Originally posted by konraDarnok I think your analysis of them is ad hoc. You're taking your personal preferences and forcing them onto the 'principals' instead of the other way around.
To critique your first point, aesthetics: What you've done here is a pretty classic Argumentum ad populum. There's nothing more to elaborate about.
To the second point, Is as little design as possible I'd say this design exemplifies this principal. There's nothing pretensions about this camera. The buttons and controls are straight forward -- with no anonymous extraneous switches and dials that modern cameras have in abundance.
To the third point, Is honest Again nothing is extraneous on this camera. Your example of the bump is misplaced. They had to put the flash housing somewhere -- as directly below it is the mount. And the "snorkle" is designed so this camera can be laid. flat on any side -- even the top.
To the forth point, Is long-lasting We don't have a time machine. A design doesn't become timeless until after the fact.
To the fifth point, Is thorough down to the last detail This camera is designed to be held at arms length. It looks to me like the buttons are laid on to achieve that.
I agree with this post. While your analysis bring up some point to consider, and while I think that in most cases Ram's Principles are very relevant; all you did was state the principles, then explain as if as fact how (in your opinion) this camera does not meet those criteria. One could easily state the same principles and make arguments for how the K=01 exemplifies Ram's Principles.
I'm not trying to discredit your thoughts entirely, but just saying that they were heavily seasoned with opinion. Where you could look at it and say that it's not timeless; I could look at it and say that it has elements of a retro look, mixed in with some futuristic flare that gives it a look which is neither now nor then.
At the end of the day, everything just boils down to personal opinion. And the success of this camera will come down to how many personal opinions like it and how many don't; not how well it complies with design code. Principles are worthy, but public opinion is not bound by them, so design shouldn't be either.
I personally think it is absolutely weird looking and far from normal, but I kind of dig it in that way. People who want what comes to mind when you think of a camera won't want it. People who wants something that looks different than what's out there might want it. Pentax has a long history of catering (or trying) to those who want something different, and I think when the dust settles, the K-01 will do pretty well for the first implementation of a new line.