For the past few months several people have emailed us, asking about solutions for carrying the Glif around on a keychain. We actually had a keychain hole in our original design for the Glif, but removed it for various reasons, namely that it increased the cost of the mold quite a bit. The solution we came up with, however, is much better than a permanent hole in the Glif itself.
The trick is to use the tripod thread as the means to attach the Glif to the keychain. I personally use the Podmount from Luma. It’s pricey ($15), but high quality. If you look elsewhere for something cheaper, all you basically need is a 1/4”-20 screw with a loop on the end. Please do let me know if you are able to find a cheaper solution.
The great thing about this setup is the Glif can easily be removed from the keychain without having to remove the entire attachment. Simply unscrew the Glif to use, and then screw back on when finished.
Devir Kahan: The Great Case Debate -
I don’t use a case on my iPhone, and most probably never will. Apple made the thing to be a beautiful little block of glass. Precision engineered to be as slim and light as possible. It just feels perfect when you hold it. A case - any case - ruins that. If you have an iPhone and use a case, take it off for a second. Just hold it ‘naked’ for a second, and remember how it’s supposed to feel.
This was our thinking when we designed the Glif, which only fits a “naked” iPhone 4. Why cover up such a beautiful piece of industrial design?
(Source: devirkahan)
Universal Plug by Kim Seung Woo (via Reddit)
Edit: A reader pointed out that Breville implements this very design in some of their own products. See page 6 (PDF).
“A good idea, well-crafted and pursued with passion, doesn’t need a gatekeeper’s stamp of approval to succeed.” — Yancey Strickler, in his blog post introducing Kickstarter to the world two years ago today. Happy birthday!
I love music videos. For a short, misguided time earlier in my life I wanted to be a music video director, no doubt influenced by the Directors Label DVDs. What appealed to me, I suppose, were the inherent constraints of music videos. The best videos tend to encapsulate a single idea. Songs are typically 3-4 minutes in length, enough time to execute a concept but not too long to bore the audience with it (ideally). The thought of making a full length film seemed like an impossibly complex task, but music videos, I could understand.
The role of music videos in today’s media landscape seems unclear. Aside from some notable examples pushing the boundaries (eg. OK Go and Arcade Fire), most people seem disinterested and consider music videos a relic of a bygone era.
I had a realization the other day. The iPad is the first video consumption device that allows for easy orientation switches. It’s actually designed that way, with an equal bezel around the edge of the screen and no discernible top or bottom (Home button notwithstanding). The same can’t be said for movie theaters, televisions, laptops, portable dvd players, etc., all designed to view content in one (immovable) orientation.
I would be interested to see a director take advantage of this unique characteristic, and create a “tablet only” music video that utilizes all four orientations. The viewer would be free to rotate the device as they saw fit, and watch the video from several different perspectives, lending a bit of interactivity to the experience. I am envisioning a single-shot video in an enclosed space, where the floor, ceiling, and side walls map to each edge of the tablet, and action takes place along each edge. Think Virtual Insanity mixed with Inception. Of course, that’s just one idea, but this concept could obviously be applied to any number of ideas. The “free-rotation” concept isn’t limited to music videos either, but I feel anything longer than a song’s length would tire the user, and the gimmick would wear off.
Michel Gondry or Spike Jonze, if you’re reading, I fully expect you to jump on this.
A couple weeks ago I posted a hack that allowed a Smart Cover to be attached to the original iPad. The solution was incredibly simple — gluing a few magnets to the spine — but not as easy on the eyes. I also noticed, unsurprisingly, it was not as comfortable to hold along the left edge.
After some tinkering, Tom (of Studio Neat) came up with a 3D model that solves both of these problems. We sent it off to Shapeways to be printed, tested it out, and it works as advertised. It essentially acts as a “track” for proper magnet placement and covers the unsightly magnets.
This hack requires a 3D printed part, 20 rare earth disc magnets, and some super glue. The magnets should be ordered from K&J Magnets, the D201-N62 model specifically. The magnets themselves are cheap ($2.60 for 20) but you might want to team up with some friends to save on shipping.
For convenience, we have uploaded the 3D part to Shapeway’s online store, where it can be purchased directly. There is a $25 purchase minimum in the Shapeways store, so again, best to team up with some comrades. The color options include white, black, red and blue. We recommend black. You are also free to download the 3D model if you want to have it printed elsewhere. Download either of these files [igs | 3ds] if you would like to modify the model. Have at it.
Once you have all the parts, installation is fairly straight forward. Watch this video!
Lay the 3D printed part across the magnetized hinge on the Smart Cover. Place a small dab of glue in each slot. Simply hold a rare earth magnet near a slot and it will pop right in at the correct orientation. Repeat until all 20 slots are filled with magnets.
I used a bit of masking tape on the iPad to make sure I was positioning the 3D printed part properly. A touch of super glue is all it takes a affix the 3D printed part to the edge of the iPad. Of course, tape or some other adhesive could be used if the thought of supergluing something to your iPad makes you squeamish.
And that’s it. We’ve had fun with this little side project, but now it’s on to bigger things, like the Cosmonaut. Funding ends in 53 hours!
I’ve been maintaining The Russians Used a Pencil for 18 months now and realized I never properly introduced myself.
Hi, I’m Dan.
As you may know, I am one half of Studio Neat, along with design partner Tom Gerhardt. Tom and I both recently quit our full time jobs, and are now 100 percent dedicated to Studio Neat activities. I couldn’t be more excited to be moving full steam ahead with our business.
As a pleasant side effect, I hope to increase the quality and frequency of posts here on The Russians Used a Pencil. I started the blog as a place to celebrate simplicity and elegance in design. That will always be the main focus, but I am finding it to be a great space to discuss our design process at Studio Neat, as well as a place to toss random ideas and ruminations. Writing on this blog has been incredibly rewarding so far, and it has helped me grow as a writer and designer.
If you want to be kept in the loop, please feel free to subscribe to the RSS feed or follow @RussianPencil, which essentially acts as an RSS feed for Twitter. You can also follow @StudioNeat, if you are so inclined.
Onward!
“I originally pledged a bit more than the estimated fair-price-plus-shipping because I wanted to help subsidize someone… I never thought about the game theory applications or people trying to take advantage of others. I participated as a member of the little community. Every community has some people who are doing all they can, but are in circumstances that prevent them from doing more. And every community has freeloaders.” — Ruth Ann Harnisch
“It is interesting to look at this vs the Radiohead “In Rainbows” experiment. The big difference is that with this project, there is a physical object attached. Those “under paid” on In Rainbows were resulting in potential lost revenue, as they wouldn’t have been full-price customers in a normal situation. With a physical object that costs money to produce, the game changes.” — Jeffry Matthias
“I think it’s funny how everyone automatically places such a high value on this thing because of the $50k/3000 calculation. I asked myself how much I would pay for this simple item if it were an impulse buy at the registers at a place like Micro Center, and decided on $3. I didn’t think I was “freeloading” or screwing anyone over; I was using the opportunity given to tell the seller what I think their product is worth. It seems some people are forgetting that products are allowed to fail if they can’t be sold for a price people are willing to pay.” — Justin Cardinal
“I personally own two styluses and have backed another one here on Kickstarter. The fact that I was given the opportunity to pay what it’s worth *to me* was awesome. And so my pledge was less than the $16. On the plus side, I tweeted the link as well as posted it to Facebook. I also found this a great opportunity to introduce my teen to Kickstarter. He signed up and pledged as well. Sure, he didn’t put in a lot of $$$ but he’s actually really excited about getting in on the ground floor.” — Jose Lema
“I think this project would have hit well over the $50,000 needed if pledge amounts were public. Few people want to be caught at the $1 level, and plenty of people want to show how altruistic and giving they are. Anonymous actions encourage selfishness, while public actions encourage altruism.” — Corey Ward
“So once this project hits the $50k goal, won’t we see a lot of people dropping their pledges to $1?” — Zach Wendkos
“Bottom line: this should be the default for all Kickstarter project funding. Early adopters can get in for minimal contribution, they’ll be more apt to share to their circles, and it keeps you coming back to Kickstarter for more neat ideas to fund. The later you buy-in, the more it costs. (Of course this would be an optional project setting.)” — Benjamin Bertrand
Tom and I have been fascinated by the outcome (and subsequent discussion) of our pay-what-you-wish Kickstarter experiment for the Cosmonaut. We had no idea how this payment model would work out for a physical product, and were blown away that we made it 90% of the way to our funding goal in less than 48 hours. When the last of the 3000 slots was filled, those backers had accounted for $44,631, which averaged out to $14.87 per backer. Let’s first look at the dollar distribution:
The bulk of the funds raised were from people pledging in the $16-25 range, which, incidentally, spans the same range as the average needed ($16.67) to the suggested retail ($25). We also got a nice bump from individuals pledging $50 or more.
The backer distribution graph, below, better tells the story of how much each backer decided to pledge. The color bands in each bar distinguish the dollar increments in each respective range (eg. in the left most bar, the bottom light green represents the number of $1 backers, while the dark green on top represents $5 backers).
Just over 25% of the total backers pledged $1-5. The next most popular tier is $16-20, followed by $6-10. It’s also interesting to note that backers definitely prefer to pledge in $5 increments (as illustrated by the darkest shade of green).
We will continue to monitor the backer report, especially in regard to how people are adjusting their pledges.
I recently signed up for Basecamp to manage Studio Neat activities between Tom and myself. The 30-day free trial is about to expire, and they sent me an email:
Seems straightforward enough, and that’s the point. Simple, clear, concisely written copy. A thing of beauty.
A few months ago, right after the Glif Kickstarter campaign ended, I wrote a blog post about how most iPad styluses on the market today follow an incorrect cognitive mapping, in that they try to resemble a pen. The right shape to mimic — to match the low fidelity nature of capacitive touch screens — is a dry erase marker. I of course didn’t know it at the time, but this was the beginning of Studio Neat’s second product.
Tom and I have been researching, prototyping, and designing for the past few months (in synchrony with Glif work) and have come up with a solution that we think is pretty great. And now, once again, we are calling on Kickstarter to help make this idea a reality.
We had some hesitation about using Kickstarter again. We were worried that people would question our motives. Considering how overfunded our first campaign was, didn’t we have enough leftover for other projects? Our reasoning for returning to Kickstarter is two-fold. One, $50k is a ton of money to risk, no matter how much capital you have. And two, Tom and I are intentionally staying small, and continuing to operate as a two man operation. We see Kickstarter as the perfect tool for guys like us, to test out ideas we think may have legs. Maybe in the future if we decide to expand and grow this will no longer be needed, but for now, it just works too well to not use, in large part because of the amazing people that are willing to support our projects.
We also saw this as an opportunity to try something different. For this project, we are instituting a “pay-as-you-wish” system (a la Radiohead). This is the first we have heard of this being done for a physical, tangible product. Basically, you can pay any amount you feel this stylus is worth to you, but the pledge goal ($50,000) and pledge limit (only 3000 slots) will keep things in check, and hopefully create an interesting tension.
So, after receiving encouragement from the Kickstarter staff, we present: The Cosmonaut.
(View on Vimeo).
When the iPad 2 was announced, like most people, the part that I was most intrigued by was the new Smart Cover. I had nearly convinced myself it was reason enough to upgrade, but eventually calmed down and figured it would be wise to wait for the rumored Retina Display. I wondered though, if it would somehow be possible to retrofit the original iPad to utilize the Smart Cover. Turns out, it’s actually pretty simple.
Before ever seeing a Smart Cover in person, I figured this hack might need to be much more involved, perhaps even needing a 3D printed part that would interact with the hinge in some way. After getting the cover in the mail on Friday, I realized that the solution could be much simpler. The flat edge of the iPad affords a perfect area to place a few thin magnets, and the hinge on the Smart Cover can lay flush across them. Coincidentally, the dimensions just happen to work out, and the right edge of the cover lines up nicely with the right side of the iPad.
I purchased several different types of rare earth magnets from K&J Magnetics. I ended up using block magnets, 3/8” x 3/16” x 1/32” (found here). These particular dimensions work nicely because they sit flush on the iPads edge. I wonder, however, if the round equivalent might feel a little nicer (no sharp edges). Shipping ended up costing more than the magnets themselves so if you are ordering try to team up with some friends.
To place the magnets, I stuck them first to the magnetized hinge of the Smart Cover. I slid them around until they became locked into a position. This ended being asymmetrical, but I didn’t mind. I then lined up the cover with the iPad and used masking tape to mark where the magnets should be placed. I wanted this to be a somewhat permanent solution, so I used super glue to affix the magnets to the iPad. If you are not so daring, or want to test it out to make sure you like it, just use transparent tape. Even though the super glue keeps the magnets secure and in place, they are actually pretty easy to remove by just “chipping” them off with a flathead screwdriver and a very light tap of the hammer.
All in all, I am pleased with how it turned out. The biggest downside is not being able to have the iPad automatically turn on when the cover opens (as in the iPad 2), but this will hopefully tide me over until the next revision.
Check out the video below (or on Vimeo) to see it in action.
It seems every time I rent a car I find something pretty offensive to report. Last weekend I rented a Toyota Corolla and was pretty befuddled by the windshield wiper control:
Not to be dramatic, but I could see a bad windshield wiper control design as being potentially dangerous; it would be terrible to be fumbling with one in a unfamiliar car after it suddenly begins to rain. Imagine trying to figure this out during a downpour:
I would suggest that the design should be standardized, in the same way turn indicators all function the same car to car, but that’s probably an impossible dream for a variety of reasons. It seems like most cars I’ve driven follow a similar pattern: push up to wipe once, push down incrementally to increase the speed, and pull forward to release washer fluid. After a cursory Google search, this is the best I could find:
Not sure why the mist functionality is duplicated; pushing up should run the wiper once. The fact that this design utilizes text makes me wonder if it’s even possible to have a clearly communicated windshield wiper control without text, by using icons only. Perhaps in car interface design, as in the Apple HIG, “a word is worth a thousand pictures.”
Edit: A reader pointed out that “mist” does in fact mean “one pass of the wipers,” used when the rain is “misting.” Anyone else confused by that? Why is the washer fluid icon repeated next to the “mist” indicator?