> But when it comes to smart home or networking or car electronics or various other places where markets are still fragmented such that earnings per device are small to negative, it's clear that the simpler the better.
It's not just about markets being small. Many times it's about designers pushing form over function, and people not realising what they're losing.
Take induction hobs, for instance. I had to go out of my way to get one with mechanical knobs, as opposed to touch controls, and it's such a huge UX improvement that I now feel handicapped in other people's kitchens. Yet I've had several friends and colleagues express genuine surprise that this is even possible; they've only ever seen induction hobs with touch, and thus assumed it's necessary to have touch on induction.
Funny that you mention induction stoves - that's exactly what I was discussing among other things in above link. I hate those touch stoves with a passion. What were they thinking? It has one job!
>> They're easier to clean. They look better. They're possibly cheaper.
You add supposedly safer as well. Since no heat is generated unless the pan is on the stove, it's safer for kids. Apparently the jury is still out on the technology since it uses electromagnetic currents:
It's not just about markets being small. Many times it's about designers pushing form over function, and people not realising what they're losing.
Take induction hobs, for instance. I had to go out of my way to get one with mechanical knobs, as opposed to touch controls, and it's such a huge UX improvement that I now feel handicapped in other people's kitchens. Yet I've had several friends and colleagues express genuine surprise that this is even possible; they've only ever seen induction hobs with touch, and thus assumed it's necessary to have touch on induction.