Although about industrial design, this movie continued the theme from Helvetica and the Glaser movie about everything having been designed at some point: every little thing was thought of and sketched and created purposefully. At this point in the semester, I am not as surprised by this because I find myself noticing designs and thinking about why something was made in a specific way. I really liked the notion of designing for the extremes. I would think designed for specific “extreme” needs would be less useful because there are fewer people with that need but it is true that the middle can take care of itself and adjust. Everyone can enjoy the extra comfort in a grip made for arthritic hands while arthritic hands cannot enjoy every grip. As an Apple fan I appreciated the bit spend on the Apple VP of Design as he explained his mission to design a lot with as little as possible. Things that appear hardly designed may actually have been the most designed because as much as possible was whittled away from it. When I was designing the resume I was really aiming for that simplicity that looks almost effortless, like a MacBook! I was confused about one of the people who spoke about design and policy. While I can appreciate design as a form of mass communication and I don’t deny that it can help spread a message, I don’t understand how it would help policy. When government officials make policy, they aren’t looking to make something aesthetically pleasing or conforming to design principles—it has to work. There is nothing pretty about playing with the Federal Funds Rate or creating legislation about immigration. I don’t understand where the design element would help. It can create great pamphlets, posters and websites to explain policy changes but how can it help?