All projects: Gel, Jobs, Gootodo, Games, Uncle Mark, Goovite, Blog, Bit Literacy
In praise of old, dependable technology
Jul 15, 2007
Good New York Times piece on constant, frenetic "innovation," even when it's unnecessary: I Love It, It's Perfect, Now It Changes. It also mentions my favorite digital watch - Casio G-Shock - some version of which I've worn for about twenty years now. It works. The design needs no innovation, no new or improved features... kudos to Casio for keeping it consistent for 25 years.
Some products (yes, the iPhone, iPod, etc. etc.) are big wins for consumers due to their innovative genius. However, many other products could use any number of improvements (see my Broken product archive). Many companies can't resist the temptation to jump into the game of hype, flavor-of-the-month, "what's hot," call it what you will, even when there's no need for it. From the article:
To judge by marketing hype and iPhone mania, most people live in perpetual anticipation of the next super product: a bigger plasma-screen TV, a sleeker BlackBerry, a more shock-absorbing running shoe. But the truth is, many consumers bemoan the incessant rush of innovation that pushes manufacturers to tamper with products the consumers feel are already perfect.
This is one of my favorite quotes I've read all year, because it's a truth so rarely stated in the media:
David Willey, the editor of Runner’s World magazine, said his publication contributes to feature creep by only reviewing new or improved models of shoes. “There’s this need to continue to evolve and have consumers feel like things are getting better, and that the needle is being moved even if it isn’t,” he said.
And that's a problem with traditional marketing, which often turns to advertising or hype-filled press pieces to create a perceived need, or a perceived competitive advantage, by not-totally-truthful means. (One reason I write the Uncle Mark guide every year is to cut through all that nonsense and give people actually good and legitimate product recommendations.)
See also: The acceleration of food trends
See also Joel Johnson on "the disgusting cycle of gadget whoring".
I wear the most basic Timex analog watch, I've had it for about eight years and don't see any reason to use another. It has black numbers on a white background and an indiglo backlight. That's it, no other features to distract me or to break.
Technology "classics" are a new idea. There's only a few companies that even try. HP calculators, some Nokia handsets and maybe Motorola's several StarTAC models are the only hardware that springs to mind. Look at how popular some "outdated" software is, I'd bet there's several times as many WinAmp 2.x users than anything after.
I'm actually a bit of a G-shock collector and Casio has always been really good about keeping the basic and older models in production. What they've been doing lately is releasing some of their classic models with the awesome solar power and radio syncing which are definite improvements without monkeying up the basic function of the watches. Check out the GW5600 series.
Daniel: I own around 20 watches and when I travel I wear a black on white Timex "easy reader" with Indiglo I got for $30 at Walgreens. The only thing I wish was different about it is it could maybe use an alarm.
The classic software example is Word. It's had all the features it ever needed for probably 8 versions - and yet they still add more features with every version, making the app heavier, more complex and less compatible with the versions out there. I wish they'd drop a boatload of features, make it simpler and less resource-hungry and standardize the file format once and for all. But then they'd never get any new upgrade revenue!
I work for a retail store that sells electronic gadgets and I'm a bit of a gadget nut myself. However, I agree that some things are fine just the way they are and don't need "upgraded". Take cell phones for example. Companies keep adding more and more features while trying to make the phone smaller and smaller. I get customers all the time who complain that they can't find a big enough cell phone so that they can hit all the buttons and read the display. They also say that they don't use all the features on their phone and see little use for most of them. There are some very simple phones out there, but they are hard to find since most stores seem to think they need to sell the most gadget filled ones. I have the least expensive phone that my cell phone company had bundled with a 2 year contract and it still has a lot of features: camera, calendar, calculator, email, ringtones, games, speakerphone,voice dialing etc. The buttons are just barely big enough for my big fingers. It has a nice big display but you have to slide the display up to get to the buttons. Most of the other phones they had were half the size of the one I got and I couldn't dial a number on them. I like most of the features on my phone, but rarely use all of them.
Innovation must solve a problem. If it doesn't, it will invariably cause one. Sadly, much of what companies call "innovation" are just changes for the sake of change. This is often counter-productive as there are always social, technical, and political consequences each time a so-called "innovation" is introduced. Moreover, users (and by extension focus groups) are not always the best place to start when seeking ideas on which to innovate. As Henry Ford once said, "If I had asked the public, they would have told me they wanted a faster horse."
Innovation is the key to problem solving; AND when it's used, - it will invariably cause another problem...a gift needed for innovators.