Click here to download:

An_Idea_Create_random_order..zip (89 KB)

In creating a collection of similar objects, be they a series of designs, or works of art, or even products for a market, a challenge one could face is to engineer and create a subtle variance in each object. Specifically, create an ordered series of objects that, although similar in form and/or function, differ radically from the next.
 
These variations, either obvious or nearly imperceptible, are required for creating a genuine touch and feel. Most importantly, they impart a unique DNA into the object that makes it truly yours.
 
Example: If someone presented you with two identical iPods - both filled with the exact same music - which one would you choose? And, is that particular iPod really the one you wanted?
 
I can't even answer that question aside from maybe saying, "I really don't care."  But, am I lying to myself?

.

... of course, I am sure these will change as the day progresses.

... not being an asshole?

This is a book that deals with a very succinct issue in our society and workplace that, once understood, identified, and classified, is easily handled with class, a deft strategy, and definitive action.
 
Whether you work with assholes, deal with clients who are assholes, or live with assholes, effectively dealing with assholes is, unfortunately, a sign of the times as well as a survival strategy for the future. (If you don't think you work with, live with, or associate with assholes, then you may be the asshole.)
 
[ http://bobsutton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/06/the_no_asshole_.html ]

Everywhere I go. Everything I am reading. Everyone is talking; and the frantic buzzword on their lips is, "Carbon."
 
What they mean is, "Carbon Dioxide." CO2. And specifically, the outpouring of it into our air. Carbon Dioxide is a subset of a much larger group called, Green House Gases (GHGs). Right now, everyone wants these to go away. Every industry is now going to look at Carbon Dioxide in a whole new light. If not, impending financial punishment await those who ignore this growing pariah.
 
Here is the problem now: As designers and architects, we are following mandates and standards for building new projects that conform to at least a small subset of rules that are sure to be growing in the near future. As of now, the science of this technology is overpowered by the political jousting over terms like, carbon offsetting, emissions trading, carbon diet, and even, cap and trade. Say any of those terms in a group of people then stand back and watch the Left-Right polarization tsunami sweep across the room as proponents for and against the political arguments surrounding these terms take sides. When will we finally be able to discuss the science and engineering of this issue without all the hackles rising?
 
So, in thinking about Carbon, as a final thought before I go to bed, I am thinking about what Carbon Dioxide really is. And, I am thinking about teaching myself some hard science and chemistry. Beyond that, I will look for opportunities as a designer (and a responsible one) to create both a revenue model as well as a design model that addresses not the eradication of CO2, because that is impossible, but a meaningful coexistence with this compound without all the partisan squinching associated with it right now.
 
For me, the engineering knowledge behind the political rhetoric will be infinitely more powerful than a loud mouth.
 
Footnote: How much CO2 is produced by a loud mouth? Multiply that by the amount of mouths that are really loud right now and the actual parts per million (PPM) figure may surprise us.

A great post on Design Observer featuring the notebooks of graphic designer, design critic, and educator Michael Bierut.
 
Look at the simplicity of the medium. Nothing fancy. Just simple, composition notebooks that you can buy at any store...
 
 From the article: "Like most designers, I get asked a lot about my process. A lot of my ideas are so simple and dumb that a simple dumb drawing is all it takes to describe it."
 
[ source: http://designobserver.com/archives/entry.html?id=38831 ]

The pen, by itself, is actually quite nice looking. But here, we have an excellent example of extreme “Logoitis” wherein the designers were given the directive to,

“Make the logo bigger. No, bigger!”
 
Unfortunately, not only does the gigantic logo ruin the look of this pen, but the font choice, balance, graphic quality, and yes, even the trademarked, juvenile name all work together to “cheapen” the product. What could have been a nice design is now made to look like a convention-floor giveaway.
 
The fact that this object is being marketed as, "an efficient Yawara stick for driving off an attacker" is, in my opinion, a secondary design issue; we'll leave the topic, "Design As Pain Inducer," for another day...
 
 
[ found via my FriendFeed and located at http://www.coldsteel.com/pocketshark.html ]

Please make it stop!
 
In 2002, when designer Stefano Giovannoni visualized and sketched this barstool, its inception was described by the industry as a "design revolution!"  And, it is still being produced, with prices for the Bombo ranging from $1799.00 to as low as $55.00 for cheap reproductions...
 
At some point, the irrelevancy of a "new" design simply makes further use of that product counterproductive to the goal of a particular project. This barstool has become hopelessly ubiquitous and, because of this, has lost any and all ability to enhance any environment in which it appears. In fact, using this particular design will have the opposite effect that you intended: your design goes backwards.
 
Although staying positive and looking at an overall design as more than a collection of parts is crucial, when parts begin to fail, the machine will cease to operate. As a designer (and as an informed consumer), an ability to recognize the "end of life" for an idea, product, or desire will be a huge survival technique for the future.
 
I don't want something just because it's there.
 
 [ pictured: the $55.00 version from http://www.regencyshop.com/index.html ]

As we transition more and more of our lives onto the web, into digital information, when does it become too much? Could we see ourselves becoming pure information? Will the need to translate our life streams into digital timelines eventually replace the actual act of living the timeline?
 
In other words, will we spend more time processing the digital code of our experiences than we do experiencing the actual events that the digital code represents?