From designer Meng Fandi (and via The Product Usability Weblog), the "Ring" alarm clock for couples is a great concept, but not quite fleshed out to a usable state. The basic idea is that instead of waking users with sound, it wakes them with a wireless vibrating ring worn on a finger during sleep. This not only allows couples to wake up one at a time without disturbing the other with a room-filling alarm sound, but also helps out deaf or hard-of-hearing users by working through a different sense than hearing. Even the form of the charging and time-setting base assists usability by taking the form of a bed, so each member of the couple knows to use the ring on the side of the bed they (usually) sleep on. Good stuff!
...But it's not quite done. Just a couple of issues come to mind. First, this design is a slave to button-reduced "clean-design," and as a result can only offer criminally inefficient setting of alarm times: a single up/down button pair take quite a while to reach an exact time that's, say, 12 hours away from the previously set time! (I've been waiting for a numeric keypad on an alarm clock for quite a while now - but it's too many buttons to please the eye, even if they would sooo please the hand...) Second, the mechanical feasibility of this concept, as it currently looks, strains credulity. It's sleek and beautiful, but there's no room for a battery, wireless transceiver, and vibrating motor in a ring that size. My engineering intuition is screaming here, accusing this design of writing a cosmetic check that it just can't cash. In the real-world product development cycle, this sleek look would bulge so much as to lose its cool, becoming a bastardization of its intended beauty. Instead, industrial designers should be starting with the constraints of reality and progressing to a beautiful solution based on what is actually feasible. Pushing the limits a bit is okay; claiming an impossible slimness is not!