I usually find John Dvorak entertaining but infuriating -- whenever I know something about what he speaks, technology-wise, he's usually full of hot air.
That said, his column on idiosyncratic engineering should be a must-read for every hardware vendor out there.
There are exactly two points of sanity in the world of high technology. One is the recharging connector for Nokia phones. The other is the recharging connector for Toshiba notebooks. The manufacturers don't keep changing them.
I probably have ten Nokia chargers, so if I want to charge a phone, there is one around someplace. The same with the Toshiba. I know of only one model of Portégé that used a different connector, and it wasn't on sale for very long. Thus when I grab my notebook, I can easily find a power supply for it, since all the old ones work with the new machine. This isn't rocket science, but you'd think it was when you look around.
It's true. There's no reason why every notebook shouldn't be able to use the same power brick, every cell phone the same charger (and same headset -- one place where Nokia falls down), every digital camera the same mini-USB cable.
Well, there is a reason. Dvorak discounts it, but clearly it's motivated by greed. These tech manufacturers make a tidy sum from folks getting a second charger, a new proprietary headset, etc. In some cases, that's goofy (mini-USBs on cameras, for example), but in other cases, someone has put together a business case that shows it makes money somewhere. At the very least -- in those cases where the gear is common within a given company line (which is less often than you think, Dvorak notes) -- it might create some brand loyalty.
At least, that is, as long as the items involved are not commodities. Yes, if you want the latest tech, you're going to be willing to pay for it and put up with paying for extra cables. Nobody bought the latest cell phone from company X because it promised to use the same charger as a Nokia (or, more powerfully, decided not to because it didn't).
But if I were going for a low-end phone, a less-than-cutting edge bit of tech, I might actually pay attention to an ad that noted that it uses an industry standard charger. Certainly, for phones, I look for the standard 0.25mm headset being mentioned; it actually has been a factor (though not the deciding one) in vetting models.
Sooner or later, "works with everything" is going to be recognized -- by the public and the manufacturers -- as a strong selling point. Can't come soon enough for me.
Filed under :: Hi-Tech
It's not just hardware that is anoyingly idiosyncratic, but software and interface design as well. My decisions on a number of purchases has been influenced by this factor. For example, my new digital camera is the same brand as the old one mostly because I didn't want to learn to use a new interface. There's another brand with an arguably superior product, but I didn't buy it. A similar example: when I lived in Michigan, I bought two identical car stereos, one for each car, so I would only need to learn one interface. Ironically, I'm pretty good at figuring user interfaces out. Better, anyway, than many people I know, and I'm still trying to reduce the cognitive load caused by all the idiosyncratic technology in my life.
