In today’s world, it seems everything is becoming increasingly complex, particularly when it comes to electronics. We’re constantly bombarded with gadgets boasting an overwhelming array of features. But why is this the case?
The humorous exaggeration, “Hey, our cell phone takes pictures, sharpens knives, mows the lawn, pays your bills, steers your car, and cooks dinner, all by voice command!” highlights the absurdity. The unfortunate reality is that manufacturers often cram electronic products with features because it’s relatively inexpensive to do so. Whether consumers actually need or want these functions is a separate question, and often the answer is no.
Companies frequently add features simply to advertise them, rather than investing in the more demanding process of identifying genuinely desirable features and designing products that are both feature-rich and user-friendly. This shortcut leads to frustrating user experiences.
Remember struggling to program your VCR? It might not have been your fault. Blame the engineers who designed a poor user interface. And if VCRs were bad, combination VCR-DVD players were even worse!
Another reason for this feature creep is market saturation. In the case of cell phones, for example, sales have slowed because most people already own one. To incentivize upgrades, manufacturers add features, hoping to discover that one ‘cool’ feature that will compel consumers to buy a new phone.
Similarly, digital camera manufacturers continuously release cameras with ever-increasing megapixel counts – from two to 3.2, then 4.0, 5, 6, 7, and even 8 megapixels. But do consumers truly need 7 or 8-megapixel cameras? Not really. For casual snapshots and online sharing, a 3.2-megapixel camera is more than sufficient.
Manufacturers push these capabilities for two primary reasons: to advertise impressive specifications and to encourage consumers to replace their existing devices with newer models.
Therefore, it’s crucial to carefully evaluate the features offered in products you’re considering. Don’t automatically assume that a product with more features or higher specifications is the better choice. Often, it’s simply more complicated to use and more prone to malfunction.
This phenomenon extends to software, where it’s known as “bloatware.” These are programs overloaded with features, particularly those that are non-essential to the software’s core purpose.
During my time in the software industry, programmers would sometimes propose adding features that required minimal code. While seemingly insignificant in the context of a large program, these features were often unnecessary. As a consumer advocate, I would question their value and advocate for their removal. Unfortunately, such features often find their way into software products, contributing to the problem of bloatware.