Wearing In

I caught a video clip in which a designer discussed the idea of items that "wear in" instead of wearing out. It's an interesting notion, and one that applies readily to physical objects: the pair of shoes that get more comfortable over time as the leather softens and molds to the wearer's feet, or the shirt that feels most comfortable when it's on the verge of being threadbare.

His premise was that objects should become more useful over time rather than less, and that age and use create patterns of wear that make them more comfortable or more efficient. It seemed a sophisticated way of making a common complaint: that things aren't made as well as they used to be, and that the demand for continual profit leads manufacturers to make things that will become useless over time to encourage consumers to replace them. Planned obsolescence as a source of revenue.

I considered this notion for a while, especially in terms of the digital media - not so much the objects we use, computers and cell-phones with a practical life of several months before a newer and better model makes comes along and the software companies no longer develop for them or support their "old" software. It seems that the digital media is inherently compelled to be new and different instead of old and familiar, and my sense is that's not always desirable.

There is a certain level of fascination with the new, but there is also a certain level of frustration. I knew how to use the last version of the software, but this upgraded version is completely different and I can't figure out how to make it do what I want (not to mention that it is loaded with features I will never use, consumes so much memory and processor I now need to upgrade my computer, etc.). I knew how to find things before the company redesigned its web site.

And this leads to another problem: what's the point in learning to use some computer software or a Web site if it's going to change in six months? My sense is software designers themselves are to blame for one of the biggest headaches they complain about: user stupidity. Nobody reads manuals anymore; nobody refers to the on-screen help; nobody invests much time in learning to use the software, but simply calls the support number with complaints that the software or Web site is badly designed.

And in this instance, I have to side with the users: it's too much to expect a user to learn and remember a sequence of actions to accomplish the same task when that sequence changes with every version upgrade or site redesign. The software wasn't designed to "wear in" - and what it wore out, ultimately, was the patience and tolerance of users.