Cracked
Describe form for an Object of Desire?
Since it’s release, I’ve found myself drooling over pictures of the iPhone like a giddy, hormonal teenager.
Yes, I want one! I’ve waited 3 generations and 2(?) software updates and I think finally will get mine soon!
I have also been paying close attention to another side of these objects of desire – in USE! Duh! This is where I see a huge gap between the initial seduction and what you end up with, while using the Object. Take the example of the pictures above. One obviously illustrates a very common problem – an inevitable failure of the bigger-screen form language of the iPhone. Until bullet-proof screens are commonplace, this will be a frequent problem.
We use mobile phones constantly, carelessly and unforgivingly. Form – whatever remains of it in a post-interaction era – must evolve to a level where this gap is bridged as much as possible. New material thinking must take center-stage, so that users, consumers or whatever you want to call ‘us’ are not given false hope.
What the current situation leads to, is a scurry for iPhone ‘cases’. Once these condoms are strapped onto an erstwhile slick, beautiful object – you’re left with quite another, rather ugly Beast. It’s the same ‘case’ for all other objects. You fall in love with them as they appear in their perfect, glossy showrooms – but the minute they’re in use, they are covered with cloth, cases, and other second-skins which often change our perception of form entirely. A week of rough usage and our Object of desire is left scratched and dusty.
Shouldn’t the material and form include these in the first place??
Not that I would favor ‘pre-scratched’ Ferraris and linoleum floors for everyone. Rubber iPhones would look undeniably uglier compared to the glossy, plastic cases you get out of the box.
I simply cant imagine Steve Jobs selling that idea in their next WWDC. Or ever.
