Looks so simple, but I guess that's a sign of good design. I was also surprised something like this didn't exist already.
But my first thought was that it will almost certainly be cloned and sold en masse pretty quickly, so I hope she gets enough revenue from it to pay for her time.
> Looks so simple, but I guess that's a sign of good design.
I find that this is tends to be the rule, not the exception and it's really reworked how I view things. I've started to almost (more jokingly than seriously) believe that the less novel something appears the more it actually is. The real mark for a good work seems to be "wow, how did you spend so much time on that? It's so fucking obvious" combined with "why has no one else done this?" But it is also easy to post hoc attribute something to being "well that's just x and y, so not really novel." But far too many things can be trivialized that way.
I wanted to say this because I think especially in engineering circles we have this wild novelty paradox. Where we can understand how our work, despite all outward appearances, is exceptionally nuanced and has minor details that are critical but when we judge others' works we don't consider such details. I think this is because most details are baked in when you learn of the new thing. But we got a good litmus test: is anyone else making/producing/doing this "super simple blatantly obvious" thing. If no? It's probably deceptively complex. (It's also why you should laugh at anyone who starts a sentence with "It's so simple, you just...")
I used to embarassingly think that design was merely a matter of aesthetics until I read The Design of Everyday Things by Don Norman, which opened my eyes to how much thought goes into seemingly simple things. Really changed the way I look at human-designed objects.
My favorite anecdote due to its simplicity and ubiquity that I never thought about previously was the anecdote about the idea of making top surfaces slanted in public spaces to keep people from placing empty drinking cups and such on top of them. So damn simple and inconspicuous, but so effective and now I see it everywhere!
> idea of making top surfaces slanted in public spaces to keep people from placing empty drinking cups and such on top of them
That's a low-key example of hostile architecture, isn't it? Other than preventing people from leaving cups around, this decreases the utility of public space. Everyone sometimes finds themselves suddenly needing a flat surface other than pavement for a couple of seconds or minutes. Say you've grabbed multiple coffee cups wrongly, or packed your groceries badly, and need to repack. Or something fragile you carried broke. Or you need to make a note on the spot. A raised flat surface nearby is godsend in such situations.
It is an interesting thing though. Why did the design lead too people leaving the cups behind? I get the hostile part as they do not want to clean up other peoples trash. It is something I think about a lot on the way to work. I see gum on the ground. Not like one or two here and there but hundreds of little blobs on the sidewalk. What is causing people in these particular spots to leave their gum behind and then putting the chore of cleaning it up on someone else. I even see it when there is a trash can nearby many times. What is causing the issue? So yeah so sometimes there is no 'clear fix' but making it seriously inconvenient to do something is an option for those who have to pay to clean it up. So we all suffer because of that.
Yep. The primary fault lies with the too-many people who abused the non-hostile system. "This is why we can't have nice things"--because trust is too costly in the societies where hostile architecture is prevalent.
I get that and agree. But why is the 'easy path' to leave the garbage even in conditions where there is a garbage can right there? Shame and motivation probably seem like the wrong tools here. It seems like something is lending it to us just not doing it the right way. It is like something in the architecture lends itself to people just ignoring the obvious way. My wife was telling me about a 'gum wall' at an amusement park. I immediately saw that as a way for the park to basically hack people to not throw their gum on the sidewalk. Basically a weird reward for keeping your gum and putting it on that wall. The architecture and mythos encouraged people to not do it.
Or you are my wife, didn't realize it wasn't flat, and now your plastic bottle is bouncing down the mountain side and part of the trash littering the place.
She labels her prototypes in the video on the Kickstarter page and the one that either ended up being the final design or very close to it was prototype number 134. So it did take her quite a long time to arrive at the solution.
It's never a linear path either, I am sure she branched down paths not used in the final design and spent many hours solving small parts of solutions she never actually used.
> But my first thought was that it will almost certainly be cloned and sold en masse pretty quickly, so I hope she gets enough revenue from it to pay for her time.
The reason why this isn't a thing yet is a few reasons - from my humble perspective:
First, it's actually a 2 part system.
You need the coat hanger but you also need the coat rack, more specifically - the dowel, to be really close to the wall.
So you would want to sell this as a kit. She doesn't really talk about it in the video - it feels like an odd afterthought. The kickstarter has it but only at the $135 starting level.
Secondly, it's not a "one size fits all solution". I can't use this with really bulky jackets. I think it's a cool, front door, guest entryway piece.
Last, it's pricy - really pricy. You're asking me to pay ~$15-20/hanger. If you have this specific problem... still hard pressed - definitely expendable income level. But because it takes up more width, it can hold fewer items not a general place to store clothes (hence i think guest front door would be a cool-piece/talking-point).
The ones getting sold on this kickstarter are grooved to keep the hangers at a neat 90 degrees to the wall. With a normal rod the hangers can twist some. Whether or not this is a problem is up to personal taste.
I think the details matter. Curtain rods are typically 1-4" from the wall. This product looks like it works best <0.5" [0] from the wall otherwise it's possible the hanger will move around or have a "sagging" look.
Finding curtain rods that are that close is uncommon and limited in styles/options (I didn't see one on a quick amazon/aliexpress search). That's not to say you're wrong, but I don't think it's as simple as you believe it to be.
Are you misunderstanding something? Clothes Railings are "normally" fixed on the ends (to the wall of the cupboard) or from above and can thus, be positioned any distance from the rear wall.
Do an Image Search for "Clothes Railing U Bracket" for example.
Having two sidewalls available such that u brackets work is probably not a good use case for this hanger. Usually it means you're inside a closet?
But I agree you could build/attach small sidewalls or simply blocks and use this u bracket. But we've entered DIY space since it's not a common package and "readily available" as a solved problem.
From comments I read elsewhere, there are apparently apartments in places like New York that have non-standard depth closets that don't fit regular hangers that these could be useful for, and the van-life crowd has also been mentioned. In both instances, a regular rod mounted on either side would work fine.
I think also the negative comments here are missing how commonly closets are built incorrectly without the correct depth for a coat hanger. Not every day, but there are enough people living in condos which had lazy architects/contractors and might appreciate the solution. I've lived in one and seen several others. I couldn't think of another solution besides kids hangers, which wasn't a satisfying compromise.
This is an extremely useful design. I never thought I'd get excited about something like this but I recently moved to an old house with chimney flues running through every room, resulting in shallow alcoves that are of differing sizes.
A fitted wardrobe would be pricey (~$4000), barely fit depthwise and half of the space would just be covering the flue if we wanted it wall to wall.
On the other hand I can just buy 3/4 of these for each wall and still come out ahead. The grooves in the rods are well thought out and mean that I can saw them to size myself, as can anyone.
The only drawback I can think of is having clothes up directly against a wall. This could obstruct airflow and be an incentive for mould to grow.
I thought about it as well but if the rod is attached to a plank on the wall the clothes are 1cm away from the wall allowing for some air circulation.
Btw, there is an alternative solution, a hanger where the hook can spin, so one can hang clothes diagonally, nearly flat.
Hers looks nicer on the wall though.
I find coathangers comically cumbersome, if they could spin willy nilly I just might give up and store my shirts in draw. I already just fold and stack most everything else, the only thing I bother hanging is button down shirts.
Basically any coat hanger not made of wire or a single plastic part has a rotatable hook. There’s usually enough friction that they won’t normally spin.
> ”it will almost certainly be cloned and sold en masse pretty quickly”
Wouldn’t it be worth taking out a design patent on a product like this? It might not stop people making similar designs, but it would give you protection against outright clones.
Hopefully she already started the patent process, otherwise it’s either 1) an expired patent 2) an existing patent 3) she actually invented it but won’t profit at all from it
Patenting this for her portfolio maybe, I can design and print a folding plastic hanger in 1 piece in less than 24 hours. A mold not far behind if i reached out to a shop...
you raise an interesting point I think gets asked in nearly every YC interview. How do you build your moat or stop any big players from competing with a very similar product.
I think she actually misidentified the problem she was trying to solve.
In her case, imo, her "secret sauce" would be the space saving clothes rack/furniture AND matching hangers.
There is no solution with her hanger in normal clothes racks. so her hanger product actually serves no purpose.
Most of the options on Kickstarter include both the hangers and low profile rod/brackets (and a shelf on the fancy one). The tier without a rod included says:
> While using your own rod isn't recommended, we got a lot of requests for it so here you go! Please read our FAQ before buying so you're aware of the pros and cons. Some basic DIY knowhow required.
I think she knows the hanger is only useful as part of a system.
Shit. You do have a really good point. There's not many examples of hanger bars mounted so close to a wall or in a tiny closet already. Most people who might use this would have to be building or installing one for this custom purpose.
I also wondered if it wouldn't make your shirts more wrinkly or have the potential to leave creases. I don't think anyone cares to invest in a space-saving solution like this if it means all their shirts will be wrinkled or creased. Unless space is the primary constraint, like a tiny apartment, tiny house, or custom van build.
There are plenty of examples of shallow closets in older homes/apartments that were once workers' quarters. I lived in a triple-decker in Somerville, MA that had a bedroom closet that was only deep enough for hooks on the back wall to hold the limited clothing of the occupants. The only way I could use a rod for hangers was to remove the closet door.
But my first thought was that it will almost certainly be cloned and sold en masse pretty quickly, so I hope she gets enough revenue from it to pay for her time.