Reading this book section, something that catches me is about glasses. Before it never occurred to me that glasses were used instead of worn. They were so common that I forgot they were for disabilities in the eyes. Also, the design for glasses right now focuses more on aesthetics than practicality. It has come to the point that some people wear fake glasses that don’t really do anything because it makes them look better. It is interesting to see how this can be applied to hearing aids or even prosthetics. However, I think this is unlikely to be the case. I believe that this transition from a tool to a fashionable decoration is not replicable for other tools used to address disabilities. Apart from simply being something to fix disabilities, glasses also suggest that the person is smart or knowledgeable because reading a lot makes people’s eyesight decrease. But for other prosthetics or disability aids they do not suggest such meaning. others might even say they are being careless. Therefore subconsciously, people will not think having such things is good, and thus have negative feelings about it no matter how fashionable they are.
As mentioned later, the iPod part also was very interesting. The author used the iPod to demonstrate appliances. However, I think the iPod is just a product that got stuck between sound quality and portability. For the sound quality, the iPod is obviously not even close to as good as other big professional speakers and stuff. For portability, it is just a tiny bit smaller in size compared to that of a cell phone. Therefore I think this product is not successful and cannot be used as an example of a successful appliance. Maybe only mentioning cutlery would be better:)