4 ms·
From the article, it seem like the main failure was in execution. The pods were designed to be replaceable, swapped out regularly as needs changed. In practice,
by Angostura 5y ago
From the article, it seem like the main failure was in execution. The pods were designed to be replaceable, swapped out regularly as needs changed. In practice, swapping out a single pod was impossible, due to the construction.
For some reason, I'm really sad to see this go. I remember it being all over the UK media when I was a kid.
- WJW 5y agoI think that > swapped out regularly as needs changed was the key design mistake, because it glosses over the fact that people get attached to things for sentimental reasons. Even if it were easier to swap out pods, I bet that some people would stubbornly remain in their older pods "because it is the pod I grew up in" for example. Designers in all sorts of fields (even software) often fall for this fallacy, because it would just be so much more elegant if humans conformed to your vision for the world instead of the other way around.
- Angostura 5y agoBut that was the point. Nostalgic folk could keep their pods. Others could go for an 'upgrade'