Zen and the Art of Car Rentals
For this job, I have to rent cars somewhat frequently.
When I arrived in Providence, I wound up at first with a car I really disliked. I didn't feel totally safe driving it for a number of reasons, but my biggest pet peeves were what I thought of as design flaws. I felt like the car was designed for someone who wanted it to look cool, and who wasn't particularly concerned with functionality. I drove it for a day, and dad recommended that I go back to Budget and see if they could switch for me. They did and I like the new one much better, but it has gotten me thinking.
As a disclaimer I feel like I should reiterate that the things I didn't like about the first car were predominantly design-related. I know essentially nothing about those little car-related details such as handling, braking, horsepower and ... really whatever other technical things go into creating a car. All I really know about is my experience driving it. I realize that it is hardly the most important thing when it comes to cars, but... the car industry has a long tradition of producing cars that are supposed to somehow "stand in" for the driver's personality. Choosing a car is like picking your wardrobe. You're not going to go out on a brisk fall day in shorts and a tank top, but when you pick out your sweater, you're also going to want it to reflect who you are as a person.
I found it interesting to observe what a visceral reaction I had against the first car. Everything seemed in the wrong place, and everything seemed to be there mostly for the purpose of being cool (why would I ever need a keypad on my dashboard? Especially when the car is already voice activated and bluetooth enabled?). The biggest illustration of the "wrong-place-ness" was the steering wheel music controls. Normally, I think these are brilliant additions to cars, both convenience- and safety-wise. However, these controls somehow remained just out of reach of my already-long fingers. The control placement certainly -looked- good, but it totally undermined the entire point of having them on the steering wheel in the first place. It was so close to good design, but so far off, which is I think what made it particularly frustrating. Driving the car, I could tell that plenty of thought had gone into its design, but I felt like I could also tell that the thought went into the visual appeal and not the functional use of all of the pieces.
Just like the steering wheel controls sort of represent the design bummer of the first car, the second car has a similar representative feature. The steering wheel does have a set of (well-placed) controls, but the best nod to thoughtfulness is actually in relation to the in-console controls:
The gear shift (or whatever you call the automatic-car equivalent) is the perfect height and width for resting your forearm while you use the center controls. I have never seen one of them shaped quite like this, and I can't help but assume it was intentional. Its like the designers realized how frequently people put their arm there and incorporated the common workaround armrest into its own design. While I'm fiddling with the controls in the center, my arm rests absolutely perfectly. Its like the designers had anticipated a need I didn't even realize I had.
Interestingly enough, both cars are made by the same company, which brings me to another thought. How much is good design dependent on money? There is no doubt that the second car is the more expensive one. But is it necessarily the case that good design is expensive? I hope not, and I don't think so. It seems to me that design happens out of responses to constraints. Wouldn't cost be one of those constraints? Maybe it's a matter of prioritizing which constraints to satisfy.
I hope this entry didn't make sound like a jerk, "Oh look at her, getting to rent cars and complain about them and get new ones!" Oh well, I guess if I do, I do. By the way, I am eating some of the juiciest grapes I have ever encountered.
When I arrived in Providence, I wound up at first with a car I really disliked. I didn't feel totally safe driving it for a number of reasons, but my biggest pet peeves were what I thought of as design flaws. I felt like the car was designed for someone who wanted it to look cool, and who wasn't particularly concerned with functionality. I drove it for a day, and dad recommended that I go back to Budget and see if they could switch for me. They did and I like the new one much better, but it has gotten me thinking.
As a disclaimer I feel like I should reiterate that the things I didn't like about the first car were predominantly design-related. I know essentially nothing about those little car-related details such as handling, braking, horsepower and ... really whatever other technical things go into creating a car. All I really know about is my experience driving it. I realize that it is hardly the most important thing when it comes to cars, but... the car industry has a long tradition of producing cars that are supposed to somehow "stand in" for the driver's personality. Choosing a car is like picking your wardrobe. You're not going to go out on a brisk fall day in shorts and a tank top, but when you pick out your sweater, you're also going to want it to reflect who you are as a person.
I found it interesting to observe what a visceral reaction I had against the first car. Everything seemed in the wrong place, and everything seemed to be there mostly for the purpose of being cool (why would I ever need a keypad on my dashboard? Especially when the car is already voice activated and bluetooth enabled?). The biggest illustration of the "wrong-place-ness" was the steering wheel music controls. Normally, I think these are brilliant additions to cars, both convenience- and safety-wise. However, these controls somehow remained just out of reach of my already-long fingers. The control placement certainly -looked- good, but it totally undermined the entire point of having them on the steering wheel in the first place. It was so close to good design, but so far off, which is I think what made it particularly frustrating. Driving the car, I could tell that plenty of thought had gone into its design, but I felt like I could also tell that the thought went into the visual appeal and not the functional use of all of the pieces.
Just like the steering wheel controls sort of represent the design bummer of the first car, the second car has a similar representative feature. The steering wheel does have a set of (well-placed) controls, but the best nod to thoughtfulness is actually in relation to the in-console controls:
The gear shift (or whatever you call the automatic-car equivalent) is the perfect height and width for resting your forearm while you use the center controls. I have never seen one of them shaped quite like this, and I can't help but assume it was intentional. Its like the designers realized how frequently people put their arm there and incorporated the common workaround armrest into its own design. While I'm fiddling with the controls in the center, my arm rests absolutely perfectly. Its like the designers had anticipated a need I didn't even realize I had.
Interestingly enough, both cars are made by the same company, which brings me to another thought. How much is good design dependent on money? There is no doubt that the second car is the more expensive one. But is it necessarily the case that good design is expensive? I hope not, and I don't think so. It seems to me that design happens out of responses to constraints. Wouldn't cost be one of those constraints? Maybe it's a matter of prioritizing which constraints to satisfy.
I hope this entry didn't make sound like a jerk, "Oh look at her, getting to rent cars and complain about them and get new ones!" Oh well, I guess if I do, I do. By the way, I am eating some of the juiciest grapes I have ever encountered.