In a recent post at Logic and Emotion, he had apparently re-written ‘thought leadership’. He sees a world where the ideas are free to flow and it all become a very flat business model.
My problems with this are, its has already be done there is currently being utilized by Nathan Myhrvold. He gets a bunch of ‘expects’, gathers all of there ideas for any crazy scheme in a mass brain storm. Then (after not paying them) will patent there ideas, make the product, and then sell it back to them. There are many articles and great podcast from Business Week Cover Stories, ‘Grandfather of Innovation’ .
although I am all for the forwarding of humanity, I don’t believe that we should comoderdized ideas, and take a new invention or idea for granted. Why do we so under value ideas, but we will pay thousand of dollars on those new ideas (as products).
I blog this as I’m currently working on a open source, community added, peir reviewed product. The ‘product’ will be a real consumer product but will use modern design thinking and leverage to get to really know my customer and market.
I stumbled onto this today, its a firm in England that gives 45 min free with layers to talk about patents and contracts.
Own It offers free intellectual property advice for London’s creative people.
Within your business or your practice, you’ve probably created a wealth of in-house ideas, designs, music, writing, images – in short, ‘intellectual property’ – which can make you extra money, as long as you give it the proper legal protection. Own It will show you how.
This is some work that I’m working on for Seat ability Design Compertiton, I don’t know how much work I will do further than this. I might do a CAD drawing and Place the work in. But working on lots more exciting stuff at the moment. Comments Welcome.
In a reply to Tim and Toms Excellent podcast ‘Design Critique: Products for People’ I have decided create a ‘soloution’ to some of the problems that they encountered within there use of the products.
Rice Cooker 1: This first solution is solving the problem of cooking rice for one. (or two). I have added a bit of my own ID imagination and created a circular device that spins around to keep the rice always moving. This will heat all of the rice and will mean that no rice will stick to the bottom of the pan. Once complete the cooker splits open and you have you rice ready to go, cook in the bowl you eat. This in turn solves on washing up , and as the rice is always moving, all rice within will be perfect to eat.
Rice Cooker 1: This first solution is solving the problem of cooking rice for one. (or two). I have added a bit of my own ID imagination and created a circular device that spins around to keep the rice always moving. This will heat all of the rice and will mean that no rice will stick to the bottom of the pan. Once complete the cooker splits open and you have you rice ready to go, cook in the bowl you eat. This in turn solves on washing up , and as the rice is always moving, all rice within will be perfect to eat.
Akin to all of these Web 2.0 mash ups that get nothing really done. I have created a new section to envisage what would happen if two designers were to meet up and use there skills to create a super mash up of a product.
Meet the Designers:
Ross Lovegrove.
I first found out about Ross from TED Talks, This video really inspired me, and I’m even working on some designs based on his philiopsy. He dose lots of Organic but not Bloob design. He seeks nature as inspiration, along with being super crazy, he also seem super cool and down to earth geezer. I am a fan of his Magnesium injection molded chair.
Jeremy Faludi
This tree hugging crazy dude is like Ross, he is into saving the environment, and Is properly one of those people who shop at PCC markets. He has a great background in biomimicry . check out his website.
What would these Bad Ass Designers Make?
I feel with Jeremy’s knowledge of biosystems, and Ross’s eye for aesthetic they could both create some great product solutions that spand far beyond the limits of super sexy furniture.
In a recent a response to Bruce’s blog I was going to post a comment, but have had problems with the 1000 character limit. So I have decided to put the response into my blog.
The questions Bruce asks is …
Are Designers The Enemy Of Good Design?
So what should I say? How should I say it? And what should be done about it?
I believe Bruce is right in saying ‘designers are the enemy of good design?’ I have witnessed that a lot of designers against design at both work (on my internship at Resolute) and during my time (and time to be continued) at Middlesex University. At University when undertaking live projects we do weekly ‘crits’ where we present our work in front of the rest of the class, the other designers then comment on the work. The problem with this is, is that most designers have a lot of perceptions of ‘good design’ and they can end out making the designer run around in circles to only come out with a mediocre output. This is because the designers are leading the design, and its not being lead by the user. Often even if you create a concept that is ‘for’ a user group most designers won’t see it as a ‘good design’ as they don’t understand a market.
An example is my Rio ‘Dezac’ project which wasn’t fully understood by a older generation of designers. A great example is a recent arctial about social networking sites and the way its changing a generation, yet I have seen that the designers just aren’t thinking of the users a great example is a recent piece of work from the Microsoft Techfest 2007 and the BubbleBoard I even e-mail Tim Regan comments on this device, and will post the comments on this blog soon. Why is so much energy going into working with Voice mail?? Who sees voice mail as a important in this connected world?
I think Bruce should talk about
Out dated design teaching. (My university doesn’t even have an updated website, let alone a video, blog, shared source of data, everything that would help distribute information in my university)
Designs being flippant when looking at Design Portfolios, Designers just love Design porn, they want amazing visualization skills and don’t care about students being creative within manufacture, Human interaction, niche products or a greater knowledge of selling experience and service over products.
Designers are up there own a*se, we all copy each other and get now where, Student designers don’t read, and don’t understand business and greater design methodology’s.
In the deffence of Designers I know many great designers like my friends at Slipstream design, these guys work for a consultancy and come up with amazing products and proposal for products. But when they show business they get shunned but hopefully with designers in the boardroom everything should start to becomes a lot more integrated to business. I think that the best thing will be a shake up in the design education, to a more holistic approach with business and design, and for business to put more designers in the board room.
I would recommend this book to any Design Student. This is one of those books that has change my perception of product design. It teaches us about abudence, there is a life for a Eco-Product Designer. We are no longer the Designers making for landfill.
As a undergraduatte product designer it can be a worry to think about the future of our enviroment and what the result of the products we make. This book utlines a new design process that will not ‘make less bad products’ but we will make products that will create a better effect onto our enviroment.
It has a good range about manufacturing technique, Service Vs Product, Sustainable Arcteticutre, and a new outline framework. I would highly recommend this book to all undergraduate product designers and to read it!
So Its the question that always asked and is what everyone is talking about in business. In this short introduction to my blog i will explore to what design has been, where its going, and what it is to me as a undergraduate designer.
