The articles of the July issue of the TRIZ-journal fall into the following categories:
Amongst the case studies the article "Typical Examples of Innovative Design Based on TRIZ" by Feng Yuan and T.Y. Wang attracted my attention. I was wondering what was so typical in this case study that they called it so ? The problem was quite mundane. And the solution was rather trivial. It did not require TRIZ or any other methodology to arrive at. I believe the authors invoked TRIZ just in order to make a "research" paper of the dull work. And this is really typical for all case studies published in the TRIZ-journal ! Thus, Feng Yuan and T.Y. Wang did really say the truth ! Unintentionally, though. The truth would have been more complete had they entitled their article as "Typical Examples of Not Very Innovative Design Not Based on TRIZ But Presented as TRIZ Case Studies in Order to Earn Academic Degrees".
Another piece that attracted my attention in the TRIZ-journal was a review of the new e-book on ASIT. From the review I learned about a novel ASIT technique of conceptualizing new products consisting in systematic removal of main parts of old systems. Upon some consideration I came to a conclusion that ASIT itself was definitely devised according to this principle. Indeed, what is ASIT if not TRIZ minus its key parts ?
Upon further consideration I came to a conclusion that the technique is quite misleading. For example, if we consider a bed, what is its main part ? Mattress, probably. The technique suggests to think about a bed without a mattress. Wow ! But what will you do with frame ? Leave it ? Why would not think about the ideal bed instead ? The ideal bed is no bed but its function is nevertheless fulfilled ! In other words, why throw away just mattress ? Throw away the entire bed altogether !
It seems that ASIT was devised by "researchers" who threw away their main parts too. Namely heads !