Kind of an addendum to the 'Gizmos' post. I talk about the Playdate a bunch and don't wanna come off as a shill. Similarly, the rabbit r1 is kind of the tech worlds punching bag right now and I don't wanna just, join in to say the same things. But I find comparing these things just, impossible to ignore. - Both designed by Teenage Engineering for another company

• Both small, square handhelds
• Roughly the same size
• Heavily feature a rotary input mechanism
• Even the same price From a design standpoint, I think both of these things meet my definition of a 'Gizmo'. Teenage Engineering, for as ridiculous as they can sometimes be, knows how to make a gizmo. But, aesthetics aside, the functionality of the two devices and how they differ in using their quirky input method, really fascinates me. --- Ignoring the ai rabbit elephant in the room though, I've seen a lot of criticism of the r1 from a pure UX standpoint. Something I mentioned in my gizmos post is how tech is at a point where you can make something silly and weird without worrying about solving the technical problems of implementing it. What that doesn't mean is the quirky-ness shouldn't come at the expense of being able to use the thing. The GameCube's face weird button layout didn't make it harder to use the controls (some would argue it was easier), but it still stood out and is pretty instantly recognizable, nowadays. The Playdate's crank tries to never get in the way. Admittedly, it's underutilized, but whenever a game wants you to pull out the crank for something, it's not a chore. Part of that is a lot of games and apps letting you use the d-pad in place of the crank, which makes the crank a little toy to play with if you want. When the crank isn't optional, it tends to try and provide something kind of interesting on top of the game boy inputs. And, at the end of the day, this is a game console. It's a toy. This gimmicky input method isn't that bad when you consider the nature of what you're doing. Despite the Playdate vastly preceeding the r1, rabbit apparently didn't bother to look to it for any inspiration. While the Playdate's game-console nature and 1-bit screen kind of dissuades you from using it like a phone, the portrait-mode display and overall presentation of the r1 screams 'touch my screen! it's 2024 and everything has a touchscreen!' And, even worse, it does have a touchscreen. When you enter text, you turn it sideways and use an on-screen keyboard. But any other time, you've gotta use the gimmick. Even if the software could compensate for the slow dial speed, it just feels stupid. You look like an asshole rubbing your thumb over a tiny wheel when there's this big, familiar interface directly to its left. I feel like both of these devices added their rotary inputs to stand out. Panic brainstormed a bunch of weird ideas with TE (including a small, full-color circular screen on the back of the device?? Really glad they didn't go with that one), and landed on the crank. And, mostly, they added it to be fun. Whether they succeeded is up to you, but it feels very in line with the goals of the device. The r1 needed it because people already complain that it could have just been an app. Imagine if it was just a red rectangle with a touchscreen, and no dial or funky motorized camera. The Humane Pin - the other ai slopware gizmo - has this whole laser projector in lieu of a screen. It's a neat novelty, but in both cases I feel like it speaks to this need in the design to stand out so people think the devices are more futuristic and unique than they really are. I guess if you want to take away anything from this post, it's that style and usability don't need to exist in conflict with one another. Not every device needs to be a featureless aluminum and glass rectangle, but not everything needs tactile switches and rotary knobs. Finding that balance is when you end up with really cool design.