Hey EEs! Simplify my life, please!
In a recent CNet article, Philips North America CEO Paul Zeven posed the question, “Do people need the gizmos we're selling?” It's not a question I'd expect to hear from an executive at such an electronics giant, but Zeven relates that a study done by his company shows that “only one in four consumers” use the full range of features available on any given product.
Why are the designs of today being crammed, packed, and stuffed with features that only 25% of the users actually need?
It makes sense. The two phones I use�at work and in my home�both feature buttons I'll never press, memory I'll never use, and processing power I'll never need. As a consumer, I'm sure you, the design engineer, can relate. I would bet most of you own at least one piece of complex gear that you use only for its most basic features.
So, my question is, why are the designs of today being crammed, packed, and stuffed with features that only 25% of the users actually need? Each day, the editors at Electronic Products are presented with new products�resistors, ICs, connectors, sensors, and everything else�touting their small size, and ability to save pc-board space in end products that are space-challenged. All this integration and feature-cramming sometimes comes at a price: whether it be higher power consumption, less pc-board space, introduced interference, signal degradation, and the beat goes on.
Stereotypically speaking, I know EEs are fairly practical people, and I doubt a designer willingly complicates a circuit just to satisfy the cool factor. But, maybe the challenge alone is a driving force for the design engineer, where accomplishment and the ability to build a design supersede necessity.
It is doubtful whether the blame can be dumped on one entity alone. We are all at fault, from the designer to the savvy marketing department to the consumer. We have all been taken over by the same affliction, something referred to as Featuritis in our Jan. 2007 Consumer Electronics Forum (see Electronic Products , January 2007, p. 45).
For instance, the integration of camera and phone�successful in an economic sense�leaves a bit to be desired in terms of performance. The result of this marriage? Poor phone performance meets poor image quality, made acceptable because of the consumer's penchant for portability as well as with a teaspoon of sugar-coated marketing.
We�as consumer and designer�simply need to campaign for quality over quantity in our products. There should be less emphasis on adding features that are not needed and more on quality and performance. Whatever happened to keeping it simple?
Ralph Raiola
Advertisement
