So they've been using this pole for 1,000 years. Yet I see it for 1 minute and I want to improve it.
Why? What makes me different from them? Why did they not try to improve it themself? What am I missing?
Steps for making a curved wooden yoke
1. Cut down a tree
2. Saw out a rectangular cross-section
3. Cut out rough outline of the curved pole
4. Whittle it down to the appropriate thickness
5. Sand down to smooth it out and reduce the possibility of splinters
End result: A single curved yoke and a lot of small pieces of wood that you can't do much else with. You could make more yokes with the rest of the tree, but each time you make one you will essentially waste the cutout section.
Steps for making a Bamboo carrying pole
1. Cut down a piece of bamboo
2. Cut a piece of the appropriate length
3. Split it down the middle
End result: Two carrying poles. The rest of the bamboo can then be cut to make even more carrying poles with practically zero waste.
So you see that the manufacturing processes are very different. The bamboo carrying pole can be made using just a machete with minimal skill or effort. For the wooden yoke you will need an ax to cut down the tree and various woodworking tools to shape the yoke. It also takes more time and care to carve the wood appropriately.
Another consideration is that trees take a relatively long time to grow, whereas bamboo is the fastest growing plant on earth.
Why split it, rather than just using the entire tubular pole? No doubt I'm overlooking an important feature. This is just for my curiosity.
> What makes me different from them?
You probably don't have the experience of use that comes with 1000 years. Or even one summer.
As I see it, the tool is already adequate. Especially in bamboo form, the pole has some flex and a smooth surface. Adding curved wood or fabric would cause additional rubbing wear. In the case of curved wood (and some of the prototypes), you lose versatility in how you can use it.
When these guys go up and down narrow stairs, they follow each other closely, each leading with one basket higher and in front. The designs that lock into the torso would make navigating steps and quick direction changes harder.
Imagine there was no plastic, no composite wood. You had to find a large piece of wood to do even a small design. Plus, if there was really a needs for alternatives, there was Chinese weelbarrow [0].
http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2011/12/the-chinese-wheelbarr...
What makes you think they haven't tried to improve it in a thousand years? Or that every other person that makes their own pole doesn't have some little tweak to improve it only for themselves?
> What am I missing?
I don't mean to be rude by saying this, but: humility?
Example: http://www.objectlessons.org/work-and-innovation-victorians/...
The difference is the availability of wood. You would need a truly epic bamboo bole to make anything like that, but one ordinary plank would suffice over here.
A) There is a hidden advantage of some sort to the current design that the designers in OP are not aware of or not taking account of. It could just be cost as another poster suggested, or something else.
B) No good reason at all, just tradition. I can't find it now, but there was a post on HN asking why we still used the traditional Western wheelbarrow in our countries, when the Chinese wheelbarrow (what a coincidence!) was so obviously superior. The Chinese wheelbarrow has the wheel in the middle, so the wheel bares the load and the human just needs to push/steer.
Or perhaps there are other reasons why the simple solution is preferred. I honestly don't know. What I wouldn't do is infer that they're all stupid because they've not thought to do what is obvious to you.