01.04.07 (11:24 pm) [
edit]
Ladies only
It's a busy day for blogging but the fodder is ripe. The latest post on Audrey and the Bad Apples has everybody's favourite blogger doing furious battle with a packet of cheese. The cheese packet claimed to be resealable and hence able to avoid that wax block that you always have to cut off the end.
This sounded familiar. I have noticed since living with a lady that many many items that require some kind of design process to come into our lives (ipods, lids, cheese slices, condiment bottles, etc) are not really designed for ladies to be able to work them and hence either break or cause extreme frustration and blogging.
Are there any other ladies out there who get the impression that the dudes behind the design of things don't really take women into account? That they're forgetting that the function of something is more important than treating it like a gentle thing of beauty that needs to be understood before being engaged with? Perhaps the fellows designing things need more girlfriends and less staring at schematics.
Ladies: is this an accurate perception? Do seemingly amazing gadgets and inventions fall extremely short of your expectations when you try to use them? Remember if the thing doesn't work - it's not your fault, it should have been designed better.
posted by:
69whisper (
reply)
post date:
01.04.07 (8:23 am)
since its a ladies only post so i will refrain to comment :)
posted by:
MillyMoo (
reply)
post date:
01.04.07 (5:55 pm)
Absolutely - teapots that dribble more onto your lap than into the cup;
The peel back lids on those tiny orange juice cups they give you on Qantas flights;
Jars in general;
Cheap one-ply loo paper (in fact anything Black and Gold);
Long life milk spouts (designed for amusing the watcher, not the opener);
Plastic wrapped crumpet packets...
.... Need I go on? Surely the UN should be actively tackling these issues?
posted by:
franzy (
reply)
post date:
01.05.07 (3:35 am)
Reply to: 69whisper
Post is only CALLED 'Ladies Only' - anyone may comment. Watch how I comment in so maculine a way now.
MillyMoo - Reading your list makes me realise that these things piss me off too. The 'Not Designed For Women' Thing doesn't seem to have been a successful line of thought.
Perhaps I should have rephrased: are there things that you try to use, can't and then feel that you have to take to someone else (a bloke?) to operate? Do innanimate objects that you know are designed to make lives easier end up making your life harder instead?
posted by:
audrey (
reply)
post date:
01.05.07 (5:05 am)
I can't operate anything technical. I think there's some kind of electrical field around me that causes things to break. Thankfully my laptop seems immune...
Cheese packets
Yoghurt tops
Dip foil
Anything that requires assembling
Men
posted by:
gigglewick (
reply)
post date:
01.07.07 (1:10 am)
I hate those resealable cheese/ham/olive/whatever food seems to need resealing things too. They do truly suck, and never work the way you want them to.
Also I hate the way that dispenser tops on things like jumbo packs of sunscreen SEEM like they can be resealed if you need to take them somewhere, but insist on letting out an enormous squirt of liquid while you struggle to get them to do so. If that's not homoeroticism disguised as form following function, I don't know what is.
posted by:
billie (
reply)
post date:
01.07.07 (11:27 pm)
The classic of flawed design must have been the original computer terminals that flickered at a rate that was undetectable to most males. However the operators were women who were expected to work the machines for 8 hours a day. They were truly sick, heaachy and unhappy.
Got to say that the Telstra billpay site and the Medicare user sites are other models of ugly design. Why would you remember a 12 character password to check if a supplier has mail for you. Its makes snail mail that much more attractive.
I liked the Top Gear test of mobile shopping trolleys ie Honda Getz, Citroen ???? and something else. One motoring of the journalist's mother pointed out the slow opening electric doors on the Citroen would drive her mad. Another mother said that she didn't have strong enough fingers to change the configuration of her vehicle, must have been a Toyota Corolla.
Good design is not "close enough is good enough" its "form follows function" and "fit for purpose". There is quite a lot of effort needed to ensure that a design is useable for its target user group and good design is usually simple and elegant.
posted by:
franzy (
reply)
post date:
01.08.07 (3:27 am)
Reply to: billie
Being the massive TG fan that I am, I HAVE seen that episode! (Honda Jazz, Hyundai Getz - nerd factor 7 here) That is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. Why didn't the manufacturers get their OWN mothers, or pay some target group mums to help design the cars?
Because the design process probably doesn't allow for the end user, only the end product. That's why the ipod continues to sell trillions. All other mp3-players rely on more interaction and activity, rather than less and you don't want to interact with your mp3-player, you want to listen to music! You don't want to marvel at the automatic doors on your Hyundai! You want to get in!
posted by:
Trently (
reply)
post date:
01.08.07 (4:55 am)
"Why didn't the manufacturers get their OWN mothers, or pay some target group mums to help design the cars?".
Insert Simpsons ref here... I loved Homers car!
posted by:
franzy (
reply)
post date:
01.08.07 (5:28 am)
Reply to: Trently
We all did Trently. We all did.
(Kudos for timely Simpsons ref - the modern fable)
posted by:
Gadget (
reply)
post date:
01.10.07 (6:23 pm)
See Frenzy;
Your are only slagging an individual, not an ethos, a principle, a cult, not even a real identity -per se-, but hay, you gave it your best shot.
Keep your hissy-fits to a minimum franzy.
posted by:
franzy (
reply)
post date:
01.10.07 (8:16 pm)
Reply to: Gadget
Sorry about the above comment folks. This person has come from the abortion raging over at the forum (will post link). Wildly religious and hilarious! I'm not even sure what the comments means, other than something about not really being a real person ... or something.
Anyway - check out the debate. Too much fun! Gadget posed a picture of a Chinese artist eating a roast duck with a doll's head as 'proof' of how bad abortion really is.
I couldn't help but post a gloating rebuttal and a link to the relevant snopes page.
posted by:
69whisper (
reply)
post date:
01.11.07 (11:22 am)
Long time no see ???
