Comments on: Simplicity http://www.brightlycoloredfood.com/2004/05/25/simplicity/ Fri, 05 Dec 2008 10:11:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Jim Amos http://www.brightlycoloredfood.com/2004/05/25/simplicity/#comment-176 Jim Amos Sun, 08 Aug 2004 11:48:53 +0000 http://www.brightlycoloredfood.com/wordpress/?p=230#comment-176 Your link to the 'Simplicity Design Studio' website currently points to your own url. Your link to the ‘Simplicity Design Studio’ website currently points to your own url.

]]> By: Maggie http://www.brightlycoloredfood.com/2004/05/25/simplicity/#comment-175 Maggie Tue, 25 May 2004 18:14:15 +0000 http://www.brightlycoloredfood.com/wordpress/?p=230#comment-175 This quote struck me as interesting. "The brainstorm suggested crucial elements: transparency, aesthetic appeal, restraint, just-in-time information." Are these really what we mean by simplicity? I'm not saying that they aren't, but it seems like the first step might be to really try and move beyond these terms which seem to have such a loaded history in the design realm especially. And I was reminded of the Eames movie about computers when the article talked about transparency especially in dealing with the ambient intelligence initiative. When the Eames made that movie (I think) people didn't really interact with computers on an every day basis. Computer where this foreign thing that lived in big rooms in office buildings. But since computers have come to live all around us, no one has remade the Eames move about computers. Why is that? Why does the transparency have to be in the object itself? Why can't the transparency be part of the culture? This quote struck me as interesting.

“The brainstorm suggested crucial elements: transparency, aesthetic appeal, restraint, just-in-time information.”

Are these really what we mean by simplicity? I’m not saying that they aren’t, but it seems like the first step might be to really try and move beyond these terms which seem to have such a loaded history in the design realm especially.

And I was reminded of the Eames movie about computers when the article talked about transparency especially in dealing with the ambient intelligence initiative. When the Eames made that movie (I think) people didn’t really interact with computers on an every day basis. Computer where this foreign thing that lived in big rooms in office buildings. But since computers have come to live all around us, no one has remade the Eames move about computers. Why is that? Why does the transparency have to be in the object itself? Why can’t the transparency be part of the culture?

]]>