Peter, one problem with the ClearRX that you might be unaware of that is pretty enlightening is who uses it. Most people just seem to remember the people who take prescriptions. Well, evidently they forgot to talk ergonmics with the pharmacists, most of whom (I seem to recall > 60%) despise ClearRx as it takes a much longer time to fill the prescriptions.

I guess the lesson learned is remember that optimization for one set of users can drastically harm others.

Peter, Do you wonder if the word Experience is part of design that's really been happening since designers were designing? Just that back then, people weren't linking the experience with the product, or the UI, or the retail experience...http://design-crit.com/blog/2006/03/design-jargon-experience-design.html#links

Hi Peter,

Great article. But I feel that this is written by someone new to the product design process, maybe coming from another field. I can't see how Experience Design is different from the thoughts that lies behind all work done by architects and designers for the last few hundred years. That said, I think the article is relevant and as always it is refreshing to get this kind of text written by someone articulate not from the hard core designer-crew. What I mean is - if we designers we're better at communication, maybe Peter would have picked this up years ago. Then again, maybe we wouldn't be so good at designing then :)

Best regards,
Frederik Andersen
Goodmorning Technology

Why are consumer electronics designed so badly? Because they have such a limited life that even a great product has a limited effect. The Motorola Razor phone was great in its day - three years ago. Now it is considered a has-been and iPhone is the hot new product. If it takes that much work and promotion to get a great product out most companies will settle for OK. The Blackberry is not a great design in terms of pushing the user experience forward but it does what it does well enough that RIM, for its size, has been much more successful than Motorola.

Excellent article. While everyone agrees this now overhyped "product experience" is what sells a product, we need to remember that experience is essentially a post-purchase event. If a product fulfills most of its functional promises few buyers will return it, but they probably will not repeat the purchase of that product or brand. Get a few million suckers to "try out" that experience and you're starting to look at serious money, so the incentive for most companies for a "good, lasting experience" is next to nil. Their idea is to move boxed stuff primarily.

I am not a believer in disposable goods creating much of a life experience, it sounds pretentious and almost desperate on the part of many designers. Being in love or in mourning are experiences, as is being afraid, mesmerized, horrified or surprised. This is the realm of cinema, art (sometimes), theatre and the like, hardly product design. Whatever experience using a mass-produced object provides is quickly forgotten and rather low on the intensity scale of everyday life.

Manufacturers are only geared to sell hard goods that fill a purpose, to then be discarded or recycled. The anarchy objects are made in is rather inevitable, can you imagine the task of considering every interaction between the product on your screen with everything else out there? Life was way simpler in Kodak's time.

Designers should leave creating experiences to artists and writers for one simple reason - it takes serious time, talent and effort to create memorable ones. Time especially is a commodity in rare supply today in R&D departments. Designers should stick to what design does best - serve reliably and unobtrusively.