Comments

The hammer's brand name is Tuf-E-Nuf, with two hyphens and a capital N. That is a line of tools. When I searched for the hammer online as Tuf Enuf, no hyphen, I found a line of marine cleaning products by Wallace & Sons. The two families of products are two distinct brands.

Posted by cathy mosca at December 30, 2008 10:14 AM

Hype it what got us into this mess - it won't get us out.
Redesigning a tool from the stone age won't do us much good.
We need something that is totally not lickable -
something like a battery that gets a car 200 miles on a charge. And it needs to be an American patent and product.
Artsy fartsy design won't get us there.
In the late 1970's when Jobs and Wozniak realized there were silcon chips sitting around in corporate labs that could be turned into personal computers, that was the moment the 1980's were kicked off. What is rarely pointed out is that those chips were a form of potential energy wating for someone to give them a nudge to get them rolling down the hill. Wozniak provided that nudge, but there had to be something with a lot of potential energy to nudge. This potentail energy was built up though years of scientific breakthroughs - The 1990's were powered by the potentail energy trapped inside Internet Techlology - tecnology developed over 30 years - good design expliots potential energy - but what happens when there is not much potential energy around to take advantage of?
We need to give more praise to the people who provide the potential energy -
For example, everyone knows who Jobs is - but how many people know the name of the scientist who discovered the quantum mechnical properties that allowed memory chips to hold
40 gigabytes of songs and still be the size of a penny?

Posted by zed at December 30, 2008 4:32 PM

I have some mixed feelings about this - yes I love good design - but I guess I like my hand tools kinda old fashioned - for me there is a real joy in using a good tool well - a simple pleasure - a great designed tool ain't going to make a craftsman out of you. I have stuff in my work shop from my father (and one item - a rather battered mallet from his father) - just feels good to pick them up. My 8 year old son made his Mums Xmas present this year - one day he (and his sister if I have my way!) will be able to carry this on and use the same kit

"induces you to make an expenditure that you hadn't intended to make." - This phrase really disturbs me - to me this sums up the whole problem we are under right now - buying more and more and more stuff - and if need be going into debt to do it- The truth is that if this planet is going to survive we need to find ways of using the stuff we have in a better way - making it last far longer.

You talk about good design - great design is working out how you are going to do the job without needing a different hammer......

Posted by PaulH at December 30, 2008 4:58 PM

Believe it or not, the American economy is not all about gigabytes on a wafer and batteries that last forever. The people who also need more praise and constitute the base of every economy are the small biz people with, in America's case, relatively skyhigh productivity. I swoon over the best of Silicon Valley and Cambridge MA, the research universities, the startup entrepreneurs and the VCs. I was once on the "100 most powerful people" in the Valley list--yippee for me. But the Valley Boys and their ilk are far from the whole story.

Posted by tom peters at December 30, 2008 5:06 PM

It is folly to sell oil paintings to customers who would be happy with a poster and even bigger folly to sell posters to customers who value oil paintings. Marketers need to segment their audiences and create products/services based on what each audience values and appreciates.

Posted by Abu Noaman at December 30, 2008 11:55 PM

Hhhmmm...

'Radically Thrilling.' If we're naming businesses in similar manner to the way in which rock bands / pop groups choose their monickers, then clearly there's potential in that term.

And, I'm fully in agreement with the view ["Radically Thrilling." (Love that term!)] expressed in the earlier entry linked to by the line 'BMW claims that one of its models is radically thrilling.'

I too, 'like it a lot' (as a starchy Brit, 'love' is a term reserved for family members and those ladies for whom I have particular affection).

So then, what nominations do we have for other things which are 'Radically Thrilling!'... the gaspworthy' stuff from which to learn personally and share with others?

Come to think of it, where on the wowscale is our own stuff?

Posted by g at December 31, 2008 3:36 AM

Here's Wishing you a very happy and prosperous '09!!!!!

Posted by rahul at December 31, 2008 3:38 AM

Hi g and I wish you a wonderful New Year from another 'starchy' Brit (Thanks - I love that term). You ask for nominations for 'Radically Thrilling' - here are my unsurprising suggestions:

*Manchester United – the team and the brand – please forgive me Judith for mentioning soccer again!
*The Eagles – still rocking and packing 'em in at 60 years of age (just bought my tickets for their Birmingham gig in July 2009) - forgive me John O'Leary!
Barack Obama – a man who provides hope.

Posted by Trevor Gay at December 31, 2008 4:42 AM

Some of the comments feel a little bitter on this post. I know times are tough and everyone is down but Tom's right it's those little things that spark you to life that'll bring things back to life. Sure we've all learned that be careless with our cash is dumb (allways was) but great stuff, when it truly is great is what brings people out of the mire.
There's too much average stuff out there that people still run out and spend on. Very soon they realise they've been duped, that's when buyer reqret sets in. Great design, great service and the longevity of the truly amazing is what's going to get us out of all this. That's why the get rich quick schemes have fallen around our ears - there was no substance.

Here's to an amazing 2009.

Posted by Richard Michie at December 31, 2008 7:09 AM

TP - If the Valley Boys are not everything, why do you throw around steve jobs name whenever you get a chance?
And, by the way, does anyone know the name of the scientist who discovered the physical properties that enable the Ipod to exist?

Posted by zed at December 31, 2008 10:16 AM

What would really help the economy is if this hammer (that is lickable) only lasts for 10 nails. Then you have to buy another one.

Posted by Troy Bingham Dialer at December 31, 2008 4:12 PM

Jobs is Mr. $3 Apple stock 1997 to $202 to $96 now - zed - I hear what you are saying though.

Tom like most loves design - a beautiful hammer & car. Capitalism & free enterprise though - what has that become in 2009?

Posted by Contraire at December 31, 2008 6:38 PM

The really bad thing about some social networks is the illusion that actual thought processes and knowledge are present. (This illusion then is transferred in various means of communications about a whole host of topics from politics, to business to cultural criticism.) It is obvious that buzz words and snippets do not represent much and nonsensical style is still nonsensical. It will not be valuable in the new year just as it has had done precious little to add much of value in the old —u k.w w.at im s.y,g?

Twitting is just the kind of communication we need in a world filled with such immense complications. Right! This is akin to the kind of communication that I have read here that often offers nonsensical quips that appears smart only to the author. (A note to the Israeli consulate or any other consulates engaging in twitting about such conflicts as what is occurring now in Gaza: Stop it! This is ridiculous!) What kind of thoughtful processes and outcomes does that kind of communication engender? Not much! Having such communication in business is as equally silly. The illusion of achievement and cool design does not make it so.

Perhaps it is the design of such nonsensical things and the deconstruction of important thing is what has brought us to this defining moment. Twitting to me seems somehow akin to all of the hip cool things that have brought us to this very moment of deconstruction, the deregulation of all kind--including financial instruments that not even the creator of such understood it many derivations.

The one who is unable to form intelligent designs and sentences that evolve out of well informed thoughts will be losers in the long run, as well as those with seemingly smart-ass quips. Our opinions are important. But out of what have they evolved? Do not be deceived by the hype. Anything done that makes a difference in the long run requires thought, study and action. Twitting or quipping seems to only require action, the use of thumbs unconnected to intelligent sensical thought.

Happy New Year to TP, Cathy, Erik and all others here. Many blessings to you all in the coming year. I'm off now to meet with family for incoming of the New Year! See you then.

Posted by Judith Ellis at December 31, 2008 8:21 PM

Just a quick follow-on to my earlier note of 'what nominations do we have for other things which are 'Radically Thrilling!''...

It'd be useful/worthwhile (to at least some of us) to have a convenient place for such stuff.

So, if you're interested, send 'em and I'll put an appropriate dotcom in place.

Posted by g at January 1, 2009 7:23 PM

Groundbreaking innovation comes from small, simple, ORDINARY innovations.

Surrounding yourself with BEAUTIFUL things and constantly believing that things can be better, then just wait and in hindsight comes EXTRAORDINARY innovation.

Posted by Dennis D. Balajadia at January 1, 2009 11:37 PM

So...

Zed has it partially wrong...

Without the free thinkers behind such product development, challenging the norms of design and of thinking about this stuff means that we won't need a battery car if we all drive the honda powered by hydrogen instead? Equally we won't have to wait a day to charge back into life....

Have a peaceful 2009

Patrick

Posted by patrick at January 2, 2009 7:07 AM

Patrick - YOU FAIL! (Or, was that 6-word New Year challenge only for Trevor and I?) I'm laughing hysterically as the one with the brevity fetish has not managed his very own. How many words above? A whopping 61, symbols aside. Yes, I counted. It was great fun! :-)

Happy New Year, Patrick! You let me off the hook.

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 2, 2009 9:10 AM

Bravo Judith - we win Patrick :-) (5 words only)

Posted by Trevor Gay at January 2, 2009 1:51 PM

"Groundbreaking innovation comes from small, simple, ORDINARY innovations."

Exactly how does E=MCsquared fit into the above statement?

Posted by zed at January 2, 2009 2:00 PM

An earth-shattering innovation? Radically thrilling? Please! It's a hammer!

Posted by Wendy Maynard at January 2, 2009 6:16 PM

E=mc2
"Einstein had long been convinced that the Principle of Relativity must apply to all phenomena, mechanical or not. Now he found a way to show that this principle was compatible with electromagnetic theory after all. As Einstein later remarked, reconciling these seemingly incompatible ideas required "only" a new and more careful consideration of the concept of time."
http://www.aip.org/history/einstein/great1.htm

From Einstein's perspective, it was a small, simple innovation. And, when considered in the context of his total career, ORDINARY.

Posted by Mike L. at January 3, 2009 2:07 AM

Nice, Mike L. Thank you. I also wonder if Einstein did not see everything as ordinary which enabled him to see the extraordinary intrinsic quality of things, the display of grand simplicity. Einstein sought to understand the mind of God and in doing so discovered the excellence of what to Him was ordinary. In this sense, Einstein's discoveries, achieved mainly through observation, became ordinary. This too is the essence of innovation and design.

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 3, 2009 2:44 AM

Wish you a very happy new year....

Here is hoping such design secrets distill into everyday products..yup, simplicity rules

Posted by brijesh at January 3, 2009 3:02 AM

Ray Kroc said, "You must be able to see the beauty in a hamburger bun."
McDonald's and Wal*Mart were the only Dow bellweathers to go up in 2008.
Sounds like McD's was pretty radically thrilling to those of us with their stock in our 401(k)s in 2008.

Hammers.
Hamburger buns.
iPods.
Efficient electric transmission lines.

Alll part of the economy.
All worthy of serious consideration.

Diabetes is a horrible disease, but Big Macs taste pretty good on a cold winter day.

Posted by tom peters at January 3, 2009 10:48 AM

"From Einstein's perspective, it was a small, simple innovation. And, when considered in the context of his total career, ORDINARY"

He won the nobel prize and is considered to be
the greatest scientist of all time, so why not refer to his own discovery as simple.
Einstien was just being modest.
My point is that design is usually just a variation on a theme. This thread started with a bit about a cool hammer. It was not about the invention of the hammer. What einstien observed and then described using his deep understanding of physics and mathemtics was metaphorically the invention of the hammer.
A long lasting battery that would power an automobile would come close to being the metaphorcal equivalent of the invention of the hammer. We would no longer need to rely on the middle east for oil. Thomas Friedman recently pointed out that the Soviet Union fell as the price of oil was dropping in the late 1980's and early 1990's. He thinks the fall of the USSR had more to do with the fall in the price of oil than Reagans star wars program. Suppose under Reagan, we had invested in battery technology instead of star wars technology. We might not only have seen the Soviets fall faster, we might actually have a highly sought product to sell to the rest of the world.
And of course if such a battery had been developed, no one would have any idea who was responsible, but TP would be raving about the design of Steve Job's electric ICar.

Posted by zed at January 3, 2009 10:59 AM

Wendy, for the hobbyist repairman-woodworker a new flavor hammer is as good as it gets. My mother-in-law was once CT's gardener of the year--her reaction to a hand digging tool with a new shape that I gave her for Christmas suggests that radically thrilling lies in the eyes of the beholder.

(I'm sure you are a fine person--but what's your radical thrill from sneering at hammers all about? Perhaps it's just that you are too young to remember Peter Seeger? Or appreciate John Henry? Or shudder when you recall the Soviet menace?)

Posted by tom peters at January 3, 2009 11:00 AM

As usual zed makes some very fine points. From what I have gathered in reading his comments for some months now is that he decries our fascination with visible beauty and not the beauty in technology that producted the thing without which there would be nothing. No? Of course, if I have understood his basic point, it is true. But to discount the visible, and only seek to understand the invisible, i.e., the technology of the iPod, and not its sleek beauty, may be to ultimately discount value. We may never experience the technology for its ugly face.

When dealing with people en masse it is always about the visual first and not even necessarily the invisible. Why should I know the technology of the iPod, though thoroughly appreciating it? The world revolves on the training of various professions and various tastes and proclivities of customer. (Though, the power of suggestion in marketing and advertising makes dubious whether our tastes and procivilites are indeed ours. But perhaps this is insignificant for this point.) This being so, the desire to understand then propels further innovation.

But innovation is the doing of the professional or inventor and not necessarily the customer. The customer wants efficiency and beauty. Why not leave the technology to professionals and inventors? Appreciation – yes! But why stress the technology of the iPod for all? We need it for its capacity. But we love it for its design. Design cannot be devalued or there would be less of a market, if any market at all. The eye (I) requires pleasure, though in many forms and distinctions-- as it should be.

Regarding Einstein, his understanding of physics and mathematics seems to have evolved out of observation more than science. He did not seem to try to make science, accepted theory, fit his observation. (The same can be said of any great scientist, DaVinci and Newton being among the greatest of these.) He observed and defined. We called it science. What we see on many levels, superficially or deeply, evolve out of us. I guess what zed is seeking to redefine is how we see what we see and how we value it. Where is value placed?

TP - Keep away from the Big Macs! OK. Have one. But only every now and then.

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 3, 2009 12:44 PM

Yes, it is just a hammer, but that is not the point. That hammer represents a small-business person’s innovative thinking (make that Radically Thrilling thinking)…the same kind of thinking that will lead us out of recession. The last time we had an economic downturn (2002-2004), almost 3 million workers were downsized, and it was the small businesses that put the unemployed back to work, while the big guys were still downsizing.

The “Tuf-E-Nuf” business is a 150-employee company that produces 4,000 task-oriented products, and, to me, many of them look “Radically Thrilling”. These are the kinds of companies that hire 40% of high tech workers (scientists, engineers, computer workers), and produce 13 times more patents per employee than large patenting firms.

So, let’s encourage our small business innovators—from hammer makers to battery engineers—we need all the “lickable” products they can come up with. Don’t forget; Apple started with two guys in a garage.

Posted by Bob Foster at January 3, 2009 5:31 PM

Radically Thrilling is the new Barack administration coming in - perhaps. And Newsweek's New Global Elite issue:

1. Barack - 2. Hu Jintao - 3. Nicolas Sarkozy - "The Elysee Palace has again become the most important address in Europe." "... the go to guy in Europe ... faced down the Russians in Georgia, then helped pull together Europe's response to the economic meltdown." Ahhhh Paris - with NYC the most cosmopolitan cities in the world!

Wait a second though - Newsweek Periscope has "If I had Subpoena Power: Five Questions for Obama." About Chicago & Illinois corruption & Tony Rezko & "transparency". Nevermind about Barack then ... transparency soon feels like klieg lights to the neoliberals as they scurry for Thrilling cover! :>)

Posted by Contraire at January 3, 2009 6:51 PM

The physical beauty of an Ipod would be just that -
physical beauty and nothing else if there were no memory chips that could hold the music.
The focus on design is a great idea,but I think there needs to be at least a little balance.
Why is there a shortage of Ameican Scientists and engineers? I believe it is because as a culture, we no longer value science - we value selling and marketing and money, but not real value. We nned to do big things -
I was a kid when we went to the moon - that was a big enginneering goal that the whole country participated in - Hopefully Obamas green job initiative we recreate something like the moon shots. Doris Kerns Goodwin talks about how Roosevelt got government and industry to team up to rev up industrial output for WWII. She said Obama could do something like that with green technology and the Automobile industry to get American Cars to be the best and greenest in the world. That is a big idea. And it would require good design and lots of High Tech. And it would lead to lasting economic strength.

Posted by zed at January 3, 2009 7:33 PM

"I would like to take you seriously, but to do so would be an affront to your intelligence."

--George Bernard Shaw

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 3, 2009 7:35 PM

The green job initiative seems like a big worthy idea indeed. I also agree that we have devalued science and engineering and this has brought about the shortage, not to mention the deconstruction of school curricula. Electives rule.

While we are in a period of great transition, I fully believe as Dwight Eisenhower that "there is nothing wrong with America that the faith, love of freedom, intelligence, and energy of her citizens can not cure."

Balance is always a necessity.

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 3, 2009 7:57 PM

Individual empowerment was the mantra during the past two decades.
The two most powerful countries during the next 25 years will be the United States and China. I don't want the Chinese to overtake us. The United States has the upper hand when it comes to empowering the individual. China has the upper hand when it come to focusing on long term goals which is less about about indiviuality and more about collectivismism.(it also less about getting excited cool hammers and personal music players and more about things like infrustructure and science) The country that will come out on top will be the one that has the best balance between execution of long term goals and individuallity. I believe Obama understands this. For example, Obama wants to merge the NASA and the military because he sees the Chinese space program as a challenge to national security. Why do I think it is so important that we stay ahead of the Chinese? Well, suppose China became the sole superpower and Dick Cheney was Chinese?

Posted by zed at January 3, 2009 8:46 PM

way cooler than a cool hammer

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/01/03/opinion/20090103_opedthrun.ready.html?hp

Posted by zed at January 3, 2009 9:02 PM

The GM leadership is not as bad as advertised
Also Athe Automobile Industry is more important then cool hammers or Ipods
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/03/opinion/03holstein.html

Posted by zed at January 3, 2009 9:52 PM

As far as posts go, I'm getting worse than Judith.
this is the last for today.
I call it Chinese Moon.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aOvrNO0OJ41g&refer=worldwide

Posted by zed at January 3, 2009 10:00 PM

I just can't help myself. When a Nobel Prize winner writes a column that confirms my suspicians (sp?) I have to share it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/02/opinion/02krugman.html?em

Posted by zed at January 3, 2009 10:10 PM

Zed - You may have indeed superceded me. But I'm cool with that. :-) I do not ever remember sharing so many links in a such a short span back to back. In fact, I often do not share links here. There may be something to be said for consummation of thought through a variety of study that does not need a flurry of backing to be relevant. But I do thank you for the links. It's now 3:48 AM and after a few hours of sleep, I will not go and read them. Perhaps I will have something to say about each. Perhaps not. And regarding Nobel recipients, I respect and appreciate them immensely, but they are no more god-like than you. Say your peace.

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 4, 2009 3:50 AM

Great links, zed. Thanks.

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 4, 2009 4:14 AM

One of Tom's friends defined Innovation like this....
“Innovation is something that changes the life of the customer. It changes the life of the customer in some way or the world in which the customer experiences things. That’s innovation” (from Lovemarks by Kevin Roberts)...
If we can hammer out more real change enablers we will get things moving sooner rather than later. If a new hammer makes me smile a little that means its done its job. If using "No More Nails" adhesive enables me to change the way I do things that might be even better.

Posted by Jim Rait at January 4, 2009 6:27 AM

...and as for penny-sized zillion megabyte storage read my post http://ic-pod.typepad.com/design_at_the_edge/2007/10/designs-role-in.html

Posted by Jim Rait at January 4, 2009 6:29 AM

Bob Foster, as you'd guess, I love it.

Or should I say, "LUV it." Surely Herb Kelleher's low-tech Southwest Airlines was a gamechanger--fuelled by Wild Turkey.

As to "game changer," I witnessed it this Christmas season when a baby threw up on me on a SWA flight to BWI. Thanks to SWA, grandkids of modest means can get three-quarters of the way across the U.S. to visit grandparents of modest means for Xmas--a far cry from the flying public of 25 years ago.

(Incidentally, this is a great discussion.)

Posted by tom peters at January 4, 2009 9:01 AM

Bob - How did I miss your great comment? My eyes perhaps fell on the presence of signs and symbols, the mere representation of the real. Thank you so much for your words. They matter and inspire. I was happy to be refocused.

I love the story of SWA and grandkids who are able to visit their grandparents at Christmas. Thanks for that too. I smile.

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 4, 2009 10:28 AM

Politics though & political capitalism seem to now trump most all - as those in favor get bailed out while small business is lost in the fray for the time being!

Democrats & their Radical Thrilling corruption & alleged such are foremost now with Bill Richardson going down today! The NYT with articles on Clintons' alleged pay for play donations acceptance - & "Arabs' hope dashed as Obama no comments on Gaza" (Chicago Tribune) - show that the "Lickable" economy takes the back seat as the neoliberal meltdown takes center stage. :>)

Posted by Contraire at January 4, 2009 4:12 PM

I like Zed.

"And of course if such a battery had been developed, no one would have any idea who was responsible, but TP would be raving about the design of Steve Job's electric ICar."

Cracker of a statement.

The hammer doesn't tickle my fancy. I prefer my burgers with more substance but less frills.

Posted by Peter at January 5, 2009 12:43 AM

Trevor Judith : Great style and smile.....

Posted by Patrick at January 5, 2009 2:43 AM

2009 prediction: A battery won't be the answer?

Posted by Patrick at January 5, 2009 2:46 AM

Happy New Year Patrick :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at January 5, 2009 5:44 AM

I agree with ZED that being a scientist or engineer has lost its value in North America. My two teenagers (who are heading towards engineering) tell me that they are told those are Asian jobs and are being offshored to Asia. One of them is the only one in advanced math who is not Asian, but he tells me its because of parenting.
The hammer reminded me of Clint Eastwood's new movie where he teaches the American value of getting out the hammer and fixing up your home, your neighbour's home and getting a job. It all comes back to that hammer. It's not fancy but it's work - decent hard work.
It also makes me wonder when I read Daniel Pink who tells people that the engineers at his university were not loving their school work. Pink says to do what you love and if it's not making you happy all the time, don't do it. I really question that. Seems self indulgent.

Posted by Jacoline Loewen at January 5, 2009 9:54 AM

You the man, Patrick.

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 5, 2009 10:51 AM

I don't want to get in the middle of this, but beware apples and oranges. The Chineses are turning out engineers by the bushel. Or are they? A McKinsey Institute study last year claimed that some-many-most Chinese graduate engineers would not be accepted for engineering jobs in the U.S., EU, Japan, Korea, etc. At this point at least, many of the so-called engineering grads are holding what we might call a technician's certificate. Part of this is attributed to state control of cirricula. Again, not my area of expertise.

Apples and oranges II. Swedes, I just read, are horrified at the recent precipitous drop in math-science test scores. Most of it may come from a rapidly increasingl immigrant population not as well prepared for school as the natives. For a long time, probably today, much of the U.S. SAT gap could be explained by the fact that everybody of age in the U.S. is encouraged to take the test--it's restricted to the educational elite in many countries.

Apples. Oranges.

Posted by tom peters at January 5, 2009 12:39 PM

Hmmm?

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 5, 2009 1:41 PM

I'm now thinking about reverse engineering used in many auto transplants? Is this engineering? Is it innovation?

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 5, 2009 1:45 PM