Matter/Anti-Matter

Read all 'lcd' posts in Matter/Anti-Matter
February 12, 2008 2:14 PM PST

A hard look at digital picture frames

by Adam Richardson
  • 1 comment
Kodak Wireless Digital Picture Frame

Kodak Wireless Digital Picture Frame

(Credit: Kodak)

David Pogue has written up a review of seven LCD picture frames (you know, the kind that sit on a desk or mantlepiece and have pictures you've taken pushed to them by various means), and his critique is not pretty. He lays into most of them pretty harshly and concludes that most have had some very basic things screwed up by inattention to the user experience. Why, he asks, can't the manufacturers be bothered to do what's right?

I'm sure they have all kinds of excuses for compromise: "That would cost money," "That would set us back a month," "That would limit sales in Eastern Europe," whatever.

But you don't have to have an M.B.A. to understand that refusing to compromise on design, for any reason, can lead to fantastic commercial success. Look at Apple, Google, Sonos, R.I.M. (makers of the BlackBerry), or (in its glory days) Palm.

So what goes through the minds of executives who don't sweat the small stuff? Don't they realize that critics and bloggers will find and publicize the limitations? Don't they realize that customers nowadays can compare notes, can warn each other away? And in a crowded field like digital frames, why on earth can't they see that the only way to differentiate is to be better than the other guys?

Many of the things he points out are indeed not very bright ways to handle things. But I can sympathize with a manufacturer executive Pogue quotes: "Consumer electronics is a very difficult business. It's difficult to get it right." Apple, Google, Sonos, R.I.M and (used to be) Palm only make it look easy. When it's done well it seems shoulder-shruggingly obvious. When it's done badly it's screamingly obvious.

Read David's review.
December 13, 2007 10:50 AM PST

What is the cost of "vampire energy"?

by Adam Richardson
  • 7 comments
Vampire Energy graphic (Credit: GOOD Magazine)

I've been curious recently about how much electricity all our devices that stay plugged in all the time and in some sort of standby mode consume, even when we are not actually using them. And what does that translate into in terms of real money?

Coincidentally, GOOD Magazine has created this handy chart that graphically depicts the impact.

The real surprise on it is plasma TVs--who knew they were sucking so much energy when "off"? And that game console of yours? It's costing you $25 a year just sitting there, even when you're not using it. Have more than one console? Well, do the math...

The chart does not include all the wall-warts for cell phones, laptops, cameras, and the like that tend to stay plugged into the wall (and consuming some amount of electricity) even when not actually charging their devices. By some estimates these are responsible for 4 percent of all U.S. electricity consumption, equivalent to almost 100 million tons of oil. Hmm, no wonder the U.S. is 5 percent of the world's population but consumes 23 percent of its energy...

  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

15 sites that went kaput in 2009

Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.

Top 10 news stories of the decade

Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.

About Matter/Anti-Matter

Tim Leberecht and Adam Richardson both work for Frog Design, a consulting firm specialized in designing innovative products and services for Fortune 500 clients. On the Matter / Anti-Matter blog, they engage in a debate around questions they face day-to-day in their work, using convergence/divergence as a lens through which to look at the pressing issues in business, culture, and technology. What makes a successful convergent product or a successful divergent innovation? Is convergence a myth that users don't really care about, or is the current state of convergence just not satisfying enough for them to embrace? How much divergence of innovation is good, and when does it just become confusing? How do you stay on top of people's ever changing needs and wants?

They are members of the CNET Blog Network and are not employees of CNET.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Matter/Anti-Matter topics

Most Discussed

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right