Another topic of interest is the catch-all term skeuomorph, objects that retain ornamental elements of the past, derivative iterations of elements that are no longer necessary for function, or derivative objects that retain ornamental design cues to a structure that was necessary in the original and how we use it to define navigational patterns and interaction. We now stand at a time where many believe skeuomorphs are becoming archaisms. The best way I can explain it is to look at how we measure engine power, in horsepower. At one point this made sense, they compared the output to something commonly known, the output of a horse, believe it or not people knew how much a horse could pull. My car has 286HP, that does not mean much to me…it may have made sense 100 years ago but today I cant even picture what 286 horses look likes, I guess I could Google it. The thing about this debate on archaisms is that it is not a debate on design trends or aesthetics it is a debate about human transition. We build off what exists. The trick is to design for the times in order to drive a smooth frustration free evolution into tomorrow and learn while doing it. It is the balance of innovation, a term that sounds so positive, but don’t let it fool you, innovation can quickly become irresponsible. We cant fix the horsepower archaism by changing it to light years. My question is how do we balance yesterday and tomorrow into today.