i would say yes, sounds kind of nice,
now if it could real time sample or automatically populate some
pads with drums, shakers, samples, etc of each song playing and allow further playing then I would want one and screw the kids, but this is a cool novel start
I foresee an entire generation of budding percussionists being inspired by this.
It’s innovation… but it might also a marketing gimmick… hard to really tell, I’d have to shake it…
No, it is not even a good product imo. Innovation would be something that was an evolutionary development of an existing product where the new features brought benefits, and bubba that is not this at all.
zippy, I think I see where you’re coming from, but just as a check
what if shaking also acted to power the unit, so it is not just shake for sound / interaction and not just shake / move for power / charge, but a “lens smashing” of the two?
then would you deem it innovation?
HHHMMMM…Innovation, I dunno!
It’s cool though. Never seen an MP3 where you would shake it to shuffle the songs. It could be pretty close though. I’m not too sure of the utilitarian aspect of it. Most electronics are designed flat so that the user can put it away and not bulge out.
Nope, and it wouldnt work as the ammount of ergs you can get out of that relative motion would be less than would be needed to run the system.
what would make this item (or something like it) “innovative” to you zippy?
just trying to see where exactly you’re coming from
I’m not too sure of the utilitarian aspect of it. Most electronics are designed flat so that the user can put it away and not bulge out.
if it’s for kids and supposed to be a form meant to shake I would forgive a little extra bulk for a “shake” form, that being said, I don’t think this is it
First, I have a problem with any headphone ear bud system for a device aimed at this age group the real potential exists for damage to hearing. How to make it an innovation, well I would make sure that, it had a mic built into the earbuds that would lower the volume when sound in the frequency of the human voice was present. This is so “mom” can still tell the kid to “watch out”. As far as interactive goes, lets resurrect an old 70’s idea and put in led that “dance to the music” or put on a little “I dog” like pet in a clear bubble what dances to the music too. I would not go as far as saying any but the first notion would qualify as an “innovation”.
Not sure exactly what kind of interaction will the shaking produce, so I can’t comment on that.
Why is it important if this is an innovation? So what if it is? So what if it isn’t?
If kids love it and parents are willing to fork the money, everyone’s happy eh!
I guess I am just a bit tired of all this “innovation” thingy. It seems to be a way to quantify creativity. So are future students going to be hired based on “innovation score?” Is this innovation thingy going to kill ideas because they don’t seem to score high enough?
An idea is an idea, worths more if it works, but only after it has worked. So, I’d like to see how this thing actually works before I decide how it fits in my “Innovation metrics”.
i see where you’re going with this mcow = )
i’m definitely not thinking metrics on this one, but once the initial question was raised and some responses were given, i started to become very curious about what designers here see as innovation in this time of “INNOVATION!” what fits the bill for some may not for others, why? what are they looking for? What satisfies some?
Innovation can be measured and is, called a patent ( I have 8 of them ). Now patents for the most part are pretty useless, just a licence to sue after all ( and if you do not have deep pockets that licence is almost worthless) but the process of examination requries you prove a utlitairian improvement. What I cant understand is the rest of you going “hummm ok lets screw up some kids hearing while they are real young” call it a real laps of human factors engineering or just plain bozo stupid. Ideas are like assholes, everybody has them, most stink its said so a working bad idea is still a stinking hole in my book.
you have a point about the headphones, but I also feel you are a little hung up on that aspect, for all we know the volume or audio spectrum is limited to none damaging levels (that being said I’m sure it’s not)
I guess what I was positively reacting to here is the very simple addition of some subtle interaction with the child and the music. While this is a very small change in the product, it really speaks to my sensibilities as someone who has always liked music and particularly percussion. I guess I am more responding to the potential of taking this level of interaction further as a concept than to the product at hand.
Haha, I was going to put it more blantly but I’m glad you got it!
I don’t think patent itself is a measure for idea. Like you said, it’s pretty useless unless it’s being put to good use. The same goes to an Idea. An idea is meaningless if it just sits there. A good idea that isn’t being used is not as good as a “not as good” one that is being used.
So, what is a good idea? I still think it’s the one that is good and being put to good use.
As for the ear bud thing. Well, I suppose it’s due to price point issue. If you want to consider ergonomic and health issue, a headphone with noise cancellation will be a better choice, but that will cost much more. Even one without noise cancellation will cost more. Do you think parents will see the value? Afterall, what Sansa is trying to sell isn’t the ear piece, but the Shaker itself. In fact, I think they included the ear bud just to complete the “package”. If you, as a parent, don’t agree with the ear bud, you can just spend a little more and buy a headphone instead. So I don’t really see this as a big issue.
The question was is this a innovation, in my book not. Is it a valid product, the market will decide. I did however do a little market reseach with the potential buyers of this thingy (parents and grand parents of children 2-6) with a small sample size of 10 it was 8 against, 1 not at that price and 1 for. Ok small samples size but better than nothing, I put this thing in the stinkeroo slot and wonder how it even got to production in the first place.
As you know, I am now doing mainly conceptual design. The problem with putting too much vision into a design is that it takes the attention of being a reality away from people. I can illustrate as many realistic scenarios that a concept can work, but after all, if it’s about money, no body wants to take the risk, or even to pause and think about it. Time is money.
There is almost no limit to what this can become if you just want to think of this as a concept. It can perhaps produce a sound remix like what DJ does when the kid shakes it, thus train them to be more fluent with the language of sound, or it can literally shuffle the play list as the kid shakes it. Perhaps it’s simply a device to encourage more physical activities(that’s a bit weak…). Well, conceptual design doesn’t come this way. It should come from the concept, not from a given form and utility. It’s the concept that matters, the physical form is just something that helps the audience to get a better perception on what it can be.
Just wondering if you can find out the official definition of “Innovation” from your company? I’m sure there must be a statement released somewhere. Or call up your local innovation specialist!
Nono, I am serious, please!
Can you name an example which you think qualifies as a good innovation or a good valid product?
All fine and good, ever stop and ask the target customer? Concept design with out end user imput is like a tubo car with out a waste gate, KERBOOM in short order. I did ask, the 10 they thought that interactivity was pretty silly as kids will dance to music at the drop of a hat. One suggestion was to make the whole thing glow with leds that “danced” to the music another was just cover it in rubber as kids love to throw stuff. One consistant theme was “why?” as there are scads of cheap almost free mp3 playres out there.
What market would you like?
zippy 30 years in harness