Affordances in the Age of Ubiquitous Computing

« Tea Blogs I Love| Before I Loved Tea, I Loved Teapots »

Adam Greenfield recently wrote about high-tech devices that have trouble explaining themselves to users. You can tell a spoon is made for scooping and a knife is made for cutting by looking at their shapes- using them only confirms your observation. Technology devices function by slinging invisible electricity and information, neither of which have physical forms.

Designers tend to encase these new products in sleek, aerodynamic shells that seem optimized to reduce wind resistance rather than to provide a platform for thoughtful interaction. The lack of a history of use associated with new technology, combined with the major onset of NURBS-based CAD software and new developments in thermoplastic injection molding make these shapes relatively easy for designers to articulate, and may cause designers to “default” to this futuristic-aerodynamic style, which has come to mean “I am technology” and, perhaps, “don’t put your coffee cup on me.” If these products were instead designed to fit into and enhance their individual contexts- working reliably on a desk or accompanying the user as he or she moves from place to place- their meanings for the user would be more specific and richer, functioning as a guide to the best mode of use.

« Tea Blogs I Love| Before I Loved Tea, I Loved Teapots »