ipod Design Principles

[Tom]

Why did the iPod design succeed? The man who ought do know does know: like good website architecture, it embodies the Vitruvian design principles of Commodity, Firmness and Delight. steve Jobs puts it like this in the November 2006 edition of Wired (p. 145), it succeeds 'Because it combine's Apple's incredible technology base with Apple's legendary east of use with Apple's awsome design. Those three things come together in this, and its like, that's what we do'. Having just bought one for my wife I can also tell you about one factor which made no contribution to its success: the instruction leaflet. Its pathetic. Maybe you don't need instructions if you are surrounded by teenage pals.

[David]

Yes Tom, if you need an instruction manual, the design has failed.

On the other hand, my Canon 30D came with a thick booklet and yet the design is good. Complexity obviously plays a part.

[James]

Is the iPod's success anything to do with its design though? I think it's because it was the first mp3 player to market with a huge capacity (using a hard-drive not flash memory) so people could load their entire music collection on to it.

[Tom]

Henry, almost a Macophobe, has persuaded me to buy 2 of them recently (8 gb for him and 24 gb for his Mum) and gave the same reason for both: "the interface is better". But he has learned to use it in pubs etc and we oldies don't find it intuitive.

[Trudi]

I didn't fall for the ipod until it came out in shiny black. I didn't find the interface immediately intuitive, but got the hang of it without referring to the instruction manual (just as well by the sound of it!).

I do find it far easier to use than my husband's Creative Zen Xtra (same capacity, similar age), and he (somewhat reluctantly) agrees. The Zen controls are far more fiddly and prone to breakage.