PORTFOLIO| CLEMSON M.ARCH + HEALTH 2015 |JESSICA WELCH

Table of ContentsSTUDIO 2014Clemson Urban Design - Phase 1Clemson Urban Design - Phase 2Outdoor Lab Infirmary

MATERIALS & ASSEMBLIES 2014Haiku Model

STUDIO 2013Kunsthal Food Market

ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS

MATERIALS & ASSEMBLIES 2014 Pen Holder

BACKGROUNDI received an undergradate Bacherlors of Arts from the University of Virginia with a concentration in oil painting and a minor in architcture. Directly after graduating, I went on to graduate school and I am currently pursing a Masters of Architecture + Health degree from Clemson University. I will be graduating from that program in 2016.

TABL

E O

F CO

NTEN

TSSTRUCTURES 2013TGV Model

RESEARCH METHODS 2014Research PosterAlzheimer’s Research Paper

ARTWORK 2012

STRUCTURES 2013TGV Model

RESEARCH METHODS 2014Research PosterAlzheimer’s Research Paper

ARTWORK 2012

Clemson Urban Design

PHASE 1

Location: Clemson, SCProject Type: Groups of 4 people

Assignment: Analyze the extent of Col-lege Avenue and create an urban design scheme that forwards the concepts of healthy community design. Within this you should define what healthy commu-nity design is and how this concept can translate into an urban design scheme. The end result should be a master plan which can be merged witth that of the rest of the groups in order to create one cohesive design concept. These de-sign ideas will be shared with a public forum of citizens and the Clemson city council and zoning board.

1

Stud

io 2

014

|

Jess

ica

Wel

ch

ENVIRONMENTALMENTALPHYSICALECONOMICSOCIAL

Healthy Community DesignOptimizing the MENTAL, SOCIAL, PHYSICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL and ECONOMIC aspects of Clemson in order to highten the quality of life - and create a ‘sense of place’ for the permanent residents, students, visiting family members, friends and the surrounding community.

As a large part of this project, we were tasked with attending town meetings and sharing our design ideas with the citizens of Clemson. We also met and worked closely with the town zoning board. It was our intention to educate the citizens of Clemson about their town’s current zoning regulations, what that could mean for future devlopment, and what edits could be made in order to ensure a better and more healthy growth of Clemson’s downtown. In addition to this, our group was tasked with making a video to inform the citizens about healthy community design as well as their downtown and its current zoning issues. Movie link: http://youtu.be/SnB_eHgbjp0

Inviting Walkways Vibrant Public Space

Iconic Landmarks Access to Many Transportation Options

Healthy Community Design Strategies

Clemson Macro Analysis

Studio 2014 | Jessica Welch

Traffic Map Art Locations Waterfront Map

Clemson Micro Analysis

Design Concept Proposal Diagrams

Stud

io 2

014

|

Jess

ica

Wel

ch

ZoningMassing Strategies

C 50’ 0’ 30’ 5’ 25’-50’ Front: 45 degrees at 3rd floor Side: 45 degrees at 2nd floorProposedZoning

Max. Front Side Rear Buffer District Height Setback Setback Setback Yard Stepbacks

All parcels that exceed a ground floor area of 45,000 square feet must include a courtyard or two courtyards which comprise of 15% of the sur-face area. These courtyards can be arranged in the following manner.

Sections

C 50’ 0’ 30’ 5’ 25’-50’ Front: 45 degrees at 3rd floor Side: 45 degrees at 2nd floor

Studio 2014 | Jessica Welch

Urban Design Proposal Master Plan

Clemson Urban DesignPHASE 2

Location: Clemson, SCProject Type: Individual

During this phase of the project College Avenue was broken into parcels and each parcel was as-signed to an individual student. We were tasked with deciding upon a program for the parcel based upon the needs and wants of the com-munity as well as the economic realities of the area. Calculations were also done to decide how much of the parcel had to be devloped for the land to be economically viable.Our designs were to build upon the overall urban design schemes as well as reflect healthy community design and the needs of the Clemson residents. My particu-lar design was meant to create a clinic as well as multiple multi-use buildings wihtin the area. The hope was that the design and layout of these spaces could also create valuable outdoor public spaces between the buildings. The main theory was that in healthy community design the cre-ation and design of spaces between buildings was even more important than the design of the buildings themselves.

7

Studio 2014 | Jessica Welch

COLLEGE AVENUEHIG

HWAY

123

MO

VEM

ENT

THRO

UGH

THE

SITE

ACTIV

ITY N

ODE

S

COLL

EGE

AVEN

UE

HIGHWAY 123

STRODE CIRCLE

Existing Context MapTopographic Design Moves

I. Terracing

II. Green Buffer Extension

GRE

EN B

UFF

ER1

2

3

1

2

3

Parcel Location

I. Seperation

Main Design Moves

II. Movement Through the Site III. Activity Nodes

COM

MER

CIAL

RESI

DENT

IAL

I. Vibrant Urban Cores 3. Access to Transportation Networks

Healthy Community Design Strategies

Social

Economic

Mental

Economic Economic

Social

Physical

Environmental

2. Public Art

Economic

Physical

Environmental

Programming

Sight Boundaries

Movement Across the Site

Movement Through the Site

Address the Street

Ground Plane

Public Spaces

Concept Sketch

Master Plan

Concept Sketches

There is a 24 foot height difference across my parcel. As such, I looked to the precedent of Italian Hill Towns to create a terraced site. I focused on the creation of healthy public spaces which created various ways to interact with and move through the site. The stairs were also placed so that pedestrians are forced to turn and look through the site and at different areas, always seeing into multiple spaces ahead of them.

A

B

Section A

Section B

Street Sections

Stud

io 2

014

|

Jess

ica

Wel

ch

Outdoor Lab Infirmary

Location: Clemson, SCProject Type: Individual

This project was a community outreach assignment in which we were asked to design a fa-cility for the Clemson Outdoor Lab. This design will then be presented to a donor in the hopes of raising money for the project. The Outdoor Lab is a camp for underprivledged, hearing impaired and disabled campers of all age groups. We were tasked with design-ing a facility that could serve as the infirmary, nurses quarters and staff lounge/multipurpose room.

Camp Hope Infirmary Jessica Welch | Spring 2015

Existing Context Guidelines

Client Goals

Group MeetingPlaces Flexibility of

Spaces

Nautral Materials

Celebration of the Outdoors

Central Fireplace

Sliding Doors

Wood &Stone

Large Porches

CLINIC Treatment RoomTriage/Waiting AreaBedroomToilet StorageDispensing AreaTOTAL

NURSE’S AREAAdult’s BedroomChildren’s BedtoomBathroomFood PrepClosetLaundry TOTAL

MULTI-PURPOSE ROOMCheck-in/Registration AreaToiletStorageFood PrepTOTAL

NET AREAGROSS AREA

Number111111

111121

121

Size (sq. ft)120300180

8080

2001110

200200

80100

3060

700

90050

10050

1110

29103637.5

Program

Legend

Infirmary

Nurse’s Quarters

Multipurpose Room/Staff Lounge

Waiting Area

Circulation Space

DN

DNDN

DN

Stud

io 2

014

|

Jess

ica

Wel

ch

Site Analysis Parti Development

Client Goals

GroupMeetingSpaces

Legend

Infirmary

NurseÕs Quarters

Multipurpose Room/Staff Lounge

Waiting Area

Circulation Space

Celebration of the

Outdoors

Natural Materials

Flexible Spaces

Final Massing Strategy

1

3

5

2

4

6

Separation into programs

Nurse’s Quarters Below for Privacy

Break the symmetry

Rotate for Views

Outdoor Spaces

Connective Corridors

Studio 2014 | Jessica Welch

DN

DNDN

DN

Nurse’s Quarters

In�rmary

Multipurpose Room/Sta� Lounge

Laundry Dispensing Area/Living Space

Kitchen

Storage

Bedroom Bedroom

Bathroom

Private Outdoor

Space

Waiting/Triage

Treatment Room Bedroom

Bedroom

Bathroom

Fireplace

Bathroom

Food Prep

Storage

Spaces Can Be Seperated Depending Upon the

SeasonOutdoor Public Space

Water Feature

Programming Diagram

Movement Through the Site

VerticalStacking

Turn forViews

01 02

03 04

Nurse’s Quarters

Infirmary

Multipurpose Room

Haiku Model For our Materials and Assemblies project, we were challenged to take our studio designs and create a haiku (a poem composed of 17 syllables) to respresent the main concepts and moves within our design. The 17 syllables of the haiku had to correspond to 17 removable pieces of the model which could be assem-bled as the Haiku was read. The first Haiku was meant to explore the overall design, while the second was meant to explore the relationship of water to the site. After the Haiku was read,

water was poured into the model.

BUILDING

Gouge, level, join, traverseCut, construct, protect, flourish

Flow, collect, unite, water.

WATER

Pour, follow, cascadeDrop, gather, fill, overflow, Cluster, move, silence. 17

Visu

aliz

atio

n 20

14

| J

essic

a W

elch Pour, follow, cascade

Drop, gather, fill, overflow,

Cluster, move,

silence.

Kunsthal

Location: Manhattan HighlineProject Type: Individual

For this project we were tasked with cre-ating a kunsthal that backed up against the Highline. As such, the building would have two entrances and both the back and front of the building became the front facade. In addition, the Highline would hit the building at the second floor, creating an environment that would have to be reacted to at different heights. A kuns-thal is an art museum that exhibits a ro-tating program of art rather than a set display. As such, our buildings had to be adaptable to address this constantly changing program as well as the drastic

space requirements of modern art.

19

Stud

io 2

013

|

Jess

ica

Wel

chConceptual Models

Site Context

Building Envelope Address Street Circulation

Outdoor Rooftop Spaces Alternate Circulation Paths

Conceptual Models Studio 2013 | Jessica W

elch

CIRCULATION

Public Circulation Paths

Private Circulation Path

Circulation Core

Overall idea: Create multiple paths of circulation through and around the site which could react to the constant movement inherent to NYC. These circulation paths can in turn create very different experiences, both in view and speed, of the same space.

Food Market

Location : Atlanta BeltlineProject Type: Individual

For this project, we were tasked with creating a food market which would lead out onto the Beltline in Atlanta. This site forced us to address the issue of multiple levels and fronts to the building. The programming of the building would change throughout the year due to the seasons and the crops which would be available. As such, our buildings had to be designed so that parts could be closed off during the winter months while the rest of the

building remained active.

22

Stud

io 2

013

|

Jess

ica

Wel

chConcept Sketches Final Model

Site

Circulation around the building

Market stalls surrounding columns

Programming

This building is meant to build upon urban concepts and extend the Beltline directly into the building itself. It also includes a bike path that extends off of the Beltline and around the build-ing exterior. The floor at level with the Beltline also includes ramps allowing bikers to ride into the bottom floor. The bottom floor includes an open area market while the top floor is a greenhouse community garden and open plaza. During the day, this plaza would provide space for food bikes which would prepare some of the food provided by the market.

Studio 2013 | Jessica Welch

Architecture Drawings

Medium: Graphite and Paper

The following drawings were created as part of a site study during my first se-mester of graduate school.

25

Pen Holder

Assignment: Create some-thing to hold a pen that reacts to your desk. The pen hold-er cannot simply rest on the top surface of the desk. Then create construction docu-ments of your design for an-

other student to fabricate.

28

Mat

eria

ls an

d A

ssem

blie

s 20

14

| J

essic

a W

elch

Elements

Concept Sketch-Lock and key pen holder

-Have the pen serve a purpose within the object as well as being held

-Pen is the key to the entire holder, keeps everything locked to the desk

-Holder remains on the desk without the pen but can also be removed from the desk as it is no longer lccked in place

Final Model

TGV Station

Project Type: 4 person group

Assignment: Create a mod-el to study the structure and structural connections of a famous piece of modern architecture. Construct and

build the model by hand.

Project Choice: Calatra-va’s TGV Station

30

Structures 2013 | Jessica Welch

Research Poster

Project Type: Groups of 2

Assignment: Create a research ques-tion that has to do with a consumer product that is relevant to your everyday life. Next, do extensive literature review on the topic and from this information, devlop quantitative and qualitative re-search methods to study your research question. These methods should in-clude multiple surveys of your peers. From the literature and data collected, perform data analysis and draw con-clusions about your topic. Present your findings and conclusions in the format of

a 24 x 36 research poster.

35

Once you go Mac you never go back

QuestionStatement AnalysisHypothesis ConclusionMethod

The Great Debate ?VS

Anna Nguyen | Jessica Welch | Architecture Research Design and Methods | Fall 2014

We wish to inform incoming architecture students about the use of Macbooks in architectural design. We hope to come to a conclusion about whether architects generally prefer Macbooks and what factors a�ect this preference.

Do architecture students prefer Macbooks or other computers for design? Why?

We plan to focus on various aspects that computer buyers consider in their purchasing process. Among these are branding, cost, compatibility, durability, aesthetics, and processing speed. We believe the factor that most greatly a�ects computer choice among architecture students is software compatibility.

Research Question

Purpose Statement

“top relavant factors to purchasing a computer”

Speed[100% of students]

Operatingsystem[87.5% of students]

Mac Users

PC Users

Mac & PC Users

100% 100% 100%

100% 100%78.95%

“least relavant factors to purchasing a computer”

Mac Users

PC Users

Mac & PC Users

Color[28.1% of students]

50% 26.3% 16.6%

studentssurveyed35

Students Macs PCs Macs & PCs

28.57% 57.14% 14.29%

Literature Map

Frame Work

Outcomes Design Factors

Useability

Speed

Cost

Aesthetics

Durability

Experience

Compatibility

Operating System

Size

Material

Brand

Color

User Interface

Assembly

Screen Resolution

Display Quality

Numbers of Computers Owned By Students

45.7% of Students Own One Computer

45.7% of Students Own Two Computers

8.57% of Students Own Three Computers

Hypothesis

Compatible Products

Mac UsersPC Users

100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%

Other Apple Products

PC Compatible Products

De�nitions

Resources

Literature Review

Product Information

Cost

Operating system

Assembly

Brand

Materials

Size

Display Qualities

Screen Resolution

57

1516

1819

5

71511

151617

2

920

21

5 7

159

11

7

15

5 7

15

9

57

15

9

Speed

Operating system

57

1516

18

19

Brand

1516

17

2920

21

User Interface

Assembly5

715

9

1

13

3 11Display Qualities11

715

Aesthetics

Size5

715

11

Brand

151617

29

20

21Assembly

5 715

9

Materials

5 7

159

Durability

Materials

5 7

15 9Brand

151617

2

920

21

Assembly5

7

15

9 Do architecture students prefer Macbooks or other computers for design? Why?

Useability- The ease with which one can operate their computer due to the programing of the interface. Speed- The amount of time it takes a computer to open and run programs, surf the internet, process data and power on and o�. Aesthetics- The general visual and tactile appeal of the product that is derived from various outcomes such as color, material, shape etc. Durability- How long the computer lasts without needing a repair. This applies to both physical longevity of the object as well as the ability of the operating system to �ght o� viruses and not deteriorate over time. Experience- For many brands of computer, all of the design factors come together to create an overall feeling of the brand. Consumers then buy the products to take part in the brand experience itself. Compatibility- The ability of an operating to work with certain types of software. Operating System- The software that supports a computer’s basic functions. For this study the operating system is either OSX or Windows. User Interface- The commands, menus, layout and visual objects through which a user interacts with a computer program. OSX and Windows each boast drastically di�erent interfaces.

1. Pumphrey, Clint. (2011). 10 Di�erences Between Macs and PCs. http://computer.howstu�-works.com/macs/10-di�erences-btween-macs-and-pcs.htm2. Isaacson, Walter. (2012, September). How Steve Jobs’ Love of Simplicity Fueled a Design Revolution. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/how-steve-jobs-love -of-simplici-ty-fueled-a-design-revolution-23868877/?no-ist3. Herrman, John. (2013). Mac vs. PC: Ultimate Laptop Test. http://www.popularmechan-ics.com/technology/gadgets/reviewsmac-vs-pc-ultimate-laptop-lab-4. http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/electronics-computers/computers-internet/ computers/laptop-ratings/models/overview/apple-macbook-pro-13-inch-md101ll-a-990463 79.htm

When you approach almost any computer user in today’s world about whether they prefer Macs or PCs you are almost certain to start a spirited debate. Whether it is due to the witty commercials or the extreme dichotomy that has developed in the computer industry, most people today have a strong bias on the subject. Interestingly, Macs only make up 5% of computers worldwide; however, they boast a much more impressive growth rate than PCs. Within the worldwide operating system market, as of February 2014, Windows made up 90.62% of computers worldwide while OSX only accounted for 7.69%.

Computer forums and blogs are packed with opinions on the PC versus Mac debate with various experts claiming di�erent factors to be the most important. Among the deciding factors that various consumers list are: price, technical speci�cation, choice, availability, operating system, users, software, security and costumer satisfaction.1 In consumer reports of Macbook Pros, citizens listed pros such as applecare, durable construction, ease of use, speed, lack of viruses, reliability, storage, quality construction, battery life, weight and reliable performance. Among the cons listed were the di�erent user interface and heat generation. 4

In a recent study by popular mechanics, they tested an Apple Macbook Pro against an HP Pavilion DM. The scores were higher for Macs in graphic speed, simultaneous app usage, video conversion, �le compression and the time it took to wake from sleep. On the other side, PCs ranked superior in processor speed, gaming and HD CPU usage.4 In another study, Macs beat out PCs in security, operating system, quality, boot time and drivers while PCs won in the categories of price, software, options, upgrades, gaming and repairs. 6 From these studies we can conclude that there are a vast number of ways to compare PCs to Macs and in the end preference for one or the other really boils down to what is most important for you as a consumer.

In our qualitative survey we found that Mac users were very focused on the design of their product. Aesthetics is a factor that Apple spends much of their time and money developing. The former CEO of Apple, Steve Jobs, changed the face of apple products and the brand due to his almost obsessive focus on design. “The unique designs that resulted from this �xation have given Mac products the "hip" image that they enjoy today. This unconventional focus on design began with the very �rst Macintosh, introduced in 1984.”1 Apple’s “… guiding tenet was simplicity—not merely the shallow simplicity that comes from an uncluttered look and feel and surface of a product, but the deep simplicity that comes from knowing the essence of every product, the complexities of its engineering and the function of every component. ‘It takes a lot of hard work,’ Jobs said, ‘to make something simple, to truly understand the underlying challenges and come up with elegant solutions.’ The way we’re running the company, the product design, the advertising, it all comes down to this: Let’s make it simple. Really simple.”

Research Methods

Data Analysis

Shortcomings

Conclusion

Our study was exploratory research of architecture students within Lee Hall comparing 2 subject groups, students with Macs and stu-dents with PCs. We used a mixed methods (qualitative and quantita-tive) approach of surveys and interviews to collect our data.

After the collection of data and interview answers we produced a series of charts and excel �les to convert the raw data into categories and percentages.

After the analysis of our data we found that architecture students are more likely to buy PC’s, especially if they also have a Bachelors in Architecture. The top factors considered in computer purchasing were speed and operating system in a quantitive survey. However, in a qualitative interview, Mac users listed aesthetics and durabilty while PC users listed cost and software compatibility. PC users were also more likely and open to switch to Macs while Mac users displayed more brand loyalty.

If we had more time to conduct our research we could have used a larger sample size and come up with a follow up survey based upon our results. It would be interesteing to further study students who switch between Macs and PCs and why that occurs.

The Macbook Pro is one of Apple’s laptop computer lines. They are currently in their third generation and boast new features such as a retina display and an OSX Maverick operating system. “Simplicity is

the ultimate sophistication”

–Apple Marketing brochure in 1977.2

Other Factors Cost 84.38% Brand 62.5% Material 34.8% Size 75%

Memory 84.38%Graphics Card 84.38%Screen Resolution 75%Compatibility of Software 81.3%

of students said they were loyalty to the brand of computer they currently owned

5. McCracken, Harry. (2010, February). PC vs. Mac: The Straight Scoop. http://www.foxnews. com/tech/2010/02/23/pc-vs-mac-the-straight-scoop/6. http://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch001238.htm7.Casserly, Martyn. (2013, March). Windows 8 vs OSX Mountain Loin: Which is the Better Operat-ing System?http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/features/windows/3436443/windows-8-vs- omountain-lion-which-is-better-operating-system/?pn=88. Jones, Chuck. (2014, April). Bring Back Apple’s Mac Vs. PC Ads. http://www.forbes.com/ sites/chuckjones/2014/04/14/bring-back-apples-mac-vs-pc-ads-since-windows-xp-isnt- support9. Bloch, Peter. (July, 1995). Seeking the Ideal Form: Product Design and Consumer Response. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 59, 16-29. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1252116

17. Crothers, Brooke. (May, 2013). Cause of PC Malaise? Designs not ‘compelling’, says Intel. http://www.cnet.com/news/cause-of-pc-malaise-designs-not-compelling-says-intel/18. Paul, Ian. (November, 2013). Apple by the numbers: Mac not dead yet. http://ww-w.macworld.com/article/2062821/apple-by-the-numbers-mac-not-dead-yet.html19. Weiser, Mark. (September, 1991). The Computer for the 21st Century. Scienti�c America, Vol. 265, 1-15. 20. Marks, Peter. (1995). De�ning Great Products. World Class Design to Manufacture, Vol. 2, 15-25.

10. http://designreform.net/2009/09/whats-the-best-compuer-or-lapto-for-3d-modeling-and- bim11. http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2012/06/is-apple-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-worth-the-money/index.htm12. Null, Christopher. (January, 2010). Reliability and Service: Technology’s Most (and Least) Reliable Brands. http://www.techhive.com/article/187407/reliability_and_service_2009.html13. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2352863,00.asp14. http://www.cnet.com/products/mac-os-x-10-9-mavericks/15. http://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch001238.htm16. Dove, Laurie. http://computer.howstu�works.com/macs/macs-better-than-pcs.htm

75%

De�nitions

Onc

e yo

u go

Mac

you

nev

er g

o ba

ck

Que

stio

nSt

atem

ent

Ana

lysi

sH

ypot

hesi

sCo

nclu

sion

Met

hod

The

Gre

at D

ebat

e?

VS

Ann

a N

guye

n | J

essi

ca W

elch

| A

rchi

tect

ure

Rese

arch

Des

ign

and

Met

hods

| Fa

ll 20

14

We

wis

h to

info

rm in

com

ing

arch

itect

ure

stud

ents

abo

ut th

e us

e of

M

acbo

oks

in a

rchi

tect

ural

des

ign.

We

hope

to c

ome

to a

con

clus

ion

abou

t whe

ther

arc

hite

cts

gene

rally

pre

fer M

acbo

oks

and

wha

t fac

tors

a�

ect t

his

pref

eren

ce.

Do

arch

itect

ure

stud

ents

pre

fer M

acbo

oks

or o

ther

com

pute

rs fo

r des

ign?

Why

?

We

plan

to fo

cus

on v

ario

us a

spec

ts th

at c

ompu

ter b

uyer

s co

nsid

er in

thei

r pur

chas

ing

proc

ess.

Am

ong

thes

e ar

e br

andi

ng,

cost

, com

patib

ility

, dur

abili

ty, a

esth

etic

s, an

d pr

oces

sing

spe

ed.

We

belie

ve th

e fa

ctor

that

mos

t gre

atly

a�e

cts

com

pute

r cho

ice

amon

g ar

chite

ctur

e st

uden

ts is

sof

twar

e co

mpa

tibili

ty.

Rese

arch

Que

stio

n

Purp

ose

Stat

emen

t

“top

rela

vant

factors t

o pu

rcha

sing

a c

ompu

ter”

Spee

d[1

00%

of

stud

ents

]

Ope

ratin

gsy

stem

[87.

5% o

f st

uden

ts]

Mac

U

sers

PC

Use

rsM

ac &

PC

Use

rs

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

78.9

5%

“lea

st re

lava

nt fa

ctors t

o pu

rcha

sing

a c

ompu

ter”

Mac

U

sers

PC

Use

rsM

ac &

PC

Use

rs

Colo

r[2

8.1%

of

stud

ents

]50

%26

.3%

16.6

%

stud

ents

surv

eyed

35St

uden

tsM

acs

PCs

Mac

s &

PCs

28.5

7%57

.14%

14.2

9%

Lite

ratu

re M

ap

Fram

e W

ork

Out

com

esD

esig

n Fa

ctor

s

Use

abili

ty

Spee

d

Cost

Aes

thet

ics

Dur

abili

ty

Expe

rienc

e

Com

patib

ility

Ope

ratin

g Sy

stem

Size

Mat

eria

l

Bran

d

Colo

r

Use

r Int

erfa

ce

Ass

embl

y

Scre

en R

esol

utio

n

Dis

play

Qua

lity

Num

bers

of C

ompu

ters

Ow

ned

By S

tude

nts

45.7

% o

f Stu

dent

s O

wn

One

Com

pute

r45

.7%

of S

tude

nts

Ow

n Tw

o Co

mpu

ters

8.57

% o

f Stu

dent

s O

wn

Thre

e Co

mpu

ters

Hyp

othe

sis

Com

patib

le

Pro

duct

s

Mac

Use

rsPC

Use

rs

100% 90

%80

%70

%60

%50

%40

%30

%20

%10

%O

ther

App

le

Prod

ucts

PC C

ompa

tible

Pr

oduc

ts

De�

niti

ons

Reso

urce

s

Lite

ratu

re R

evie

w

Prod

uct I

nfor

mat

ion

Cost

Ope

ratin

g sy

stem

Ass

embl

y

Bran

d

Mat

eria

ls

Size

Dis

play

Q

ualit

ies

Scre

en

Reso

lutio

n

5715

16

1819

5

715

1115

1617

2

920

21

57

159

11

7

15

57

15

9

57

15

9

Spee

d

Ope

ratin

g sy

stem

5715

16

18

19

Bran

d

1516

17

29

20

21

Use

r In

terf

ace

Ass

embl

y5

715

9

1

13

311

Dis

play

Q

ualit

ies

11

715

Aest

hetic

s

Size

5715

11

Bran

d

1516

17 29

20

21A

ssem

bly

57

15 9

Mat

eria

ls

57 15

9

Dur

abili

ty

Mat

eria

ls

57

159

Bran

d

1516

17

2

920

21

Ass

embl

y5

7 15

9D

o ar

chite

ctur

e st

uden

ts p

refe

r M

acbo

oks

or

othe

r com

pute

rs

for d

esig

n? W

hy?

Use

abili

ty- T

he e

ase

with

whi

ch o

ne c

an o

pera

te th

eir c

ompu

ter d

ue

to th

e pr

ogra

min

g of

the

inte

rfac

e.

Spee

d- T

he a

mou

nt o

f tim

e it

take

s a

com

pute

r to

open

and

run

prog

ram

s, su

rf th

e in

tern

et, p

roce

ss d

ata

and

pow

er o

n an

d o�

. A

esth

etic

s- T

he g

ener

al v

isua

l and

tact

ile a

ppea

l of t

he p

rodu

ct th

at is

de

rived

from

var

ious

out

com

es s

uch

as c

olor

, mat

eria

l, sh

ape

etc.

D

urab

ility

- How

long

the

com

pute

r las

ts w

ithou

t nee

ding

a re

pair.

Th

is a

pplie

s to

bot

h ph

ysic

al lo

ngev

ity o

f the

obj

ect a

s w

ell a

s th

e ab

ility

of t

he o

pera

ting

syst

em to

�gh

t o�

viru

ses

and

not d

eter

iora

te

over

tim

e.

Expe

rien

ce- F

or m

any

bran

ds o

f com

pute

r, al

l of t

he d

esig

n fa

ctor

s co

me

toge

ther

to c

reat

e an

ove

rall

feel

ing

of th

e br

and.

Con

sum

ers

then

buy

the

prod

ucts

to ta

ke p

art i

n th

e br

and

expe

rienc

e its

elf.

Com

patib

ility

- The

abi

lity

of a

n op

erat

ing

to w

ork

with

cer

tain

type

s of

sof

twar

e.

Ope

ratin

g Sy

stem

- The

sof

twar

e th

at s

uppo

rts

a co

mpu

ter’s

bas

ic

func

tions

. For

this

stu

dy th

e op

erat

ing

syst

em is

eith

er O

SX o

r W

indo

ws.

Use

r Int

erfa

ce- T

he c

omm

ands

, men

us, l

ayou

t and

vis

ual o

bjec

ts

thro

ugh

whi

ch a

use

r int

erac

ts w

ith a

com

pute

r pro

gram

. OSX

and

W

indo

ws

each

boa

st d

rast

ical

ly d

i�er

ent i

nter

face

s.

1. P

umph

rey,

Clin

t. (2

011)

. 10

Di�

eren

ces

Betw

een

Mac

s an

d PC

s. ht

tp://

com

pute

r.how

stu�

-w

orks

.com

/mac

s/10

-di�

eren

ces-

btw

een-

mac

s-an

d-pc

s.htm

2. Is

aacs

on, W

alte

r. (2

012,

Sep

tem

ber)

. How

Ste

ve Jo

bs’ L

ove

of S

impl

icity

Fue

led

a D

esig

n Re

volu

tion.

htt

p://

ww

w.s

mith

soni

anm

ag.c

om/a

rts-

cultu

re/h

ow-s

teve

-jobs

-love

-of-s

impl

ici-

ty-fu

eled

-a-d

esig

n-re

volu

tion-

2386

8877

/?no

-ist

3. H

errm

an, J

ohn.

(201

3). M

ac v

s. PC

: Ulti

mat

e La

ptop

Test

. htt

p://

ww

w.p

opul

arm

echa

n-ic

s.com

/tec

hnol

ogy/

gadg

ets/

revi

ewsm

ac-v

s-pc

-ulti

mat

e-la

ptop

-lab-

4. h

ttp:

//w

ww

.con

sum

erre

port

s.org

/cro

/ele

ctro

nics

-com

pute

rs/c

ompu

ters

-inte

rnet

/ co

mpu

ters

/lapt

op-r

atin

gs/m

odel

s/ov

ervi

ew/a

pple

-mac

book

-pro

-13-

inch

-md1

01ll-

a-99

0463

79

.htm

Whe

n yo

u ap

proa

ch a

lmos

t any

com

pute

r use

r in

toda

y’s

wor

ld a

bout

whe

ther

they

pre

fer M

acs

or P

Cs

you

are

alm

ost c

erta

in to

sta

rt a

spi

rited

deb

ate.

W

heth

er it

is d

ue to

the

witt

y co

mm

erci

als

or th

e ex

trem

e di

chot

omy

that

has

dev

elop

ed in

the

com

pute

r ind

ustr

y, m

ost p

eopl

e to

day

have

a s

tron

g bi

as o

n th

e su

bjec

t. In

tere

stin

gly,

Mac

s on

ly m

ake

up

5% o

f com

pute

rs w

orld

wid

e; h

owev

er, t

hey

boas

t a

muc

h m

ore

impr

essi

ve g

row

th ra

te th

an P

Cs. W

ithin

th

e w

orld

wid

e op

erat

ing

syst

em m

arke

t, as

of F

ebru

ary

2014

, Win

dow

s m

ade

up 9

0.62

% o

f com

pute

rs

wor

ldw

ide

whi

le O

SX o

nly

acco

unte

d fo

r 7.6

9%.

Com

pute

r for

ums

and

blog

s ar

e pa

cked

with

opi

nion

s on

the

PC v

ersu

s M

ac d

ebat

e w

ith v

ario

us e

xper

ts

clai

min

g di

�ere

nt fa

ctor

s to

be

the

mos

t im

port

ant.

Am

ong

the

deci

ding

fact

ors

that

var

ious

con

sum

ers

list a

re: p

rice,

tech

nica

l spe

ci�c

atio

n, c

hoic

e,

avai

labi

lity,

ope

ratin

g sy

stem

, use

rs, s

oftw

are,

sec

urity

an

d co

stum

er s

atis

fact

ion.

1 In

con

sum

er re

port

s of

M

acbo

ok P

ros,

citiz

ens

liste

d pr

os s

uch

as a

pple

care

, du

rabl

e co

nstr

uctio

n, e

ase

of u

se, s

peed

, lac

k of

vi

ruse

s, re

liabi

lity,

sto

rage

, qua

lity

cons

truc

tion,

bat

tery

lif

e, w

eigh

t and

relia

ble

perf

orm

ance

. Am

ong

the

cons

lis

ted

wer

e th

e di

�ere

nt u

ser i

nter

face

and

hea

t ge

nera

tion.

4

In a

rece

nt s

tudy

by

popu

lar m

echa

nics

, the

y te

sted

an

App

le M

acbo

ok P

ro a

gain

st a

n H

P Pa

vilio

n D

M. T

he

scor

es w

ere

high

er fo

r Mac

s in

gra

phic

spe

ed,

sim

ulta

neou

s ap

p us

age,

vid

eo c

onve

rsio

n, �

le

com

pres

sion

and

the

time

it to

ok to

wak

e fr

om s

leep

. O

n th

e ot

her s

ide,

PCs

rank

ed s

uper

ior i

n pr

oces

sor

spee

d, g

amin

g an

d H

D C

PU u

sage

.4 In

ano

ther

stu

dy,

Mac

s be

at o

ut P

Cs in

sec

urity

, ope

ratin

g sy

stem

, qu

ality

, boo

t tim

e an

d dr

iver

s w

hile

PCs

won

in th

e ca

tego

ries

of p

rice,

sof

twar

e, o

ptio

ns, u

pgra

des,

gam

ing

and

repa

irs. 6

Fro

m th

ese

stud

ies

we

can

conc

lude

that

ther

e ar

e a

vast

num

ber o

f way

s to

co

mpa

re P

Cs to

Mac

s an

d in

the

end

pref

eren

ce fo

r on

e or

the

othe

r rea

lly b

oils

dow

n to

wha

t is

mos

t im

port

ant f

or y

ou a

s a

cons

umer

.

In o

ur q

ualit

ativ

e su

rvey

we

foun

d th

at M

ac u

sers

wer

e ve

ry

focu

sed

on th

e de

sign

of t

heir

prod

uct.

Aest

hetic

s is

a fa

ctor

that

A

pple

spe

nds

muc

h of

thei

r tim

e an

d m

oney

dev

elop

ing.

The

fo

rmer

CEO

of A

pple

, Ste

ve Jo

bs, c

hang

ed th

e fa

ce o

f app

le

prod

ucts

and

the

bran

d du

e to

his

alm

ost o

bses

sive

focu

s on

de

sign

. “Th

e un

ique

des

igns

that

resu

lted

from

this

�xa

tion

have

gi

ven

Mac

pro

duct

s th

e "h

ip" i

mag

e th

at th

ey e

njoy

toda

y. T

his

unco

nven

tiona

l foc

us o

n de

sign

beg

an w

ith th

e ve

ry �

rst

Mac

into

sh, i

ntro

duce

d in

198

4.”1

App

le’s

“… g

uidi

ng te

net w

as

sim

plic

ity—

not m

erel

y th

e sh

allo

w s

impl

icity

that

com

es fr

om a

n un

clut

tere

d lo

ok a

nd fe

el a

nd s

urfa

ce o

f a p

rodu

ct, b

ut th

e de

ep

sim

plic

ity th

at c

omes

from

kno

win

g th

e es

senc

e of

eve

ry p

rodu

ct,

the

com

plex

ities

of i

ts e

ngin

eerin

g an

d th

e fu

nctio

n of

eve

ry

com

pone

nt. ‘I

t tak

es a

lot o

f har

d w

ork,’

Jobs

sai

d, ‘t

o m

ake

som

ethi

ng s

impl

e, to

trul

y un

ders

tand

the

unde

rlyin

g ch

alle

nges

an

d co

me

up w

ith e

lega

nt s

olut

ions

.’ The

way

we’

re ru

nnin

g th

e co

mpa

ny, t

he p

rodu

ct d

esig

n, th

e ad

vert

isin

g, it

all

com

es d

own

to

this

: Let

’s m

ake

it si

mpl

e. R

eally

sim

ple.”

Rese

arch

Met

hods

Dat

a A

naly

sis

Shor

tcom

ings

Conc

lusi

on

Our

stu

dy w

as e

xplo

rato

ry re

sear

ch o

f arc

hite

ctur

e st

uden

ts w

ithin

Le

e H

all c

ompa

ring

2 su

bjec

t gro

ups,

stud

ents

with

Mac

s an

d st

u-de

nts

with

PCs

. We

used

a m

ixed

met

hods

(qua

litat

ive

and

quan

tita-

tive)

app

roac

h of

sur

veys

and

inte

rvie

ws

to c

olle

ct o

ur d

ata.

Aft

er th

e co

llect

ion

of d

ata

and

inte

rvie

w a

nsw

ers

we

prod

uced

a

serie

s of

cha

rts

and

exce

l �le

s to

con

vert

the

raw

dat

a in

to c

ateg

orie

s an

d pe

rcen

tage

s.

Aft

er th

e an

alys

is o

f our

dat

a w

e fo

und

that

arc

hite

ctur

e st

uden

ts

are

mor

e lik

ely

to b

uy P

C’s,

espe

cial

ly if

they

als

o ha

ve a

Bac

helo

rs

in A

rchi

tect

ure.

The

top

fact

ors

cons

ider

ed in

com

pute

r pur

chas

ing

wer

e sp

eed

and

oper

atin

g sy

stem

in a

qua

ntiti

ve s

urve

y. H

owev

er,

in a

qua

litat

ive

inte

rvie

w, M

ac u

sers

list

ed a

esth

etic

s an

d du

rabi

lty

whi

le P

C us

ers

liste

d co

st a

nd s

oftw

are

com

patib

ility

. PC

user

s w

ere

also

mor

e lik

ely

and

open

to s

witc

h to

Mac

s w

hile

Mac

use

rs

disp

laye

d m

ore

bran

d lo

yalty

.

If w

e ha

d m

ore

time

to c

ondu

ct o

ur re

sear

ch w

e co

uld

have

use

d a

larg

er s

ampl

e si

ze a

nd c

ome

up w

ith a

follo

w u

p su

rvey

bas

ed

upon

our

resu

lts. I

t wou

ld b

e in

tere

stei

ng to

furt

her s

tudy

stu

dent

s w

ho s

witc

h be

twee

n M

acs

and

PCs

and

why

that

occ

urs.

The

Mac

book

Pro

is o

ne o

f App

le’s

lapt

op c

ompu

ter l

ines

. The

y ar

e cu

rren

tly in

thei

r thi

rd g

ener

atio

n an

d bo

ast n

ew fe

atur

es s

uch

as a

re

tina

disp

lay

and

an O

SX M

aver

ick

oper

atin

g sy

stem

. “S

impl

icity

is

the

ultim

ate

soph

istic

atio

n”

–App

le M

arke

ting

broc

hure

in 1

977.

2

Oth

er F

acto

rs

Co

st

84.

38%

Bran

d

62.

5%

M

ater

ial

34.

8%

Si

ze

75%

Mem

ory

84.3

8%G

raph

ics

Card

84

.38%

Scre

en R

esol

utio

n

75

%Co

mpa

tibili

ty o

f Sof

twar

e

81.3

%

o

f stu

dent

s

s

aid

they

w

ere

loya

lty to

the

bran

d of

com

pute

r the

y cu

rren

tly o

wne

d

5. M

cCra

cken

, Har

ry. (

2010

, Feb

ruar

y). P

C vs

. Mac

: The

Str

aigh

t Sco

op. h

ttp:

//w

ww

.foxn

ews.

com

/tec

h/20

10/0

2/23

/pc-

vs-m

ac-t

he-s

trai

ght-

scoo

p/6.

htt

p://

ww

w.c

ompu

terh

ope.

com

/issu

es/c

h001

238.

htm

7.Ca

sser

ly, M

arty

n. (2

013,

Mar

ch).

Win

dow

s 8

vs O

SX M

ount

ain

Loin

: Whi

ch is

the

Bett

er O

pera

t-in

g Sy

stem

?htt

p://

ww

w.p

cadv

isor

.co.

uk/f

eatu

res/

win

dow

s/34

3644

3/w

indo

ws-

8-vs

- om

ount

ain-

lion-

whi

ch-is

-bet

ter-

oper

atin

g-sy

stem

/?pn

=88.

Jone

s, Ch

uck.

(201

4, A

pril)

. Brin

g Ba

ck A

pple

’s M

ac V

s. PC

Ads

. htt

p://

ww

w.fo

rbes

.com

/ si

tes/

chuc

kjon

es/2

014/

04/1

4/br

ing-

back

-app

les-

mac

-vs-

pc-a

ds-s

ince

-win

dow

s-xp

-isnt

- sup

port

9. B

loch

, Pet

er. (

July

, 199

5). S

eeki

ng th

e Id

eal F

orm

: Pro

duct

Des

ign

and

Cons

umer

Res

pons

e.

Jour

nal o

f Mar

ketin

g, V

ol. 5

9, 1

6-29

. htt

p://

ww

w.js

tor.o

rg/s

tabl

e/12

5211

6

17. C

roth

ers,

Broo

ke. (

May

, 201

3). C

ause

of P

C M

alai

se?

Des

igns

not

‘com

pelli

ng’, s

ays

Inte

l. ht

tp://

ww

w.c

net.c

om/n

ews/

caus

e-of

-pc-

mal

aise

-des

igns

-not

-com

pelli

ng-s

ays-

inte

l/18

. Pau

l, Ia

n. (N

ovem

ber,

2013

). A

pple

by

the

num

bers

: Mac

not

dea

d ye

t. h

ttp:

//w

w-

w.m

acw

orld

.com

/art

icle

/206

2821

/app

le-b

y-th

e-nu

mbe

rs-m

ac-n

ot-d

ead-

yet.h

tml

19. W

eise

r, M

ark.

(Sep

tem

ber,

1991

). Th

e Co

mpu

ter f

or th

e 21

st C

entu

ry. S

cien

ti�c

Am

eric

a,

Vol.

265,

1-1

5.

20. M

arks

, Pet

er. (

1995

). D

e�ni

ng G

reat

Pro

duct

s. W

orld

Cla

ss D

esig

n to

Man

ufac

ture

, Vol

. 2,

15-2

5.

10. h

ttp:

//de

sign

refo

rm.n

et/2

009/

09/w

hats

-the

-bes

t-co

mpu

er-o

r-la

pto-

for-

3d-m

odel

ing-

and-

bi

m11

. htt

p://

ww

w.c

onsu

mer

repo

rts.o

rg/c

ro/n

ews/

2012

/06/

is-a

pple

-mac

book

-pro

-with

-ret

ina-

disp

lay-

wor

th-t

he-m

oney

/inde

x.ht

m12

. Nul

l, Ch

risto

pher

. (Ja

nuar

y, 2

010)

. Rel

iabi

lity

and

Serv

ice:

Tech

nolo

gy’s

Mos

t (an

d Le

ast)

Re

liabl

e Br

ands

. htt

p://

ww

w.te

chhi

ve.c

om/a

rtic

le/1

8740

7/re

liabi

lity_

and_

serv

ice_

2009

.htm

l13

. htt

p://

ww

w.p

cmag

.com

/art

icle

2/0,

2817

,235

2863

,00.

asp

14. h

ttp:

//w

ww

.cne

t.com

/pro

duct

s/m

ac-o

s-x-

10-9

-mav

eric

ks/

15.

http

://w

ww

.com

pute

rhop

e.co

m/is

sues

/ch0

0123

8.ht

m16

. Dov

e, L

aurie

. ht

tp://

com

pute

r.how

stu�

wor

ks.c

om/m

acs/

mac

s-be

tter

-tha

n-pc

s.htm

75%

De�

nitio

ns

Research Methods 2014 | Jessica W

elch

Alzheimer’s Research PaperrThis assignment was completely open ended, students were to pick a re-search topic and develop a research paper of 12-20 pages in length. I de-cided to study long-term care facilties for the elderly with Alzheimer’s disease. I specifically wanted to study what design practices could be adopted to increase mobility within these settings. In contrast to normal long-term care facilties, many Alzheimer’s institutions include people who are cognitively impaired but not physically impaired. As such, I wanted to study how physical mobility could be increased through design strategies that helped with cognitive impairment. Research shows that exercise and au-tonomy lead to a better sleep cycle, less disruptive behavior and a decrease in the speed of cognitive decline for Alz-heimer’s patients. As such, when de-signing these faciltiies, architects must be looking for ways to increase the mo-

bility of these patients. 37

Research Methods 2014 | Jessica W

elchV. Conclusions

As evidenced by research, current built environments and academic articles, the way that designers are currently conceptualizing Alzheimer’s facilities needs to undergo a drastic change. The traditional double loaded, repetitive, indoor spaces with few unique wayfinding devices or outdoor spaces are simply not conducive to the Alzheimer’s patient’s needs. Physical activity is a key element for patients to improve their quality of life, mental and physical health as well as social interactions. It gives patients a sense of autonomy and allows them to relieve tension and stress. Movement is also part of wandering, a natural symptom of Alzheimer’s disease. As such, we need to be looking at our design decisions as methods to decrease lost wandering, and increase safe wandering and thus mobility both in the indoor and outdoor environments of a facility. This can be done through the efficient use and layout of wayfinding devices, floor plans and outdoor spaces. Architects need to stop looking for one answer to wayfinding in these facilities. The fact is that Alzheimer’s facilities house patients with a very broad spectrum of mental and physical capabilities. As such, the use of as many wayfinding devices as possible will ultimately be the most beneficial. Designers should be laying out spaces to include nameplates, personalized doors and elements such as memory boxes, landmarks (such as clocks, aquariums etc.) and artwork. Also, the importance of visual connections between spaces cannot be overlooked. Wherever possible, walls should be avoided. Patients will have the easiest time orienting themselves when their goals are within sight. Lastly, the idea of cues utilizing multiple senses is something that needs to be further studied within design. Architects should begin to think of elements that activate the other senses, such as the sound of a fish tank, or the change of flooring textures underneath a patient’s feet. It seems that the most effective way finding will combine cues from as many different senses as possible. Floor plans should be comprised of small clustered units of rooms surrounding public social spaces. Corridors must be simple and closed-loop and have an open feel. Above all, hallways should always avoid dead ends. Facilities should also move towards small, pri-vate-rooms with many small activity spaces rather than a few large spaces. Lastly, all of these things need to be organized and laid out to create effective wandering spaces. Designers need to stop thinking of hallways in the traditional manner and rather look at them as meandering paths through the facilities. They need to include multiple ways of getting places as well as intersections with areas of interest such as social spaces. In an Alzheimer’s facility corridors do not need to be designed around the traditional merit of efficient travel, but rather should allow for stimulating and safe wandering of the patients along multiple interesting yet simple routes. Lastly, outdoor spaces need to start to be ranked at equal importance to indoor spaces due to the countless mental and physical advantages that they provide for patients. They should be walled spaces that are open enough for the ease of supervision by staff. One exit or entrance should be included to prevent confusion and there should be flexible seating options both within spaces and along pathways. The layout should be simple with closed-loop routes and no hidden spaces. As with indoor wandering paths, routes should include points of interest such as bird feeders or gardens. Protection from the elements is also a large concern and should be designed for. The most important aspect of outdoor spaces needs to be the provision of multiple types of areas. Alzheimer’s disease produces patients with a wide variety of needs and as such, a wide variety of flexible spaces need to be provided. The outdoors requires loud stimulating spaces, quiet and private spaces, good socializing spaces and spaces that range between these three. Designers need to make the outdoor environment as flexible and malleable to different programming options and uses as possible. Through the implementation of effective wayfinding, outdoor spaces and floor plans into Alzheimer’s long-term care designs, the end result should be a space that decreases unsafe or confused wandering of patients. This environment should result in more personal autonomy for patients and less stress and confusion. The ultimate goal is that the implementation of such spaces will increase mobility of patients and ultimately their overall quality of life.

39

Oil Paint - Reproduction 30 Second Gesture

Fresco on Concrete

Oil Painting

Pencil Sketch - Study

Acryclic Painting

Pencil and Charcoal - ReproductionOil Painting

Acrylic Painting