Software designers, among others, know that “default” is a very powerful tool for influencing the behavior of users/customers.

Architectures of Control looks at what happened when Adobe tried to steer business toward FedEx Kinko’s. Other printers got upset, and a default setting was removed from the product.

[Image from Architectures of Control]

As someone who lives only a few blocks from a Kinko’s, this strikes me as a case where competitors acted against the interests of consumers. We didn’t get a more flexible product, one which would allow us to choose to send our documents to FedEx Kinko’s or another print shop. We simply have no “send-to” button at all. It reminds me of all the cases against Microsoft, where competing software companies complained about Microsoft giving consumers free software. Now, I’m a Mac guy. But I also very rarely have a problem with companies trying to give me something for free.

While the FedEx Kinko’s button could be seen as piece of architecture trying to control consumers, I think consumers pretty desperately need these default functions. I don’t agree with everything I’ve read attributed to “The Paradox of Choice,” but it seems rather obvious that individuals don’t need any more extraneous choices to make. I’m happy to just send my printing wherever the heck Adobe wants me to. And if I have a strong preference for another provider, I’ll find a workaround. If enough people have another preference, Adobe will have a pretty good incentive to come up with another architecture.