Dieter Rams (quote):
'I am troubled by the devaluing of the word 'design’. I find myself now being
somewhat embarrassed to be called a designer. In fact I prefer the German
term, Gestalt-Ingenieur. Apple and Vitsoe are relatively lone voices
treating the discipline of design seriously in all corners of their
businesses. They understand that design is not simply an adjective to place
in front of a product’s name to somehow artificially enhance its value. Ever
fewer people appear to understand that design is a serious profession; and
for our future welfare we need more companies to take that profession
seriously'.
Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/8555503/Dieter-Rams-Apple-has-achieved-something-I-never-did.html
> Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 09:06:33 +1000
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Whats' in a name - Industrial Design or Product Design
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Hi all,
> Thanks to all who have contributed valuable perspectives to the debate. Trawling through the numerous posts the last few days (no easy task with the way we receive jiscmail posts!) it confirms for me that others are just as curious as to how best describe our design filed (I'll avoid using the word profession at this stage). I've no strong opinion on the matter, other than I'm quite convinced, and others seem to concur, that Industrial Design and Product Design means different things to different people. Does this matter? Alfredo suggests - in the quest to find standardisation - "It may not be necessary (nor even advisable, or even more ‘designerly’)". As some of the other posts state that ambiguity is not so uncommon in other fields. For instance, Lubomir suggests that interior design v's interior architecture in the US may have a few quibbles with each other but have a common accreditation regime. Just don't call an interior designer / interior architect a 'decorator'!
>
> Is one term dominate over the other? I thought this issue may dominate the debate, it didn't but some insights into the conundrum of labels . Martyn states that in the UK "product design is a subset of industrial design" while Mark (also UK)suggests otherwise that "Product design can be used to describe anything from industrial design to engineering design". Other regions have differing perceptions. Do we tally up how many are in agreement and go with that to describer our profession? I think not. The problem of 'professions' and the tangle of debate that ensued was put on hold by Clive for us to leave aside.
>
> So it's a qualitative debate as our field is changing in so many ways. Ken points out - "from designing artefacts to the design of integrated product and service systems in a continuum from users - post-sales servicing and end of life". From the new tools we use to design, to the new ways designers engage with the world around them and to new empathies (eg, user insight, product life-cycles and systems design). How does ID / PD contend with describing these shifts? Not necessary to us but to our many other stakeholders, admirers and critics?
>
> So many thanks for the thoughtful contributions.
>
>
> Miles
>
> Dr Miles Park
> Program Director | Industrial Design
> Faculty of the Built Environment | University of New South Wales | Sydney NSW 2052 | Australia
> [log in to unmask]
> Location: Room 4042 Red Centre
> T +61 0(2) 9385 4853 | F +61 0(2) 9385 4270 | M 0432 784 997 | Skype milespark
>
> http://idsydney.posterous.com/
|