Hard hard user interfaces.

Started as someone doing ActionScript in Macromedia Flash I got into Human-Computer-Interaction after watching Jeff's Hann's multi-touch work. That's the power of a really cool demo that inspired the birth of NUIGroup community which spawned 1000s of makers all around the world making their own projector camera multitouch systems. All of it became mainstream once Apple released the iPhone to the world, and also gave birth to my interest in human-centered engineering. I spent some 10 years after that playing with sensors, haptics, and gestural interfaces through multiple input modalities but nothing stuck as much as multi-touch did. Thanks to Apple's execution. Everyone's phone/tablet interaction is default multitouch. (unless you have a visual impairment). Primsense evolved into Kinect, then came Wiimote, Leap but nothing stuck.  for speech, it was Amazon's Alexa. Latest news , that its going to lose Amazon 10B.  Like I am writing this post through my keyboard a...

What if phones were made like shuttlecocks!

Now evolution is a slow process, and as humans and smartphone users this evolution to 'not drop things' is going to only happen in a million years. It's easier to redesign bodies/smartphones.

I shattered two phones in the last two years, two screens I got replaced were expensive and quite a hit on the pocket. Humans drop things.

What I don't understand is that the screen is the most sensitive part of the phone yet it shatters easier than feather. The phone has other parts too- an incomprehensibly well made PCB, modem, battery, and the casing.



Observing a smartphone physically:

Now the parts above with respect to screen are packed in this fashion primarily for three reasons: packing, protection and function. The case's job is to protect, the electronics are for function, and fasteners/glues for packing. 

It's pretty clear that current design of smartphone fails pretty badly at protection: one of the most expensive parts, the screen(aluminosilicate glass) is just a part that's yet to evolve as a hardened material, or oriented badly so that the most adept human gesture of grasping objects with a small false negative that's called dropping.

I also don't like phone cases.

What if phones were designed as shuttlecocks

Understanding the beauty of fall

Not that we've played a lot of badminton.  At 108 in Baba's room there's been a shuttlecock hanging on the window. The most beautiful thing to be as an observer in a shuttlecock is the orientation it falls in.

No matter how you drop it >90 percent of impact will be dampened in the first hit on the ground.

Framewise dissociation of shuttlecock's fall motion

This primarily happens because of how shuttlecock is made.


If we were to design a shuttlecock where the flexible parts are stiff, it'd still fall as a regular shuttlecock, (considering we use a lightweight material).

Clearly, weight and density distribution is everything here. e.g. 


e.g. This configuration preserves the shape and dimensions, but has density distributed on the side. Photo: MIT

Task to prototype!

Let's assume there's a hard block of plastic ABS that we were to 3D print in a way that it's weight distribution(COG) falls through one of the edges- i.e. graded density. 

We've to design electronics, and fuse the above components in a way that the phone's weight distribution(COG) falls through one of the edges. That's the only place where you put a bit of padding- instead of carrying a bulky phone case.

Thoughts?







Popular posts from this blog

NZM-SEC Superfast express that took my '35 hours'

Ideas

discordant yet musical whistles