has design alterd to work better or to look better?

---

Clarification of Question by ryboy-ga on 05 Jan 2005 03:17 PST

i should be more specific. has the design of products i.e t.v's,
mobile phones ect changed to look better (more stylish, sleeker) or
have they changed to work better? or have the two naturally evolved to
encompass both?

and also, is there any good websites i might find other case studies,
essays or theories on this subject?

What is it that you want to ask?

Often design refers more or less equally to work better and look
better. Ie a magazine about dogs is designed to attract advertisers
relating to dogs, but it needs to look better, and give useful
information to attract readers.  Do you have particular group of
products or services in mind?  Neil

This is a favourite bitch of mine. To site one particular case,
radios. There was a time when the ?wireless? was big and bulky. By the
end of the fifties, although expensive, quality was excellent both in
sound quality and performance -- transistor radios put paid to that.
Not that there is anything inherent in solid start which results in
poorer quality, quite the reverse in fact, but in the pursuit of style
and size, performance is eroded. If one designs upon the baseline of
what immediately preceded, cumulative sacrifices can render products
simply awful. I recently purchased an expensive portable radio from
one of the world?s oldest and most respected radio manufacturers --
looked good but was truly abominable in every other respect. I
received a refund, but the model is still on sale.

Headlights. Round makes for better beam control, but is not trendy.

Metallic paint on vehicles. A scratch costs a fortune to repair.

Bathroom sinks. A vast ?designer? range but never the size you want.

Ceramic tiles. Millions of different design house patterns, but
fillets and edging in the same style -- yea right!

Three hours to remove a dashboard to change a penny lamp. What the
hell is wrong with visible screw heads!

The Stratocaster, the Les Paul. Sound good(ish) but dear god.

Who ever (except me) uses the number pad on a keyboard. Bigger is
better, apparently.

Stupid fancy flaps on CD drives on computers.

Boy bands.

Dysons.

Toasters.

Hey this is fun, but getting mad so better stop. Yes of course design
is often very good and reliable and drives the design process. But
engineering principles are far too often sabotaged by marketers
schooled in business practice or some other such over indulged
disciplines.

Best

i should be more specific. has the design of products i.e t.v's,
mobile phones ect changed to look better (more stylish, sleeker) or
have they changed to work better? or have the two naturally evolved to
encompass both?

and also, is there any good websites i might find other case studies,
essays or theories on this subject?

Let me comment (again) by example. In the seventies there was a UK TV
set internally identical to a common model. However, in keeping with
the questionable aesthetics of the time it was cased in a huge white
sphere. Very trendy, but in view of hybrid reliability of the day was
horrifically difficult to service. One often used to adjust TVs by
looking at the screen and with your hand twiddling controls inside,
usually convergence. Mirrors are no good if you want to see the whole
screen in detail but even that option was blown by that stupid great
sphere which you couldn?t see round. Uplifting it to the workshop was
also a two person job.

On the subject of design versus reliability, one also should include
reparability. Household equipment is generally more reliable these
days but I used to be able to repair virtually anything. Not so now.
Can?t get the VLSI chips, schematics, source code, or even readily
dissemble in many cases. Success rate is still high but old equipment
is far easier. Lots of ancient VHS recorders still chugging away quite
happily but modern ones defy repair.

Haven?t found specific web info but the best looking web-sites are
often the least functional.

Best