Having lost my beloved iPhone SE in a moment of foolishness, I was forced to consider what options I had in terms of it's replacement. A direct replacement in the same way I bought the original would set me back the same £429 that was paid in November 2016, money which I don't have at this time.
A common option in this situation is to buy a very inexpensive pay-as-you-go phone to patch up the gap for the meantime. This kind of approach usually yields a t9 candybar of the kind not uncommon in 2004.
Overall, I am surprised by the relative comfort it has while scrolling through twitter, facebook and other social networks, and watching videos on youtube. The android 6.0 (which is unlikely to be updated anytime soon) handles itself very well with very few snags, and browsing on chrome works as you would expect for day-to day websites such as the BBC. My expectation was that despite being able to 'do' these things, that it would crumble and lag, as was my experience with entry level phones from a few years ago such as the Samsung Galaxy Ace, which could barely handle the interface.
Being a very low cost example of hardware, it is limited in many regards. The 480x845 screen has horrible viewing angles, and it's low resolution is years behind premium phones which are 1080p, or in some cases 4k. This doesn't actually get in the way of the user experience in anyway, photos and media content are still absolutely visible. We also don't get 4G, contactless payment or a fingerprint sensor.
The 8mp camera has no focus ability at all and in anything but the best conditions there is a lack of contrast and a lot of light creeping in from the edges. Weirdly, it also takes photos in Having said this, to an absolute beginner, it is still adequate for 'recording experiences', without any professional intention.
In terms of design, the phone is actually a half-inspirational example of unassuming minimalism. I also find myself drawn to the phone because it's cheap - it seems to be trying it's hardest, and so it's mistakes are easier to forgive. Obviously, this isn't a canonical example of 'good design', as the arrangement, such as the alignment of the front sensors are wonky; and the forms, such as the oversized camera lens are vague.
As I mentioned in a previous post, for 'good design', you can pay 5 times as much for a less-functional Jasper Morrison certified Punkt MP 01, or 12 times as much for an iPhone SE. Basically then, this phone is the Arial of phones. Low cost, basically functional, but lacking in respect or academic rigour.
So when you can 'do' the same thing in discomfort and aesthetic disunity for 8.4% of the price, what is the rational choice? The moneyed states of the western world have chosen the iPhone because, especially when in conjunction with £1/mth for iCloud, £10/mth for Apple Music, a £20/mth data plan, and with all of your apps, music and movies delivered through iTunes, the iPhone offers a maximum of functionality and an effortless user experience.
India have made a different decision. Companies like Oppo and Vivo, Chinese companies, are offering a range of options from the Rs 27,000 (£327) Oppo F3 Plus 'selfie expert', to ultra cheap and slow phones which probably came out of the same factory as mine. These are relentlessly marketed and 'mirror' the look and feel of Apple products. Obviously not good design, but they do the same things, and to someone not already hooked up to Apple's infrastructure, it is hard to justify spending Rs 29,000 (£350) on a re-released 3 year old iPhone 6.
This all asks an important question about the cost of good design in today's products. In nearly all markets, you can achieve basic functionality at a very low cost and you are asked to pay many multiples of the basic price to increase function and 'visual appeal'. The kettle, a simple and unassuming single-function product is a good way of showing this.
A common option in this situation is to buy a very inexpensive pay-as-you-go phone to patch up the gap for the meantime. This kind of approach usually yields a t9 candybar of the kind not uncommon in 2004.
However, as an experiment, I decided to pony up a little bit more cash and see how good a £30 android phone could be, expecting at the very least massively flawed software and sluggish performance. The phone I went for was the Alcatel Pixi 4(5), which I got from virgin media for £39.99, including the required £10 top up.
Instead of being constantly annoyed about the phone however, I find myself pleasantly suprised by this phone, which often does what I want it to, and actually suprised me with how much it can do.
Overall, I am surprised by the relative comfort it has while scrolling through twitter, facebook and other social networks, and watching videos on youtube. The android 6.0 (which is unlikely to be updated anytime soon) handles itself very well with very few snags, and browsing on chrome works as you would expect for day-to day websites such as the BBC. My expectation was that despite being able to 'do' these things, that it would crumble and lag, as was my experience with entry level phones from a few years ago such as the Samsung Galaxy Ace, which could barely handle the interface.
Being a very low cost example of hardware, it is limited in many regards. The 480x845 screen has horrible viewing angles, and it's low resolution is years behind premium phones which are 1080p, or in some cases 4k. This doesn't actually get in the way of the user experience in anyway, photos and media content are still absolutely visible. We also don't get 4G, contactless payment or a fingerprint sensor.
The 8mp camera has no focus ability at all and in anything but the best conditions there is a lack of contrast and a lot of light creeping in from the edges. Weirdly, it also takes photos in Having said this, to an absolute beginner, it is still adequate for 'recording experiences', without any professional intention.
In terms of design, the phone is actually a half-inspirational example of unassuming minimalism. I also find myself drawn to the phone because it's cheap - it seems to be trying it's hardest, and so it's mistakes are easier to forgive. Obviously, this isn't a canonical example of 'good design', as the arrangement, such as the alignment of the front sensors are wonky; and the forms, such as the oversized camera lens are vague.
As I mentioned in a previous post, for 'good design', you can pay 5 times as much for a less-functional Jasper Morrison certified Punkt MP 01, or 12 times as much for an iPhone SE. Basically then, this phone is the Arial of phones. Low cost, basically functional, but lacking in respect or academic rigour.
Sector 22A, Chandigarh, India
India have made a different decision. Companies like Oppo and Vivo, Chinese companies, are offering a range of options from the Rs 27,000 (£327) Oppo F3 Plus 'selfie expert', to ultra cheap and slow phones which probably came out of the same factory as mine. These are relentlessly marketed and 'mirror' the look and feel of Apple products. Obviously not good design, but they do the same things, and to someone not already hooked up to Apple's infrastructure, it is hard to justify spending Rs 29,000 (£350) on a re-released 3 year old iPhone 6.
This all asks an important question about the cost of good design in today's products. In nearly all markets, you can achieve basic functionality at a very low cost and you are asked to pay many multiples of the basic price to increase function and 'visual appeal'. The kettle, a simple and unassuming single-function product is a good way of showing this.
Obviously, they can all boil water, and by inspection, I can tell you that they only range in power output from 2.2kW to 3kW, with most over £15 being above 3kW (besides, amazingly, the £149 Alessi design icon, which is only 1.8kW). We can also assume that they use basically all the same components. The main functional improvement, a 360 degree base, also appears at the £15 mark. So what are we paying for?
Well, paying twice as much as a basic £5 kettle gets you either a better brand of the same thing, or a cool colour. Paying six times as much will either get you a very special german-sounding brand, or fancy materials. If you want to pay ten times as much, then you can get one in glass. Finally, thirty times as much money gets you a genuinely Italian made kettle (DeLongi are impostors, so are Dulait, both made in china), designed by the famous Michael Graves.
This all is a clear example of the diminishing returns that come out of investment in household products. As consumers, our spending is extremely efficient if we buy cheap, representing close to the actual price of the components that we buy. It is also however an example of the absolute economic value that design offers; Many companies, primarily Apple and Dyson, have found that a definite way of achieving amazing levels of market profit share is to simply invest as much as possible in producing the best possible product. This is great fun for designers, but as consumers the question we ask ourselves is: what is the cost of good design?
No comments:
Post a Comment