As well as designing the operating system to match the users and the context of use, the OLPC folks have focussed on the hardware needs of children in developing countries.
The XO-1 laptop is bash-proof, sand-proof, splash-proof. You can charge it up in the sun or by winding it up. It’s got no moving parts, apart from the main hinge and two chunky wi-fi antennas. The screen works has a mode that works in bright sunlight. Clever.
And isn’t it funny that in the process of developing a laptop for kids who live in dusty rural villages, they’ve also invented quite a lot of hardware that “traditional” users all over the world would also like? I want to be able to wind up my laptop as I sit on a train. I want chunky, gin-and-tonic-proof industrial design. I want a screen that works in bright sun.
This kind of thing happens often. Teams start off by thinking about the needs of a minority group, and end up making a product that’s better for everyone. For example:
- Good Grips vegetable peelers for arthritis sufferers – actually great for everyone who wants to peel vegetables in comfort
- Curb cuts for people in wheel chairs – also good for mums with pushchairs, and for rollerbladers
- Large fonts and shortcut keys for computer users with disabilities – also good for expert users with hi-res monitors.
It seems counter intuitive at first. Designing within tight constraints for a demanding group of users sounds like it would stifle creativity. In fact, it tends to yield some of the the very best design there is. That’s why many interaction designers say you should aim your product at just a single persona.
Yet again, designing for this “minority” audience (of 1.2 billion children) seems to have delivered something useful for everyone.