Who originally created Star Trek

Who designed the original Star Trek communicator? [closed]

There are only so many ways a "flip" can open.

Why fold up?

  • Right = hits and blocks your thumb if you are right handed
  • Left = hits and blocks your thumb if you are left handed.

The only logical direction for a serial device is up or down. Both variants exist for telephones (down, up)

Since the Star Trek communicator's flip cover is made of metal, I wonder if it will be used as an auxiliary antenna.That could be one reason why it specifically folds up, not down.

Why turn around

When closed, the flip serves as a cover. Star Trek prevents you from pressing buttons (the classic dial or simply damaging the buttons or hurting the buttons when the device is in your pocket).

In the case of flip phones, it protects the screen and minimizes the size of the phone, making it easier and safer to carry it in a pocket (more spherical than long objects).

Why a folding hinge?

  • If you do not connect the Flip to the device, it can be lost. You'll also need to put it somewhere when you open the device.
  • If you attach the flip loosely, it will tip over when you move it. This can damage the flip / device / environment.

The only logical decision here is to use a hinge. It's sturdy, ensures you never lose the flip, and keeps it from flapping around. It also helps with one-handed operation of the device compared to a cover that snaps on and needs to be removed.

In the case of the phone, the hinge is also big enough to hold the video cable through the hinge can be guided from the device to the screen.


Note that phones experimented more: flipping, sliding, unfolding, ... In comparison, the Star Trek communicator lacks the variation.

Johnny Bones

That answer undermines completely the idea that no form of communication device before Star Trek had such a design. While it seems like a no-brainer at the moment, that answer isn't based on the likelihood that at least one of the designers of the modern cellphone thought, "I bet we could make it look like the communicator from Star Trek ..."

Flater

@ JohnnyBones: (1) I'm not undermining anything. I am only looking at the ergonomics of handheld devices in relation to the anatomy of a human hand. Whether older designs (fictional or real) exist is irrelevant to my answer. (2) I cannot prove (nor do I claim) that there is no way that flip phones were designed to look like Star Trek communicators. But that's because I can't prove a negative (the lack of an intentional reference). Do you have any evidence that the designers of the flip phone decided to purposely refer to Star Trek communicators? If so, that would be a good answer.

Flater

@JohnnyBones: (3) Even if there is no intentional reference, it may be unconscious if the designer happened to see Star Trek. We cannot prove an unconscious connection. (4) In the absence of actual evidence of an intentional link between the two, the only reasonable answer we can infer is "undetectable, but also not impossible," in other words, "maybe".

Johnny Bones

You've been here long enough, Flater. You have just described every reason why this shouldn't have been posted as an answer.

Flater

@JohnnyBones: If you have evidence to support intentional reference, please post a reply. I agree that the word of God is a better answer than the corollary. However, in the absence of any evidence, my position still stands on the ergonomics and practicality of the "flip-phone" design for a handheld device. I would also appreciate if you didn't resort to an ad hominem.