Useless design features in modern products | Hacker News Reader

Useless design features in modern products

bbc.com

87 pointsnairteashop156 comments

> Jeans of all brands still have antiquated watch pockets, now too small to be useful

I disagree. They make great coin pockets, which also helps keep my phone from getting scratched up by the coins.

Things can still be useful for reasons other than their original purpose.

Yep, depending on how tight/loose the pants fit, you can also put a key in there. Won't fall out as easily as from the normal pocket.

They also can be more secure than the main pocket for a small pocket knife

Ha, I pocket my pocket knife in that pocket as well.

Ease of getting to the knife quickly is the thing. The larger pocket is full of everything.

I would miss that pocket.

I use mine for my KeyPort[0] which helps to avoid digging for a keyring.

[0]: https://www.mykeyport.com/slide3

I use it for a small amount of spare change/coins, and it works great. No need to figure out by touch if I'm grabbing a coin or a key, etc.

I use those pockets for keys and other small items. It is useful for me.

I curl up my headphones and tuck them in there; easy to access, and they tangle up with themselves but not the other 4 things in my pocket.

I use this for a pocketknife or leatherman. It's a perfect size for either and keeps my phone from getting scratched.

My first Smart phone (Palm Pre) fit in the watch pocket. Sometime I keep my remote for the garage door there. but yeah, lots of uses.

That's the AirPods pocket.

> > Jeans of all brands still have antiquated watch pockets, now too small to be useful

> I disagree. They make great coin pockets, which also helps keep my phone from getting scratched up by the coins.

I'll second; up until a few years ago, I actually carried a pocket watch on a chain (hard to lose it). It took no batteries (wound by hand every morning) and the ticking was soothing.

Those were watch pockets? I always vaguely thought they were for cigarette lighters.

I bought a pair of trousers recently that have a small pocket embedded rather deep into the right pocket, which seemingly isn't a watch pocket—it's a different size.

Interestingly, it snugly fits (the bottom half of) my iPhone 6 (without case.) I put it in that inner pocket, and it prevents it from bouncing out of my pocket if I'm running somewhere. Just as easy to take back out as if it was just in the larger pocket.

This is kind of standard on trousers, as far as I know. Every pair I've ever worn has had one.

I keep my apartment key in it. It's quite useful.

I simply carry keys in there. The pocket is perfect for small metal objects. If left in a bigger, thinner pocket, they are likely to make a hole moving around.

> Though electric cars don’t need cooling grilles – batteries don’t get as hot and they’re chilled in a different way – many have them anyway to avoid looking weird.

This actually isn't true. Electric engines do indeed release a lot less waste heat than internal combustion engines, but they also can't tolerate nearly as high of temperatures. And since heat dissipation is proportional to temperature, their cooling requirements (ie radiator) tend to be similar. Perhaps a bit less, but comparable.

Teslas actually do have radiators; they're just mounted low, so they're less obvious. The same could be done in most other cars, although admittedly the electric engine might allow for easier flexibility of layout to accomplish this.

but why does it need the grille, if the radiators are low then the grill is in the wrong spot, no?

Yep. Look at Model 3 design. Low radiator grille: https://www.instagram.com/p/BamdM3clVU3/

It's almost like the reverse of what the article is talking about. People expect electric cars to not need radiators, so they design the Teslas specifically to look different, even though in this way they're actually pretty similar to other cars!

> Electric engines do indeed release a lot less waste heat than internal combustion engines, but they also can't tolerate nearly as high of temperatures.

Eh? I thought both topped out around ~100 degrees C? Not that water cooling isn't a good idea for automotive electric drive motors.

Sorry, I guess I worded that poorly. In the electric case, it's specifically the batteries that need to be kept cooler. So while the whole system puts off less heat, at least the battery portion also withstands less, so still needs a significant radiator.

Rechargeable batteries of most designs are pretty heat sensitive. Too hot or too cold and the maximum range of the electric vehicle suffers. The drop off can be as high as 30% or so too, especially if you live somewhere with regular seasonal extreme temperatures.

This is why as well as cooling systems, some EVs even heat the battery in the cold.

The same thing affects Lithium Ion batteries in phones, cameras, laptops etc too.

Hah, sounds kind of like LED lights -- way less waste heat, way more sensitive to what heat there is.

> This is why as well as cooling systems, some EVs even heat the battery in the cold.

IC cars have that feature too, if you live somewhere like Saskatchewan. You need to plug the heater in at night (https://info.kaltire.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Jan-6-Pl...) or the battery will be too cold to start the car in the morning.

Block heaters are used in somewhat milder climates as well – even though a modern ICE will start quite fine at even below -20°C (increasingly more unreliably the lower you go), doing so is somewhat harmful for the engine. (Also, by heating the engine fluids you can also blow some warmer air into the cabin to prevent the windows from frosting when you get inside – not to mention the added comfort.) Actual battery warmers are much rarer I think, but that isn't often an issue as long as you keep your battery well charged (and obviously have a more capable battery to begin with).

The usual recommendation is to start using the block heater even before temperature gets below freezing (for convenience reasons not many people do so).

They could have pointed out the chargers on these cars. I’ve seen some that mimic a fuel pump and gas cap (implying there is a gas tank) even though that is all unnecessary.

Why would you not need a port cover? Electric cars are charged by plugs to connect the electric line, same as how gas cars are charged by plugs to connect the gas line.

I'm pretty sure the radiator you need for an EV is much smaller. You need cooling, but not a whole lot. The cooling needs are similar to what you need for cooling the cabin, so the radiator will be similar to a normal car's AC radiator. The intake is just a small gap between the hood and the front of the car, not the giant grille most cars have.

IC car radiators are limited by their working fluid to 100C before massive problems show up and in practical terms much lower temperatures. On the other hand electric motors can safely operate at over 100C minimizing the differences. However, while IC's produce vastly more waste heat much of it is simply dumped into the exhaust system which can in get hot enough to glow. ex: https://imgur.com/gallery/J7oNY

Both electric an IC cars need radiators for their AC system.

Electric car batteries produce minimal heat in use, but while charging may produce significant heat.

So, it's really quick charging stations and the AC system that causes minimal radiator needs.

Automotive cooling systems have been designed to operate in excess of 100C for decades now. The system is designed to pressurize the coolant to raise the boiling point by as much as 25C/45F. The radiator cap acts as a pressure release valve and most are typically designed to blow at 15psi above atmospheric pressure.

You also have the intended working temperature of ICE and eletric powerplants inverted. While an ICE's cooling system is designed to keep maximum coolant temperature around 110-115F, the internal components are designed to operate far in excess of that temperature. Exhaust valves, for example, are designed to operate indefinitely at temperatures exceeding 700C with the valves of high performance engines nudging 900C. Electric motors on the other hand, rapidly lose efficiency as operating temperature increases.

Radiator sizing only cares about the working fluid temperature, temperatures past that point are irrelevant.

Anyway, remember failure point != safe operation.

50/50 antifrease mixture generally boils at 220f at 1atm. As you say assuming nothing is wrong up to 265f is possible to maintain, but operating temperatures are generally kept below the boiling point for several very good reasons.

Critically, the engine should operate even if the cooling system has a minor leak as long as it's working fluid is topped off.

Every modern IC engine (and the majority of old ones) operates with a pressurized cooling system; they absolutely will not function properly with a leak.

The average operating temperature of engine coolant is around 200F, the only reason it doesn't boil over is because of the aforementioned pressure, which is usually around 15PSI (bringing the boiling point to just above 250F).

The rating on 50/50 antifreeze relies on coolant system pressure, it (ethylene glycol) will boil like water if put on a stove. The key to antifreeze is in its name: anti-freeze. It does raise the boiling point of water a little, but that's just a side benefit and is of no real significance (plain water transfers heat better).

These readily available facts contradict the comment above. The person is certainly trying to make a point, but they seem to have the fundamentals completely wrong.

200F is only 93C which is below the boiling point. This is very much by design.

Yes, the coolant loop is designed to be operated under pressure, however being able to drive with a coolant leak under sub optimal conditions is very important.

Further, engines are designed to operate at unusually high external temperatures as temperatures up to 134f / 56.7°C have been recorded, though not nessisarily with a leak. Note, road surfaces can be significantly above ambient temperatures.

No cars, in the real world, are driving around with significant coolant leaks. End of story. Talk to any repair shop.

That's the crux of my argument. There is no scenario where one can continue to drive a car with a coolant leak. This kills the engine.

Our discussion feels like a mechanic arguing with an engineer. Probably because that's exactly what's happening.

Even ICE cars use oversized grilles mostly as decoration. Look at the Ford Focus (http://i.imgur.com/DEhSO19.jpg), actual vents could be much smaller.

> The result: the controls of modern aircraft look very similar to those from the 1930s.

http://magazin.lufthansa.com/content/uploads/2016/07/A380-80...

http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/1/1/0898115....

LOL. The "explanation" in the article is mostly poppycock. Modern avionics are based on engineering of human factors. There's no inherent desire for skeuomorphism or even traditionalism. Control modalities that have been tested to work better than potential modern replacements tend to stay, that is all. In military tactical aircraft the differences are even more stark. On the smaller GA scale of aircraft, it isn't so much traditionalism, as economics.

"the cockpits of the most high-tech airplanes are still laden with analogue dials, levers and knobs" , too bad car manufacturers aren't so careful with their infotainment consoles.

I'm lucky I still have knobs/buttons on mine, but the more expensive console option did away with all of that and uses an infuriating touch screen slider for the volume... that even must be navigated to to operate.

You can accurately adjust a rotating knob without looking. They have real benefits that you can't replace with software.

Too bad more and more car manufacturers moved into gizmo mode. I think I will never buy tablet-car that have no physical knobs for basics controls.

I even see a large dropoff in usability between my commuter vehicle, which has knobs and levers, and my spouse's vehicle, which has buttons.

What makes it worse is that they are unlit buttons.

I can quite easily adjust the environmental controls in my vehicle without looking at them, or with a brief glance. In the other car, which I generally only drive at night anyway, I have to at minimum turn on the map light, and sometimes have to stop the car and look down at the mess of 20 identical-feel buttons to push the correct one.

The button I really hate is the "mode" button. It is furthest from the driver's seat, and switches between defrost, defrost + low vents, high vents, high vents + low vents, low vents. It doesn't click or beep or give any kind of audio signal. You can't tell by feel. You can either look down at the LCD display to see what it's doing, or you can wait a few seconds for the actuators to adjust the airflow, and then hit the button again if it wasn't what you wanted. This button's function is fulfilled by a knob in my car, and I prefer it that way.

I can't even imagine a touchscreen that doesn't even have the tactile-kinesthetic advantage of the fixed-position buttons. How many seconds will I need to look away from the road in order to turn on the AC and blow it at the inside of the windshield if the glass starts to fog up on a hot, humid night?

Is there a car with a touch screen but without volume controls on the steering wheel? Carmakers are racing to add more and more buttons [1]

[1] http://uploads.haystak.com/Production_Templates/Images/2017/...

There is an incredible subculture for denim, distressing jeans the old fashioned way, no skeuomorphism here. The pre-WW2 production methods produced a higher quality product (surprise?) but the small looms couldn't produce it fast enough or cheap enough and were sent overseas. The Japanese have carried on producing proper American work wear, while American brands largely produce a simulacrum of American work wear. Sad fact, Cone Mills is shutting down after more than a century, last of its kind in the US.

Can you give me some proof, not opinion or social sales speak, that the japanese stuff is "better"? Also how is it comparable to actual work wear sold in the US, like carhart/etc or safety gear?

Plenty of Japanese stuff isn't better.

Uniqlo sells a variety of jeans. While cheap and good for the price, it isn't exactly high quality.

Is carhart really work wear? All the cool kids wore carhart in junior high 15 years ago where I lived.

> Is carhart really work wear?

Yes. It made the to 'cool' on the back of the rugged reputation, but Carhartt jackets are still a common sight on construction sites, out hunting, and so on. The jackets at least really are that good - waterproof and extremely sturdy.

It's sort of the same role Red Wing boots have slipped into - they count as cool now, but they're still totally viable as heavy workwear.

I'd guess they're in a similar position to North Face, who realized there's a lot more people that want to look fashionable than people who need -50F clothing, or even people who actually ski in that temperature range instead of hiding at the bar...

Pretty much, yeah. They still make good gear, but so does North Face. There's an interesting split between outdoor companies that have made this switch (e.g. North Face) and ones that really haven't (e.g. Black Diamond). It seems like some companies have specialized in gear that no one wears for style, and the rest have hybridized.

Well there's also the like of eddie bauer which went from totally hunting/outdoor casual wear to 100% style wear.

Doesn't Uniqlo manufacture their products in the same Chinese (and Bangladesh) factories as American brands?

Note that he said higher quality, and not better. There is a bit of a difference, as better could mean different things to different people.

You can find plenty of things about the (raw) denim subculture as far as Japan goes, this is probably a decent intro article: https://www.heddels.com/2013/06/what-makes-japanese-denim-so...

Note that none of these brands are really literal workwear. They're not competing at all with carhartt (Most of these pairs will run you $300 at least eg.), and almost everybody who buys a pair is going to buy them for the experience/authenticity and aesthetic (Americana)

Quality is qualitative not quantitative.

An incredible amount of effort goes into making worn and distressed denim. Here's the web site of a jeans pre-washing plant.[1] Services offered include "Crinkle Effects, Grinding/Damaging, Scrunch/ Crumple, Hand Scraping, Stone Wash, Acid Wash, Enzyme Wash, Sand Blasting Wash".

[1] http://www.mahmudgroup-bd.com/mahmud-washing-plant-limited

I'm sure there are Japanese brands that produce great jeans. However I bough a few pairs of random Made In Japan jeans when I was in Tokyo a few years ago and they haven't held up any better (or worse) than any other random pair of halfway decent jeans I've bought from American or European brands.

William Gibson's Zero History goes into a bit of detail on this, including a mission to track down a supposedly secret brand of jeans.

And the whole Buzz Ricksons bomber jacket bit from Pattern Recognition goes down the same road.

The makers of the Rickson's have exaggerated this, but only very slightly, and done a hundred other things, tiny things, as well, so that their product has become, in some very Japanese way, the result of an act of worship. It is an imitation more real somehow than that which it emulates.

Something definitely caught Gibson's eye about Japan and imitative fashion, though I don't have the first-hand experience to see how accurate his take is. It definitely describes a trait I've seen in other replicas and exports, though; Japanese whiskey is an obvious example.

Yes, I'd forgotten about the Buzz Rickson!

I'm not inclined in any way to follow fashion but I was really taken with Gibson's attention to detail in these books. He has a way of imparting curiosity about the seemingly mundane and I have started to pay attention to similar traits in clothing.

For my favorite bit of Gibson covering the mundane: https://www.gwern.net/docs/japanese/2002-gibson

That's a whole article about the art of mud-ball shining, and it's fascinating.

(It's also an intriguing taste of how Gibson got started on his last decade of topics. Otaku, crafting perfectionism, "the absolute narrowing of personal bandwidth", and so on.)

The coolest part about that I learned recently while looking into bomber jackets: it turns out life now imitates art, as Buzz Rickson got so many queries they asked Gibson for permission to make the black bomber jacket he describes in the novel (Gibson had misremembered the color). So a few years later, you could go and buy a William Gibson Rickson bomber jacket: https://williamgibsonblog.blogspot.com/2005/12/ Believe they're still making them. (Costs something like $600 depending on how savvy you shop and whether you're willing to go used.)

I don't go for distressed, but I do actually prefer the modern type fabrics that have some elastane woven in, it is much more comfortable than old fashioned denim.

Architecture is full of further examples of useless design features, from facades to fascia, to non-load bearing columns. There are entire books (even novels) on this subject.

Not all product design is about functionality.

Emotional Design by Don Norman is my favourite book on the subject:

https://www.amazon.com/Emotional-Design-Love-Everyday-Things...

What people forget is that looking nice is also a function.

Utilitarian design is unsufferable -- like those soviet-era buildings...

Brutalism is super cool though.

Only if you don't have to live in it.

I grew up in a soviet block and thinking about it gives me anxiety.

In design work (print, web) where it can't do much damage, yes.

In residential and public buildings, not so much.

The history of GUI icons is full of this stuff...

A pencil for "edit" even though you have a computer now.

A floppy disk for "save" even though they went out in the 90s.

Manila file folders for files/directories even though few people use them anymore.

Wristwatches, and even more old-school: hourglasses, for wait time.

...

A magnifying glass for search.

An ancient-looking camera for screenshots, even though no camera is involved and most people take photos on their phone nowadays.

In recent years the floppy disk icon and the hourglass have started falling out of fashion. Sometimes save is a sort of slab with an arrow https://openclipart.org/image/2400px/svg_to_png/32251/docume... though loads of places still uses an old-skool 3.5" floppy.

The hourglass is often just a spinner now.

The pencil is everywhere, though what else could you use? It means more than "pencil" now, I see that and think edit.

The hourglass is still the equivalent of a spinner. The spinner didn't replace the hourglass as more as became another option for the same thing. An hourglass is still representative of time passing while you are waiting on something. Which is different than a save button referring to an object that you once actually saved data to. The floppy as a save icon was just a bad idea at the time as there were other things to save to.

Your camera example made me think of how digital cameras often have a shutter sound effect when taking a photo.

But the audio feedback that it took a picture is actually useful. Sure, it could be a different sound, but there should be a sound?

Why a sound? Because my eye is busy composing the view. I don't want to have to look at some magic place in the view to see if a light flashes or an icon comes up or whatever.

I totally agree. I just think the shutter noise is a bit of audio skeuomorphism.

The sound effect is a pretty good privacy feature - especially in Japan apparently.

https://www.engadget.com/2016/09/30/David Eppsteinjapans-noisy-iphone-problem/

> Manila file folders

TIL why OpenStack's NFS-as-a-service offering is called Manila. :)

I once showed my students an image of a floppy disk and asked them what it was. One kid said it was a 3D printed Save icon.

I had to stop reading when they dismissed analog dials. My car and every thing I own would be easier to use with analog dials.

As a photographer, I totally agree. Much easier to change settings when they're physically on the body or lens.

They also failed to mention the important role of car engine noise in alerting vision-impaired pedestrians to oncoming traffic.

You don't even have to be vision impaired to benefit from this. If you are walking along a narrow road or alleyway and a car approaches from behind, the noise will alert you and you can move accordingly.

Indeed, we can use an expansive definition of "vision-impaired" that includes people looking at their phones and people without 360-degree panoramic X-ray vision.

I just wish designers would bring back good old analog knobs for radio/HVAC controls. "Automatic Climate Control" systems are bromcing increasingly common even on base model cars and it is slowly driving me insane. Cars are not houses, they do not have the insulation or internal volume needed to maintain a set temperature within 1-2 degrees, plus the enormous amount of glass compared to other surfaces turns them into a greenhouse even in cold but sunny weather.

I don't want to play the guessing game of "does setting the temperature at 68 mean I'll get cold or lukewarm air right now?" All I'm left with is a choice between full cold (60F) and full hot (90F) if I'm not in the mood for the computer's guessing games. When I want cold air, I want cold air. When I want lukewarm air, I want lukewarm air. When I have to pick a set point, I get air that isn't right half the time its running. What's worse is that many systems, like that on my Nissan Altima, will override the A/C selector switch. That means I can't help but run the A/C compressor, wasting gas, when I could just be drawing in outside air when the temperature is just fine.

Radios have been terrible for a long time now but the shift to user-unfriendly HVAC controls is the last straw for me.

Don't forget designs that provide negative value. Mobile micro-payments, addiction-forming designs, "subscribe to our spam" pop-ups...

Aside, there's no evidence that DVORAK is better than QWERTY, and the origin story of QWERTY presented here is a common misconception.

> there's no evidence that DVORAK is better than QWERTY

Here's my go-to reference: http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/carpalx/?keyboard_layouts

This is worth reading. Someone made a serious effort to quantify differences in effort and strain between keyboard layouts. Thanks for sharing the link!

And here's mine: https://www.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/keys1.html

Can't wait for my next phone to come with tail fins.

(This article could have been better titled by the BBC as "vestigial traces of older products in the design of newer ones.")

And for those lucky enough to never have seen them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_tailfin

I like tailfins. Not all of them, but there's a few that look nice.

So do I. I wouldn't mind a return to some of the 50's/60's automotive aesthetics. It could look pretty futuristic at times. One of my favourite photos of Chicago: https://68.media.tumblr.com/67951c2780fe5c66863c2a31caa4d989...

The Volvo P1800.

Think my phone would be faster with a set? It could be an after market item, like a spoiler!

> In the United States, wagons were increasingly common on the roads. Drawn by up to 20 animals, they were a popular way of transporting goods over long distances – and the men helming these vehicles liked to drive on the right. They’d sit on the rear leftmost horse, so it was easier to make sure oncoming traffic didn’t get too close if it was also on the left.

Why did drivers sit on the leftmost horse?

so it was easier to make sure oncoming traffic didn’t get too close if it was also on the left.

But that just re-raises the question of why people switched to driving on the right. The article says riders used to ride on the left, then wagon drivers started sitting on the left, so wagons started driving on the right. Why did wagon drivers started sitting on the left, in a world where people were riding on the left?

For context, at this time in history, the side of the road used was mostly determined by custom and convenience - there wasn't enough traffic for there to be established law.

In the case of these large wagon train drivers, the drivers, being mostly right handed, wanted to use their crop or whip in their right hand while being able to reach both lines of horses. This dictated that riding on the leftmost horse was most convenient.

Conversely, a wagon driver in a (relatively) cramped and crowded city such as London would sit on the right side so as to be able to ensure that his whip did not accidentally hit passers-by, as the direction of travel of the whip from a right-handed person is toward the left. This concern was largely not present in the wide-open spaces of the US.

Wanting your whippin' arm lined up center makes sense, but it doesn't explain swapping both the side the driver sits on and the side of the road used by the vehicle. If you had free reign on street side, you'd sit on the side opposite your whipping arm because you could pick people up on either side (no safety preference) and would have more control over the whip. These probably changed at different times.

If you're on the left side of the street, picking passengers up on the left sidewalk, you'd want to sit on the left side to watch your whip. But, the driver is always on the side furthest from the curb, which makes me think it's more about making sure you don't hit oncoming traffic and picking up passengers.

Still doesn't explain the side of the street used. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a royal mannerism edict that said something like, "Gentlemen ambling in opposite directions should always pass one another on the left to ensure they may unsheathe their weapon, should the other engage in dishonorable combat."

Love this:

> This new material [copper] was much more versatile, since it didn’t have to be painstakingly chipped into shape. It led to a whole range of elaborate inventions, from crowns to ornamental sceptres. But many objects created in this era retained a decidedly stone-age look.

I like the fact that a part of the space shuttle's design can be traced back to Roman times:

http://www.astrodigital.org/space/stshorse.html

It's an amusing anecdote, but unfortunately false: https://www.snopes.com/history/american/gauge.asp

That article reads a bit strangely to me.

It basically says the anecdote is true, but because it's true for "trivial and unremarkable reasons" they are labeling it as false. Which doesn't seem to make sense to me personally.

Yes, snopes is strange like that. You'd think a site dedicated to debunking stories would take care to be precise with the arguments it makes, but snopes often comes across a bit sloppy. But here they still are, after all these years, apparently king of the funny little niche of debunking urban myths!

I read that entire article and came to the conclusion that, regardless of what they said at the top, they agree with most of the claim and only quibble on a few small points. In their own words, “Partly true, but for trivial and unremarkable reasons.”

Don't ruin a good story with facts :)

Those “watch” pockets in jeans are great for holding rings.

I keep my coins in there - keeps the size of my wallet down.

I've only ever heard people call them "coin pockets."

I only have one “key”, my car fob. It goes in that little pocket!

How do you get into your home?

I have an August lock

It doesn't seem like that device really adds any more security (it appears to be advertised as being one of the main benefits), as anyone can still pick the deadbolt lock from the outside using a bump key or something. Convenience sure, but not security. Sure, you might know when someone compromises the lock, but the burglar would be gone before the cops show up anyways.

Why do we keep insisting on stuffing these phone-home-devices into ever increasing niches of our homes and lives that makes it easier for the government to keep tabs on us? Don't peoples phones already drive them crazy enough as it is?

I'm sorry for taking this rant out on you. I'm sure this device met a need for you and that you're comfortable with it. I'm also pretty sure this doesn't fit the topic of discussion here and I am willing to accept the consequences of that.

Oh it’s not at all. I particularly hate having things in my pocket. That’s my use case. And honestly I rarely close my windows or sliding glass door so it’s the least of my non-concerns.

Check out the defcon video where it gets owned up and down[1] though if you want to see red strikethroughs on all of the security claims.

[1] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MMB1CkZi6t4

Ha! Great stuff. Thanks for being a good sport.

Back in the day, a Zippo lighter.

Perfect for a Bic lighter

I wear Daily contacts, and I keep a spare pair in the pocket watch pocket of all my jeans. Super useful, especially if I crash at a friend's place over night.

That's a great idea, but what kind of case do you keep them in? The standard ones are far too bulky for that purpose, for my liking.

Now they are perfect for AirPods.

My mustache wax pocket!

Or my old iPod Nano (RIP)

I've always used them exclusively for guitar picks.

Johnny pocket.

The cocaine pocket

Really interesting. What other examples can you think of?

Scroll lock, break/pause and sys rq keys on keyboards come to mind. They technically still are used for stuff but typically not what they were originally for and they could easily be removed or renamed, but still most full sized keyboards have them.

Many, many things about computing apply, really, especially in operating systems and programming languages.

We still need 'break' but few systems still implement it. Let's leave it in the hope that someone reads the rainbow books and brings it back.

Hollerith punch cards (the overwhelming standard...there were other experiments though) were the size they were because Herman Hollerith wanted to use cash handling trays for managing the cards (they used to do statistics on them by lining them up and then manually running metal rods through the holes to see which ones were universal their set! No kidding.). The federal dollars back then were larger than the reserve notes we use today in the US.

By the way the usually had rounded corners for the same reason rolodex and library card file cards usually did: less likely to become damaged and then caught in the machine. Whoever wrote that article didn't remember or perhaps had never actually seen, much less used these technologies.

My favorite of these fossilized design elements though is on hearses in the US. Ever notice that they have a funny shape, like an elongated italic "S" on the side? It's actually a completely deracinated coach spring! When people started using motorized vehicles to transport coffins, they still liked to use a horse coach for more "formal" occasions like funerals (and coronations...) -- think of JFK's funeral or Queen Elizabeth (mother of the current Queen). Eventually to make the hearses seem more fancy they glued that stupid thing on.

Another great one is the fossilized fashions of times gone by. Why do some banks still have fancy fronts or a logo with columns? Because back when banks actually kept their cash around they wanted to show off that they both had a solid building and were profitable enough to spend money on the expensive stuff kinds used...like marble. Nowadays if you visit someone really really rich with a modern house (i.e. castle) it's very often ultra high end glass and steel (Not just California, all over the globe) or exotics (think Geahry). The merely very wealthy are more likely to use the wealth signifiers of the "old days" (gold, crystal, marble).

> Hollerith punch cards

Ever wonder why a "standard terminal screen" size defaults to 80 columns?

Because of punch cards - a standard punch card has 80 columns (rows vary, but a standard was 10-12 rows), and IBM made this standard on the PC for display to be able to show a punch card data on the screen.

Likely this comes from dumb serial terminals of the era...so the standard carried over, for backwards compatibility.

> Because of punch cards - a standard punch card has 80 columns (rows vary, but a standard was 10-12 rows), and IBM made this standard on the PC for display to be able to show a punch card data on the screen.

> Likely this comes from dumb serial terminals of the era...so the standard carried over, for backwards compatibility.

Hey, I am from the serial dumb terminal era, which really only goes back to the 1960s! But you're right, that's where the 80 columns came from, and even as the tech got better, all that happened is we got more rows (24 was quite common, then to be exotic 48). I was already using bit mapped displays and mice in the late 70s when the 48 row terminals showed up (I had one in my office in school; I didn't rate a lispm terminal. Had to go to work for that). I wrote a lot of code on Ann Arbor Ambassador 80x48 terminals.

I don't know where the 132 column printer "standard" came from. That's the stuff that printed on the green and white paper (first chain printers -- wow!) then dot matrix and finally daisy wheel. Not sure if there were golf ball printers that weren't typewriters but I was never an IBM user. I never saw a 132 column terminal -- it's possibly you could get a VT100 into that mode, I'm not sure.

Remember, the character generation etc was often hard wired!

I still use my terminals in 80 or 132 character mode. Actually, since they are "soft" I use them in 81 & 133 character mode to avoid spurious wrapping.

> I don't know where the 132 column printer "standard" came from.

Back in 1959, the IBM 1401's printer (the 1403) is what made 132 columns standard. But I haven't been able to figure out why they went with 132 columns. I discussed this with the 1401 team at the Computer History Museum and nobody came up with a good explanation. There's no solid technical or business reason for 132 columns.

Perhaps 11 inches wide times 12 columns per inch?

Interesting thought.

According to wiki, the printer used 10cpi though. Which suggests 132 columns plus margins on 14" paper. But that still doesn't answer why 132 and not 130 or 136 or whatever.

Other variants of the printer had 100 columns (11" paper?) or 120 columns (what size paper?).

Edit: Looking for more details on paper sizes for the 1403 printer, I find that the 132 column model was capable of simultaneously printing up to eight 1.5" adding machine tapes (13 chars per tape), or up to four 3.1" adding machine tapes (29 chars per tape), with a few columns lost due to margins and spacing between the tapes. Perhaps that was a factor in determining the 132 value?

> I find that the 132 column model was capable of simultaneously printing up to eight 1.5" adding machine tapes...

WEIRD! What's the use case for printing large numbers of adding machine tapes in parallel? I don't believe there were electronic cash registers in that period so I can't imagine it would be for auditing receipt tapes (and anyway, would you use, you know, the computer for that?).

Yeah, kind of puzzled about that myself. But see for yourself, on page 41:

http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/ibm/1403/GA24-3073-8_...

> I never saw a 132 column terminal -- it's possibly you could get a VT100 into that mode, I'm not sure.

If you had the Advanced Video Option installed, there was definitely a 132-column mode available via \033[?3h (with \033[?3l to return to 80-column). The (very few) VT100s that my high school had were so equipped.

The VT102 came with the Advanced Video Option preinstalled.

> Hollerith punch cards (the overwhelming standard...there were other experiments though) were the size they were because Herman Hollerith wanted to use cash handling trays for managing the cards

Do you have a reference for this? There seems to be a bunch of stories floating around about this. (Wikipedia says he initially proposed smaller cards and it just developed somehow, there is your variant, there is the story that his employees were arguing about it and he just slammed a note on the desk to end the discussion, ...)

Here's a reference (not sure how reliable) but it does point out the treasury's handling hardware which is credible (at that point census bureau was in the treasury department): http://whatis.techtarget.com/reference/History-of-the-punch-... :

> Prior to 1929, this was a standard size for many US banknotes, and Hollerith apparently chose it so that he could store cards in boxes made for the Treasury Department.

Funny side note: in 1983 I was in the PRC (just opening up -- the commune system was still in place for example). I visited a textile factory, where people were astonished at how excited I was about their ancient looms (old European machines packed up and shipped to China in the 60s). I didn't care about the output but took pictures of the huge Jacquard cards that drove the patterns. IIRC they were rectangular, about a meter across diagonally.

There's a certain class of 20/21st c. up-market housing in the UK's home counties that comes with a stuck-on pseudo-Georgian portico.

https://www.cranbornestone.co.uk/Assets/User/616-Portico_A_2...

It's entirely for show - it certainly doesn't keep the rain out, like a real porch - and IMO it looks ridiculous, especially on a house that isn't particularly grand or large.

Fake Tudor-esque stuff is also common; wood just stuck onto a usually brick house.

>But the public like cars to look a certain way.

Meh, this isn't all that true in my opinion. A properly designed "grill-less" car can be just as popular if not moreso than a design that adheres to the status quo. Just look at every Corvette from arguably the C2* through the C5. The C4* definitively removed the grill from the design but the C2 and C3* worked them into the nose in a way completely unlike that of a traditional "grill". Then you have the case of the Citroen DS* which has been lauded as one of the most beautiful/cutting edge designs of all time.

The lasting popularity and perception of these cars proves that "grills" aren't necessary, it just takes more artistic skill to design a pleasing shape without them.

>Though electric cars don’t need cooling grilles – batteries don’t get as hot and they’re chilled in a different way.

Now this just isn't true at all unless I'm unaware of some new design that diverges entirely from the Tesla/Nissan/GM school of electric vehicle design. While the radiator of a Tesla Model S*, X, or 3 may be much smaller than that of a typical ICE powered car, it is still large enough to require meaningful airflow through the front end/underbody. The issue with consumer perceptions of the "grill-less" designs isn't that they are innately undesirable, it's that all of the current mass production electric cars are either woefully bland or amateurishly designed. I personally think Tesla's design language is unimaginative and would carry the perception of being 10 years out of date if made by any other brand. Also, even if it was possible to passively cool the battery and motor of an electric car (while still meeting modern expectations of performance), the HVAC system still needs airflow for the AC condenser.

Sources: C2: http://www.usedcorvettesforsale.com/img/icons/c2-corvette.jp...

C3: https://fthmb.tqn.com/gmQGeIVkCGfb6anH9CTM6jBmLuA=/768x0/fil...

C5: http://image.superchevy.com/f/9271396+w640+h640+q80+re0+cr1+...

Citroen DS: https://www.classicdriver.com/sites/default/files/styles/two...

Tesla Model S Radiator: http://www.r8talk.com/gallery/data/500/Front_Radiators.jpg

> Though electric cars don’t need cooling grilles – batteries don’t get as hot and they’re chilled in a different way – many have them anyway to avoid looking weird.

s/many/all the ass-backward archaic car companies/

Is Tesla is the only one that doesn’t have a grill?

I don’t know if my volt actually has openings but it does have the grill. Totally cool looking -_-

The Hyundai Ioniq electric has a stupid grey panel (regardless of body colour) where the grill would go which makes it stand out. On the hybrid versions this is the grill but on the pure electric they could have made it body-coloured or a fake grill.

Tesla's cars have cooling grills in the front, they're down low and small enough that people don't notice them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Leaf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_Zoe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_i-MiEV

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Up#E-up

The Chevy Bolt shares a platform with the Chevy Sonic. The grille will probably go away when it gets enough volume for its own platform.

My Prius Prime selectively opens and closes the front grille for cooling vs. aerodynamics[1] which is clever, but I will have to hope its front sensors save me from ever damaging it...

1: http://toyotanews.pressroom.toyota.com/releases/nyas+toyota+...

_design features which are included because we value them (apparently) but they serve little or no purpose_

well.. sure. I mean, once you have Helvetica and Times, all the other roman fonts are basically wasting my time.

I would argue the rivets still serve a purpose. Maybe its how I wear them, but I have torn the pockets off jeans.

The Iconography of Instagram and the resurgence of Polaroid style cameras..

The iconography of the floppy disk as 'save to disk' icon probably won't last much longer mind you.

> The iconography of the floppy disk as 'save to disk' icon probably won't last much longer mind you.

What do you think will replace it? Or are you talking about the idea of an explicit ‘save’ step largely disappearing?

Save logo will probably be phased out with a 'upload to cloud' logo

I often see the floppy disk image and think “WTF is that still doing there?”

I can’t imagine what my kids will think it is. My parents are completely confused by the power button. My mom thinks it’s a stick figure finger pushing a button.

Relevant... https://twitter.com/TheLazyDog_/status/316681011457048578

Coasters with sharp metal edges on them are indeed a novelty. /s

I hope this doesn't happen. I don't want to upload things in the cloud. I pay 20 soles for every 700 MB and I can't afford uploading everything to the cloud. I need to store things locally on my file system and maybe offload them to a USB-stick if I need more space... But not to the cloud...

Explicitly saving will probably disappear, it nearly has already for a lot of people, files and folders as UI primitives will probably follow. I also predict that this will create more problems than it solves, the average person will be heavily restricted in what the can get a computer to do.

I predict that I'll stick with systems that don't go that route, whenever possible.

I was thinking this should be a flash drive.

Jeez I can't even remember the last time I saw one of those things much less used ones.

Maybe we should go backwards to a feather pen, or a chisel for cuneiform wedges?

(or a cloud logo, a CRISPR logo, a blockchain logo, an AI logo or whatever the next buzzword is!)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com