Nickname: SLEE

Review: The "improving education" section of this article and the proposed legislation it discusses brings up a critical area that has been lacking in the US for decades. In a country where athletes salaries are measured in millions and teachers salaries are measured in thousands, innovations through education initiatives is problematic at best. Anyone concerned about the US loosing competitive advantage due to off-shoring would be well served to support this type of initiative.

Date reviewed: Jan 21, 2006 5:35 PM

Nickname: PS

Review: The claim that "third" world cultures are mere immitators by one commentator goes on to show that the US education system has big holes to fill when it comes to teaching world history. America, the child of Europe, naturally thinks everything comes from Europeans. Ignorance is bliss.

Date reviewed: Dec 29, 2005 11:29 PM

Nickname: GES

Review: I suspect Apple's "Designed in Cupertino, built in (fill in name of third world country)" labeling is partly to help avoid a backlash against their abandonment of manufacturing in the US. Apple's brand depends on its image as a paragon of good design, and this statement on their product packaging is intended to emphasize that the good design of a product is still coming from the buildings at One Infinite Loop, not the third-world shop where it's built. Trying to teaching design in China, India, Korea, etc. is predictable. Mimicry and cheap production, rather than creativity, has been hallmark of their cultures. A rote-learning approach to design won't produce results. Good design is as much art as science. The market encourages and rewards good design far more than any government intervention can hope to achieve. Freedom is also conducive to both innovation and good design, which is why the US has less to worry about in this area than many may think at first.

Date reviewed: Dec 28, 2005 12:13 AM

Nickname: DW

Review: I doubt this will get very far, as it seems our ilustrious leaders don't care about these problems, as shown by recent congressional action.

Date reviewed: Dec 27, 2005 9:20 PM

Nickname: chrisgee

Review: As usual, Niti, your observations are prescient and spot on. Art and design in much of the West and the U.S. particularly, has never been highly valued and if that doesn't change we will soon be paying a very high price for our lack of ability to react. One almost gets the sense that all of this renewed interest in and discussion of design is taking place somewhat detached from the masses. Certain companies, publications and institutions do get it but unfortunately most do not. Worse still, far too many designers don't get it, nor do enough design organizations. Our design organizations are too big, bloated, and slow to truly get out front and make the type of changes that are necessary to lead design into the 21st century. To be sure, many of them perhaps do not fancy themselves to be so ambitious, preferring instead to collect their dues, conduct their seminars, and cash in on their annual conventions.

Date reviewed: Dec 27, 2005 7:42 PM

Nickname: GTidfan

Review: As a professional designer, I agree there is a need for stronger national involvement in design. But my own personal experience has shown that a lack of professional regulation causes the career path to become undervalued and unsustainable. It is extremely difficult to find positions in the industrial design industry. The number of practicing professionals will always reflect job viability. Design standardization, as found in architecture, is the first and only step to professional sustainability.

Date reviewed: Dec 27, 2005 6:33 PM