The Little Printer
-
I'm sure we've all seen the Little Printer by now. It's cute and an interesting concept, but I'm not sure that it is a great design. It is a beautiful product and the 'receipts' that it prints out are exceptional so to many that would make it an exceptional design.
However, because it uses paper that paper is a waste on the environment. Because you have to buy more paper when you run out, how likely are you to go and buy another roll? That also means more waste on the environment. It is great to get something physical in a world of digital goods, but I'm not sure if the Little Printer takes things far enough.
I'm glad it is around though because it opens up the imagination to new possibilities. -
While I agree that the less paper we use the better, it's only wasteful depending on what you're using it for. Their website shows them printing out a twitter feed - that in my opinion is wasteful since it takes more effort to do that than checking it on your phone.
So depending on how you use it will determine how useful it is. I wouldn't use it to print my daily horoscope (i don't actually read horoscopes, just saying) but I might use it to write little morning love notes to a girlfriend living far away ®. -
When I first saw this, I became immediately infatuated with it. But as I started watching the video, I became more and more disappointed. Cute and absolutely adorable but where’s the functionality? The reality of a printer, is if it's too difficult to get ink, repairs, paper, it immediately loses its value. I've known people in the past who often buy a brand new printer when their ink runs out 'cause it costs them the same (VERY wasteful).
Other questions that arise is, how does it compete with regular printers? Is the program that come with it light and user-friendly? What are actual benefits that this printer arises that a phone or an Ipad doesn't already do for us?
Conclusion: The Little Printer turns out to be more of a novelty rather than a must have. (But I wouldn't mind having one myself :D)
-
I think the whole digital vs physical debate is somewhat misrepresented when it comes to environmental concerns. Here's the way I see it:
The primary ingredient of paper is wood. Wood is actually a carbon-neutral product, providing the tree that's cut down is replaced by a new one. Of course, some energy will be used (burned) to cut the tree and process it so that it becomes paper. Then it must be transported to its destination. But it ends there.
A digital product looks like an environmental triumph by comparison. But then think of the energy required to get that digital product from its source to its audience. The hours spent developing it needs electricity. The network via which it is uploaded to a server needs electricity and is never turned off. The server that hosts the product consumes electricity constantly. And it needs to be kept in a temperature-controlled room, again, more energy. The person downloading the product needs to be connected to an ISP whose computers never cease consuming energy. They also require temperature control. And finally, the PC on whic the product is downloaded needs electricity.
Bear in mind that the level of networking that makes e-commerce possible is colossal. If the internet wasn't ubiquitous, it wouldn't work.
Personally I'm ambivalent about the printer; it looks cute, but not terribly useful. Hope you don't think I'm preaching; I'm not. Just interested in how we seem to think the internet is 'green' when I'm not sure that it is.
