Comment by wmeredith
1 day ago
I think the point is to make the smallest unit of functionality possible and then people can integrate that into their use case using attachments, casings, etc. in a way they see fit. It's a good approach for this product in my opinion.
I think this argument would work better if the AirTag in its minimal form wasn't so teardrop-shaped. It feels almost like it was designed to be difficult to integrate into other environments because it lacks any edges or openings. It ensures that anything that could hold it must be at least as big as the AirTag itself. It really confuses me why they couldn't even allow for a single small hole in its edge - it would still leave attachment up to the user, but make it far more flexible by letting people just hook it onto things. Is it because design had overpowered functionality in this product? Is it because this shape is somehow mandated by the hardware within it? It confuses me.
An Apple product in which design takes precedence over usability. Imagine that.
That shape is symbolic of the tears of those who wish nothing more than to track where they've left their keys.
This might also explain why the first party luggage loop accessory seems to have been (unfortunately) memory-holed. I think third parties still sell them out of excess inventory, but they've been harder to come by in recent times.
My current carry-on doesn't have large enough attachment points to easily accommodate the Apple leather case's keyring, so an updated loop would have been welcome.
Mine is duct taped inside the inner liner of the carryon that has a small zipper for cleaning.
This is the way. My AirTags are hidden in my bags/luggage.