The ubiquitous "P-hole" in all mens' underwear (bikini, brief, boxer, bb or long) is to enable peeing without unbuttoning, untucking or pulling down the pants.
But unbuttoning doesn't take that long, guys don't tuck anymore and pulling down is avoided by managing a quickie thrust and scoop maneuver. All men do it.
The hole is a vestige, an antiquated architectural holdover. It's like the four buttons on your suit sleeve. They don't actually do anything anymore. They're just visual indicators.
So let's drop the artifice apparel manufacturers. Losing the P-hole will not confuse the masses. And it will make hundreds of millions of men very happy. It'll be like removing cords from telephones. Does anyone miss those?
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Google Betas
I know, I know, I get the whole Google gig. And I like it.
They're into iterating. They'd rather put out something imperfect and get it right by having people try to use it than by tinkering with it in secret. Have the engineers build it up and put it out there to be used and tested and improved. Speed is better than perfect.
All I'm saying is hire some designers to make sure the little but obvious errors (the ones that they really shouldn't be making even on rev 0.1) don't show up. Try using Google docs lately? It's amazing but also infuriating because you can see the genius at work. It just doesn't work. It's a design thing.
Hire more interaction designers.
They're into iterating. They'd rather put out something imperfect and get it right by having people try to use it than by tinkering with it in secret. Have the engineers build it up and put it out there to be used and tested and improved. Speed is better than perfect.
All I'm saying is hire some designers to make sure the little but obvious errors (the ones that they really shouldn't be making even on rev 0.1) don't show up. Try using Google docs lately? It's amazing but also infuriating because you can see the genius at work. It just doesn't work. It's a design thing.
Hire more interaction designers.
Pharmaceutical Advertising
Zero creativity involved here.
I now think Pharmads are worse than those black and white campaign smearing commercials. They're just horrible. I'll try and be more articulate later.
I now think Pharmads are worse than those black and white campaign smearing commercials. They're just horrible. I'll try and be more articulate later.
Boarding Passes
Ok, here's the thing. Your passport is the most important travel document you possess. You need to have it when traveling. Period. It's a globally recognized document that grants you access to any country. In an airport, it needs to be handy. What else needs to be handy in an airport......hmmmm. Oh, the BOARDING PASS.
Why don't airlines make the boarding pass the same size and shape as the passport? They could even make little branded sleeves for your passport with a little pocket for the boarding pass so you would always know where it went. Maybe the boarding pass could even stick out like a quarter inch so it was visible even when stowed safely in the passport.
I'm saving the travesty that is boarding pass information hierarchy for a later post.
Why don't airlines make the boarding pass the same size and shape as the passport? They could even make little branded sleeves for your passport with a little pocket for the boarding pass so you would always know where it went. Maybe the boarding pass could even stick out like a quarter inch so it was visible even when stowed safely in the passport.
I'm saving the travesty that is boarding pass information hierarchy for a later post.
Saarinen's Womb Chair
Ha, April Fool's day. I was just testing you.
Actually the womb chair is perfect. And, except for the name, I can't find one flaw with its design. Saarinen, he knew what he was doing.
Tax Reporting
As April 15 approaches I have my annual WTF moment.
I'm not even really sure what to say about the severity of crime the IRS is guilty of. We are a society built on information transfer. How much money we pay the government is important. How much money they pay us is important. Why is the process so difficult for normal people? Because the IRS hasn't made it easier, that would be ridiculous, to make it easy. So I'll just make my appeal directly to the IRS (feel free to copy and paste this into your own word doc and mail directly to them):
Dear IRS,
Most Americans are honest and hardworking people. Most Americans pay their taxes and depend on the refunds they receive and desperately hope they do not owe any money to you. Most Americans also have a high school education and got a C in math. They also probably weren't that good at following lengthy instructions or higher logic.
Why then, IRS, are you being such a bastard about this whole tax reporting thing? My boss has a Ph.d and an M.S., both from MIT, and about 30 patents to his name. He can't figure it either. How many fields of information are really necessary and what do they all mean to ME anyway? As a citizen I have this overwhelming feeling I'm being ripped off by you, by the system, just because I don't know what I don't know. Please, remove the barriers and help me feel like it's not my fault for not being able to figure it out.
I'm thinking you guys should hook up with the Hertz #1 Club Gold guys. They made the process of renting a car virtually painless. Remember what a pain in the ass that used to be? Well, I really think they could help you all with this hierarchy of information dysfunction you guys have. I mean, you know EVERYONE hates you right? Yeah, I hate to be the one to tell you but EVERYONE just isn't that into you.
How can we fix this? Did you know that I've finally resorted to hiring a whole other person, who I am admitting is way smarter than me, to deal with all your baggage with the forms and all? Yeah, I have to pay someone else so I don't have to pay you. And the funny thing is that if you just made it easier for me, the good guy, to fill out your papers, I wouldn't hate you so much. I'd do it on time even. You'd see compliance across the country go up. I bet you'd even get some christmas cards. Think about it.
I'm not even really sure what to say about the severity of crime the IRS is guilty of. We are a society built on information transfer. How much money we pay the government is important. How much money they pay us is important. Why is the process so difficult for normal people? Because the IRS hasn't made it easier, that would be ridiculous, to make it easy. So I'll just make my appeal directly to the IRS (feel free to copy and paste this into your own word doc and mail directly to them):
Dear IRS,
Most Americans are honest and hardworking people. Most Americans pay their taxes and depend on the refunds they receive and desperately hope they do not owe any money to you. Most Americans also have a high school education and got a C in math. They also probably weren't that good at following lengthy instructions or higher logic.
Why then, IRS, are you being such a bastard about this whole tax reporting thing? My boss has a Ph.d and an M.S., both from MIT, and about 30 patents to his name. He can't figure it either. How many fields of information are really necessary and what do they all mean to ME anyway? As a citizen I have this overwhelming feeling I'm being ripped off by you, by the system, just because I don't know what I don't know. Please, remove the barriers and help me feel like it's not my fault for not being able to figure it out.
I'm thinking you guys should hook up with the Hertz #1 Club Gold guys. They made the process of renting a car virtually painless. Remember what a pain in the ass that used to be? Well, I really think they could help you all with this hierarchy of information dysfunction you guys have. I mean, you know EVERYONE hates you right? Yeah, I hate to be the one to tell you but EVERYONE just isn't that into you.
How can we fix this? Did you know that I've finally resorted to hiring a whole other person, who I am admitting is way smarter than me, to deal with all your baggage with the forms and all? Yeah, I have to pay someone else so I don't have to pay you. And the funny thing is that if you just made it easier for me, the good guy, to fill out your papers, I wouldn't hate you so much. I'd do it on time even. You'd see compliance across the country go up. I bet you'd even get some christmas cards. Think about it.
Saturday, March 29, 2008
PED X-ING
What the hell does PED X-ING mean?
It means Pedestrian Crossing. Fine. Many people use the word pedestrian all the time. And using X to mean "cross" is acceptable, I guess. But ask any 16 year old today, in 2008, what PED X-ING means and they'll just stare at you.
That's because PED X-ING is not relevant anymore, even though it is still necessary. Signs that communicate that humans may be crossing the street are still useful. But why use language that most people don't use? After all "people" is a shorter word than "pedestrian". More importantly, why use terminology that requires abbreviation in the first place? Aren't signs, by definition, supposed to provide clarity of information? My assertion is that PED X-ING creates confusion and makes visual work where none is needed. There is a better, more relevant solution.
Often times, the picture does the majority of the work of communicating what needs to be communicated anyway. Does seeing PED X-ING support the graphic or detract from it? And what is the most important message anyway? How do we quickly parse important information as we drive by? A combination of color, shape, graphic, words and context, I would imagine. How important are the words in that recipe? And which word is MOST important?
Much of this work was done in the 1950's when Ladybird Johnson declared that America's design imperative was beautifying the interstates. Many serious and talented design minds set about figuring out a systematized and humane visual language for the masses (and did a damn good job I should mention - not an easy task). Gas-Food-Lodging graphics are ubiquitous in almost every country on earth because of this design effort. But times change and syntax and language change and what people demand from information changes. What should the sign look like today? What would make a 16 year old, the primary target of safe driving initiatives, notice and understand?
I think we should get the best information designers for on screen apps to redirect for a while and focus on the roads. Can you imagine what would happen?
It means Pedestrian Crossing. Fine. Many people use the word pedestrian all the time. And using X to mean "cross" is acceptable, I guess. But ask any 16 year old today, in 2008, what PED X-ING means and they'll just stare at you.
That's because PED X-ING is not relevant anymore, even though it is still necessary. Signs that communicate that humans may be crossing the street are still useful. But why use language that most people don't use? After all "people" is a shorter word than "pedestrian". More importantly, why use terminology that requires abbreviation in the first place? Aren't signs, by definition, supposed to provide clarity of information? My assertion is that PED X-ING creates confusion and makes visual work where none is needed. There is a better, more relevant solution.
Often times, the picture does the majority of the work of communicating what needs to be communicated anyway. Does seeing PED X-ING support the graphic or detract from it? And what is the most important message anyway? How do we quickly parse important information as we drive by? A combination of color, shape, graphic, words and context, I would imagine. How important are the words in that recipe? And which word is MOST important?
Much of this work was done in the 1950's when Ladybird Johnson declared that America's design imperative was beautifying the interstates. Many serious and talented design minds set about figuring out a systematized and humane visual language for the masses (and did a damn good job I should mention - not an easy task). Gas-Food-Lodging graphics are ubiquitous in almost every country on earth because of this design effort. But times change and syntax and language change and what people demand from information changes. What should the sign look like today? What would make a 16 year old, the primary target of safe driving initiatives, notice and understand?
I think we should get the best information designers for on screen apps to redirect for a while and focus on the roads. Can you imagine what would happen?
Blurbs
Pick up a book, any book, in any store that sells books in the US. It's covered in blurbs, those little written soundbites that are plastered all over the front cover, back cover and inside cover. They usually say something like "Best novel of the year", or "Year's ten best", or "Astounding".
They're garbage. Blurbs are artificial and only serve to make the book more marketable. This in itself is not such a bad thing. After all, marketing happens in lots of interesting, unforeseen ways. What I object to is the complete lack of design involved with their usage. They're just slapped on the book, often as a list. Everytime I see them I feel personally insulted. It's like I'm being yelled at by smug people some editor thought should be associated with this author to make them seem acceptable.
Blurbs represent the literary version of brute force marketing for what is probably a crap product. I picked up a book and there were 10 blurbs on the front cover. The front cover! "So and so has crafted, with wit and superior observation of the human condition, the blah blah blah of blah blah blah". The problem today is that they're on ALL books.
What needs to happen is the editors and art directors who hire the cover artist need to talk to whoever is guilty of plastering those blurbs on the cover and figure out some sort of synthesis strategy. I mean, does Chip Kidd sit there and compose 20% for title, 30% for author, 30% for blurbs and 20% for other (the rest of the cover image)?
Is there no better way to move books? I mean, c'mon people, let's try a little harder shall we? It reminds me of those Saab ads from 10 years ago. "People who test drive a Saab usually buy one". Just what the hell is that supposed to mean? Most people like this product so I should too? I can hear my Mom chiding me for going along with that logic. Why do book editors?
Incidentally, go to the UK. Books are still blurb free.
They're garbage. Blurbs are artificial and only serve to make the book more marketable. This in itself is not such a bad thing. After all, marketing happens in lots of interesting, unforeseen ways. What I object to is the complete lack of design involved with their usage. They're just slapped on the book, often as a list. Everytime I see them I feel personally insulted. It's like I'm being yelled at by smug people some editor thought should be associated with this author to make them seem acceptable.
Blurbs represent the literary version of brute force marketing for what is probably a crap product. I picked up a book and there were 10 blurbs on the front cover. The front cover! "So and so has crafted, with wit and superior observation of the human condition, the blah blah blah of blah blah blah". The problem today is that they're on ALL books.
What needs to happen is the editors and art directors who hire the cover artist need to talk to whoever is guilty of plastering those blurbs on the cover and figure out some sort of synthesis strategy. I mean, does Chip Kidd sit there and compose 20% for title, 30% for author, 30% for blurbs and 20% for other (the rest of the cover image)?
Is there no better way to move books? I mean, c'mon people, let's try a little harder shall we? It reminds me of those Saab ads from 10 years ago. "People who test drive a Saab usually buy one". Just what the hell is that supposed to mean? Most people like this product so I should too? I can hear my Mom chiding me for going along with that logic. Why do book editors?
Incidentally, go to the UK. Books are still blurb free.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Defining Design Crimes
An ongoing treatise on building a foundation to describe what constitutes a design crime. More to come.
1. System Driven - Be people-centric. Users should not have to put up with evidence of
2. Discriminatory - Be inclusive. Design should not disregard those for whom the product is intended
3. Aristocratic - Be a commoner. Design should not be for the privileged few
4. Time Sink - Aspire for seamlessness. Design should not waste time
5. No Instructions Needed - Be simple. Design should not present complexity first
6. Ignorant - Respect
1. System Driven - Be people-centric. Users should not have to put up with evidence of
2. Discriminatory - Be inclusive. Design should not disregard those for whom the product is intended
3. Aristocratic - Be a commoner. Design should not be for the privileged few
4. Time Sink - Aspire for seamlessness. Design should not waste time
5. No Instructions Needed - Be simple. Design should not present complexity first
6. Ignorant - Respect
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Shampoo Bottles
Using a shampoo bottle in the shower happens when hands are wet. Opening shampoo should not be difficult, but so often it is. Furthermore, both expensive shampoos (like Bumble and Bumble) and inexpensive shampoos (like Herbal Essences) often have the same generic packaging, which contributes to the difficulty in usage.
There are two main reasons for this.
The first has to do with production process. Shampoo bottles are blow molded and have a standard orifice diameter dimension. In other words, most shampoo bottles share the same size opening at the top. This means that shampoo companies usually source a preexisting twist cap or design a proprietary cap that is emblematic of the brand of shampoo. Often times, this design is geared towards ensuring that it works with the dimensions of the bottle rather than the expectations of the user. The consumer is not getting a good experience.
Which leads to the second problem - differentiation at the shelf. Like most consumer products, shampoo brands have to win at the first moment of truth, the purchase decision. And this means they rely on graphics, bottle shape and cap shape to stand out from the crowd. So their designers create unique and attention grabbing designs to draw the eye at the store. However, these designs are tested in focus groups rather than in the context of use, the shower. So what we get is interesting and unique looking shampoos bottles and caps that just make us mad when we finally get wet.
How about a shampoo bottle that actually looks and works like it belongs in a wet environment to be used by people who are half awake and not very dexterous in the morning. Is that so hard?
There are two main reasons for this.
The first has to do with production process. Shampoo bottles are blow molded and have a standard orifice diameter dimension. In other words, most shampoo bottles share the same size opening at the top. This means that shampoo companies usually source a preexisting twist cap or design a proprietary cap that is emblematic of the brand of shampoo. Often times, this design is geared towards ensuring that it works with the dimensions of the bottle rather than the expectations of the user. The consumer is not getting a good experience.
Which leads to the second problem - differentiation at the shelf. Like most consumer products, shampoo brands have to win at the first moment of truth, the purchase decision. And this means they rely on graphics, bottle shape and cap shape to stand out from the crowd. So their designers create unique and attention grabbing designs to draw the eye at the store. However, these designs are tested in focus groups rather than in the context of use, the shower. So what we get is interesting and unique looking shampoos bottles and caps that just make us mad when we finally get wet.
How about a shampoo bottle that actually looks and works like it belongs in a wet environment to be used by people who are half awake and not very dexterous in the morning. Is that so hard?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)