

Note: The above scenario is not recommended ;)

Re:Anyone watch Top Gear?

[Goffee71]

Shame this guy's digital Rubik's cube (but so much more) gizmo isn't in the list: More here I really want one...

Good Books on the Subject

[Old VMS Junkie]

If innovative design interests you, I highly recommend "The Art of Innovation" by Tom Kelley and Henry Petroski's books "The Evolution of Useful Things" and "Small Things Considered". Kelly's book is all about innovation in the workplace and uses IDEO to illustrate his ideas. Petroski's books (and I love all of his stuff) are more of an academic view of how engineering intersects with the real world. His books should be on every geeks must read list.

Re:just what I always wanted, Toast Messenger!

[cp.tar]

That has the be the awesomest useless appliance I have seen!

Aw, come on!

Just imagine sticking Toast-Its to all your co-workers' screens...

Re:just what I always wanted, Toast Messenger!

[gEvil (beta)]

Yes, it's perfect for all those Mission: Impossible scenarios I find myself in where I must dispose of the message medium instantly.

lego computing....

[apodyopsis]

Actually, done a but more thought on the subject. Picture this:

A 14"*12" flat panel touch sensitive display with bluetooth, wifi, inductive power and some clips at the back for mounting.

Now what can this be used for?

1. x1 a tablet PC
2. z2 with a hinge - a laptop, program the lower one to have a keyboard and tracker pad
3. x2 24"*12" widescreen TV/Monitor
4. x3 computer, 1= keyb, rest = screen
5. x4 wraparound display for conferences
6. x8 home cinema or wall screen
7. x1 advertisement kiosk
8. x1 display module and brains for industrial kiosk or ATE

the possibilities are endless.

but what would it need to function?

1. one seriously configurable operating system. mesh computer between linked components, mini cluster?
2. versatile mounting clip so you could add at will - USB, floppy, SD, CF, 10baseT, hinge for laptop, support for screen, external power cable, TV tuner etc.
3. ubiquitous standard - that would be the killer, you need a recognised standard so everybodies components would work together instead of a diversive formats war
4. power saving, power sharing (power one on a cable, it shares to connected units), some clever self configuration.
5. cheap enough or versatile enough to make it all worthwhile.

and finally, and obligatory - open standards on HW and an SDK so anybody can port apps or write their own.

well, I can dream.

Ancient unrecognized example

[PhotoGuy]

From another post I made, but for this topic, it's a bit more on-topic:
=============

There's one example of user interface elegance that has stuck with me for decades, and I use it to remind myself of what's possible, and avoiding making things more complicated than necessary:

I've had telephone answering machines before; they typically had many buttons on them (rewind, stop, play, fast forward, erase, record) and tapes for incoming and outgoing, etc.. Quite complex, for the simple task of playing and recording a message. It really felt like working two confusingly inter-related tape decks.

But then I bought one, which wasn't terribly expensive, that was clean and elegant looking, with *one* big visible button on the outside and one LED. On the side was a volume knob. And the amazing thing is that it was as functional as my prior more complicated machines.

When there was a message, the link blinked. Intuitive. You'd press the big button to hear the messages. Simple. To back up while playing a message, you simply held the big button down (not completely intuitive, but easy to learn/figure out or read in the manual). After playing the messages, the LED would blink quickly for a few seconds; you could then tap the big button to keep your messages, or do nothing to have it turf the messages. (Again, not necessarily intuitive, but trivial to learn/understand and use.) You could also record memos of your own by pressing and holding the button at any time. A lot of functionality built into one button, and not hard to use at all. Very clever.

You could stop it from answering by turning the volume knob all the way down until it clicks; fairly intuitive.

It had one microcassette; the answering message was recorded at the start, and it would record messages after that (fast forwarding as necessary for additional messages before recording). This microcassette was under an opague door (you wouldn't even know was there) on the top of the unit. Opening the door also revealed another smaller button. The single button inside paralleled the use of the outside button to a large degree, but for handling your answering message. Press and hold it to record your message (similar to the memo record of the outside big button). Tap it once to play/check your answering message, pressing/holding it to rewind during the message. Very elegant, yet quite functional.

The thing was a masterpiece of simplicity, elegance, understatement, functionality, and design.

Yes, answering machines are ancient technology now, but the thought that went into that "user interface" design continues to inspire me when I create web interfaces.

And another neat aspect to it: I'm sure the manufacturing cost of the unit was lower than others, due to fewer buttons, a single tape, and simpler design. (It likely had a bit more logic inside to handle the functionality, but overall it was likely cheaper to produce than other models.) Initial design can make such a difference to all aspects of a product's delivery.

Re:Ancient unrecognized example

[ps236]

One button that does lots of things is generally considered nasty UI design. It's "pretty" and people think it's 'cool' but most people have trouble using it.

It's generally a lot easier to use 'one button per action' UI designs. They may not be as pretty, and they're certainly more expensive to produce, but they're generally considered easier to use.

Imagine having a bank web site with a single entry box and a single "Do something" button on it. To make a payment, you have to enter the details of the payee and click the button quickly, and then enter the amount to pay and click it for 2 seconds. To set up a regular payment you have to do the same but click it for 4 seconds. That's a 'nice, elegant' design as there's less messy controls involved, but imagine what a nightmare it would be to use.

It might be 'trivial' to learn how to use your single button answering machine, but imagine you have to use an answering machine at work with different effects to the same actions, and then your mother has one with yet different effects for the actions.... Or, come back to yours after 6 months of not using it, without access to the instructions and see how easy it is. Wouldn't it be easier to have different buttons for the different actions with instructive text/good icons on/by them?

Re:apple

[gEvil (beta)]

They'll rename it the Sony Ornj shortly before release. Or will that infringe on an Ikea product?

Seashells

[ozmanjusri]

I still can't work out how you're supposed to use the three seashells.

Totally disagree

[wurp]

Can you explain any way that the device you're describing is more usable than one with one function per button? I'm all for rethinking design and having alternatives, and I can see that aesthetically, your device would be more appealing to some people.

But I far prefer a rewind button, fast forward button, etc. and I find it hard to fathom how what you're describing is an improvement. Why spend time learning how to use a device that could work just like all the other media playback devices I use?

Cordless charging

[Animats]

The cordless charging devices are a good idea. If there's a standard. If there's one bowl or pad which recharges everything, we've made real progress. If we end up with one per device, they just waste space.

At least three small companies (SplashPower, WildCharge, and WiPower) are pushing that idea. Incompatibly. There's no one in a strong enough position to make them play together.

I don't know...

[PontifexPrimus]

I don't know, some of those gadgets seem... well, not really thought through:

• Apple Remote: you wave left and right it to turn up or down sound. Great. How do I change channels from 7 to 33? Why are there four remotes in one basket?
• Maximus keyboard: heard too much about it to say it's complete vaporware, but the functionality keeps being reduced every time I hear about it. Plus, compare the low-res images from the side keys with the "regular" keycaps which seem to have a much higher resolution - I don't think that's realistic.
• Nonobject: WTF? Why, oh why would I need a camera to film what's behind it? I know what's behind my camera! Me! Because I do the photographing! What the hell were they thinking? To get at least some use out if you would have to hold this camera sort of sideways in front / beside your head, looking at the display at an angle... If I really need to photograph what's in front of me and the scenery behind me, I can turn around and take a second picture! Gods, this is stupid...
• Duofone: well, ok, granted, pretty original - but I don't know exactly how they'll handle the seam in the middle, where two LCDs not quite touch. I imagine if this problem had been solved we'd look at much, much cheaper lcd screens comprising several seamlessly connected subunits.
• Toast Messenger: ok, a funny novelty item. But quite useless for its intended purpose (I can't imagine you get anywhere near the resolution of "pen on paper" with "burnmarks on toast") and aside from writing "I love you, honey" I don't think there is any situation in which a message on toast is superior to a note written on paper ("Yes, Mr. Wilkinson, we got your order. Let me check my toast...").
• Dual Music Player: ok, points for originality. But injury risks aside - I would think it pretty dangerous for the CD to be played this way. For one thing my mobile players tend to accumulate dust, fluff and grit due to being carried around in backpacks, pockets and shopping bags, and those would probably produce nice scratches(and not the radial ones that the software can erase).
• Vaio Zoom: nice toy, probably incredibly overpriced. What's the advantage of a screen that's transparent when turned off? Look in front of you. Imagine this screen was a pane of glass. Do you prefer this view to a black rectangle? And what's with the ecstatic repetition of "holographic" (quote: "Even the mouse buttons are holographic!")??? First, I don't think this words means what you think it means. Second, I don't want mouse buttons that are glowy (presumably what they mean). Why should I? I don't have eyes in my fingers, and I don't look at the mouse when moving it, I look at the screen, where the cursor is! Stupid blingy manager toy...
• Visual Desktop Charger: ok, nice idea. But on the other hand I don't mind creating a physical link to charge my phone or mp3 player - I would guess this thing uses inductive coupling of some kind, which is much, much less efficient than an ordinary copper cable.
• Laser Keyboard: interesting idea, but I heard they're terrible to use - no tactile feedback, and you finger start to hurt if you hit a flat, solid surface the same way you type on a keyboard.
• Omaura HTPC: so it's a computer case. Which is flat. And wide. Which is important because... it has to fit below a huge giant flatscreen on the wall. Because extension cables don't exist in this world. And you have to get really, really close to those giant screens, and you couldn't if you had one of those giant big tower jobs blocking you.
• Hi-Tech Office: Eclipse Partitioning System: don't know about that one. I've worked for some time in an office with ~20 people, and cubicles see,ed to solve most of the problems just fine; plus, I really don't think I'd like to spend half of my day under a giant Cone of Silence.
• EmTrace's PS100 Photoskin Frames: it's a tiny monitor with some storage attached. Big whoop. If I really needed something with a tiny