prêt-à-porter

Now I'm going to butt in ahead of schedule to rant and rave and be the general curmudgeon that I am because I have a rant that is close to our dear friend's heart: good design versus bad design. Besides I have permission to be my usual self.

Good design functions on multiple levels. It appeals to the neccessary senses, e.g. the eyes if it's a visual product, while making the use of the product more natural and instinctive. The iPod is the example du jour of incredible industrial and consumer design. It functions flawlessly as a device while appealing to any number of aesthetic ideals. Jonathan Ive, Apple's Vice President of Industrial Design has consistently set this bar of design high for Apple with the iBook, the iPod, the incredibly beautiful "sunflower" iMac, and the stunning Titanium and Aluminium (pronounced Al-Ew-Min-E-Um - you're welcome Welly). Apple has consistently been the gold standard for product design. However, they now have a friend in the game.

Target has long been seen as a low cost, but design conscious, company. Mizrahi, Mossimo, and Graves are names that any Target shopper and most fashionistas will find familiar. They give Target an aura of haute couture while keeping costs down, appealing to a more hipper crowd than, say, the Kathy Lee collection. Target however, has just entered hallowed halls along side the likes Apple with their new prescription pill bottle. A redesign of the entire bottle to make each bottle recognizable, increase the readability of the information, and make life easier for both pharmacist and patient. Including Color coding the bottles, intelligent expiration, info attached, and an improved intake schedule.

From the article in the New York Metro:

That my friends, is good design. And now the curmudgeonly portion. I *had* a nice, shiny (read: stolen) image that I was going to post along with the my comments but Maggs doesn't like me tinkering with things. [whine]You never let me have any fun![/whine]

Found via BoingBoing

Love,
Steve