Comments on: 2007 Trends : Simply Complex

By: Jörg

Jörg — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

I totally agree. The concept of simplicity results from the 90s and expresses the desire of people to step out, take a break. But these days you can´t stop. If you stop, you are dead. So the question is to find faster, yet simpler ways for decision-making in a world that gets more complex day by day. We at Trendbuero named this “Simplexity”. It was the topic of the 11th Trendday in May 2006

By: David Brewster

David Brewster — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

I don’t know that anything has changed here. Simplicity for simplicity’s sake has never been a going concern when it comes to product marketing. To take the point about games a step further: the best games have always been simple to learn but complex enough to provide endless variety: chess and scrabble obvious examples.

By: John Voelcker

John Voelcker — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

From a technology POV, things will look simple on the outside--and the user interfaces will be some blend of simple and intuitive, cf. iPhone.

But there will be fiendishly complex software algorithms underneath to enable that simplicity.

Take, for example, the process of developing an electric-drive car. A GM engineer told me 70% of ALL the development time went to programming the control logic that integrates all the "drive-by-wire" stuff. The end result? A car that drives so conventionally that my mum would never know isn't her Jeep.

That raises an interesting side question: Will the user interface for autos ever change? We've had 50 years of steering wheel and pedal uniformity, and even the stalks for wipers and lights are pretty consistent now. But consider how much effort goes into providing steering "feedback" that's 100% artificial if your wheel isn't connected mechanically to the steering arms. If they're operated by electrically-controlled hydraulic pistons, then everything you "feel" through your steering wheel is artificially created just like a video game.

So why do we have steering wheels?

Or is a century-plus of convergence so powerful that until we have full auto-piloting for cars, we hang onto the existing interface?

Thoughts?

By: David Brewster

David Brewster — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

You point to another interesting aspect of simplicity, John. (probably a law but I haven't got my head around it to that extent yet):

Sometimes less than efficient designs and processes maintain themselves because it is simpler for things to stay the same than for them to change.

The QWERTY keyboard layout is another example. Apparently there are more efficient designs for modern keyboards, but it would be just too hard to make the change.

Our preference for simplicity is being demonstrated here - but it's simplicity from a different perspective.