And then there are companies that take good designs and engineering, and quietly scuttle them to be replaced with something far crappier. Why? To sell more of course. Iโm looking at you, Whirlpool.
Not sure you can say the Playstation controller was โimpossible to improveโ:
1995:
1997: (Dual Analog, no rumble)
1997: (Dualshock):
2000: (Dualshock 2):
2006: (SIXAXIS - Sony lost a rumble lawsuit and removed rumble as a feature):
2007: (Dualshock 3 - Rumble lawsuit settled):
2013: (Dualshock 4):
2020: (Dualsense)
2023: (Dualsense Edge):
I wonder what they can improve in the current more expensive fancy Dualsense.
Impossible is hiperbole.
The paperclip can definitely be improved. Itโs just that the way it is now is good enough, and the improvements arenโt probably not worth it.
Edit: Also, I donโt think I agree with some of his points. The design has to be ubiquitous? Why?! I can build one thing, never sell it or distribute it, and try to improve it until I canโt improve it anymore.
And he mentioned that the Sunbeam toaster could not be the de facto design today because back then it was expensive. Yeah, you know what was also expensive at the beginning? Hard drives. He ignores that manufacturing improvements make building things cheaper.
And a couple of more things. I decided to stop watching after a few minutes.
