I would think that functionality, reliability, and price point would be the top three concerns among smart home device designers. But after reading two articles recently published by ZDNET, I am forced to admit that aesthetic appeal is also part of the design equation. Aesthetics matter to device designers because they also matter to consumers.
The first of the two articles discussed a motion-tracking camera made by Eufy, a brand I am personally unfamiliar with. The second article, written by the same author, featured an Ezviz wireless camera that could be had at a particularly low Black Friday price. Both articles had a single word in common: adorable.
Not a Word I Would Use
I must admit that ‘adorable’ is not a word I would use to describe a video camera. In fact, I would make a point of avoiding the word in the context of home security. And yet it was the very word the ZDET writer chose. She also used the word ‘cute’ in the second article. Again, not a word that I would choose. So what’s the point?
It is evident to me that aesthetic appeal is important to many consumers. If having to choose between two cameras with similar features and price points, your average consumer is going to choose the one that they feel looks better. And in some cases, aesthetics even win out over function and price.
I am not one to look down on people who care about aesthetics. It is not me, but I understand that we live in a visual world in which aesthetics make a real difference. So I imagine that smart home device designers have to put as much effort into aesthetics as car and furniture designers. They need to produce things consumers do not find ugly if they want their designs to sell.
In the Eye of the Beholder
I was also reminded by the ZDNET pieces that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. While I would not consider either of the two cameras adorable or cute, I also wouldn’t say they are ugly. But what I consider ugly might be beautiful to someone else. The differing tastes my wife and I have in everything from color schemes to architectural design are proof of that.
The reality of different tastes leaves smart home device designers in a position of having to figure out what would appeal to the broadest possible audience. They realize they cannot satisfy everyone all the time, so they have to satisfy as many people as possible without compromising quality and function.
Designing Complete Systems
Coming to the realization that device designers need to consider aesthetics led me to take things one step further. I began to wonder how companies like Vivint Smart Home design complete home automation systems. Do they design their devices from the ground up to aesthetically complement one another? Or perhaps they have in general aesthetic philosophy their designers follow all the time. I obviously don’t know.
I do know that I have friends who have built home automation systems via the piecemeal approach. Some of them have pieces that are easy to tell are from different manufacturers just by looking at them. They are not at all aesthetically coordinated. Does it make a difference? Not to them.
Regardless, some consumers are more picky about aesthetics than others. That’s fine. Consumers should have every opportunity to select home automation devices of their choosing, regardless of what those devices look like. If aesthetics is important to one consumer but not another, no big deal.