A companion robot for older adults needs to be accepted by the person who will live with it. This is the central focus of Pablo Mariñosa’s project, which he presents in chapter 33 of Toque de Ingenio. Onorato AI takes the form of a parrot and proposes combining conversation, reminders, and communication with family members. The interview reveals an ongoing development where emotional design, interaction, and technology were intended to be integrated into the final product.
Guest: Pablo Mariñosa, who was introduced in the episode as the CEO of Onorato AI.
Interview published: January 13, 2025. Episode: 33. Duration: 1 h 8 min.
In this episode:
- How the experience of supporting a family member shaped the form and intention of the product.
- Why a device, technically capable, might be rejected by the person who is meant to use it.
- What distinguishes validating the appearance of a complete electronic and functional integration?
Pablo traces the origin of the project back to his father’s care and the bond he established with a parrot during their outings. The recording refers to December 2024 and was published in January 2025. The functions and commercialization strategies described are proposals for the project at that stage, and do not represent a verification of clinical performance or current availability.
Refusing technology is also a design requirement.
Pablo recounts that he had tested various devices to support his father. His aim was to establish routines and determine if he needed assistance, but the outcome wasn’t solely dependent on the device’s features. The user’s own perception could prevent the tool from fulfilling its purpose.
When recalling that experience, he explains that his father:
“I considered everything an intrusion”.
Pablo Mariñosa 4:20.
That learning changes the development question. The team shouldn’t just consider what the product can detect or communicate, but also how it will be interpreted by the user. A device that generates rejection is unlikely to integrate smoothly into someone’s daily life.
The case relates to product design Focused on usage. Understanding routines, preferences, and concerns allows us to define an interaction that makes sense. Acceptance isn’t a finishing detail – it can determine whether the object is actually used.
Why does the project take on the form of a parrot?
Onorato’s design stems from a specific experience. Pablo recounts that his father enjoyed listening to a parrot in a shop, and this association brought him joy. The product’s concept aims to recreate some of that sense of familiarity within an object that could accompany him.
The design aims to present itself as a friendly and approachable presence. In the interview, Pablo emphasizes the importance of appearance, touch, and the reaction it evokes. The outward form should communicate a desire for companionship before detailing all the technical capabilities planned.
That starting point helps to understand the time invested in exploring the structure. The developer had a very specific mental image and needed to communicate it to designers and prototypes. The conversation illustrates the difficulty of transforming a desired feeling into a shared, physical proposal.
For some teams, the focus is on describing the expected response from the user and how it will be observed. While an emotional reference can guide the project, it needs to be translated into concrete decisions and testing. The appearance should be evaluated with real users, in conditions mirroring actual usage.
The proposed interaction involves both initiative and personalization.
Pablo argues that the product can initiate conversations and reminders, as well as respond to requests. In his account, this initiative aims to address a limitation of existing tools, which require the user to remember to issue a command. The proposal is linked to routines and everyday moments.
It also describes personalization based on information provided by family members. Names, hobbies, and preferences would help to adapt the conversation. The aim is for the product to have a context that allows for a more familiar and personal interaction with the person.
The interview includes ideas for communication with family members and alerts based on sensors. These are features the team wanted to integrate, and they should be distinguished from demonstrated results. The conversation does not provide an independent validation of fall detection, emotional interpretation, or a response to emergencies.
From the design of user experience, The challenge is to define what the system does, what a person can expect, and when someone should intervene. The closer the interaction, the more important it is to maintain a clear and understandable relationship between appearance, response, and actual ability.
To arrive home with a clear plan.
Pablo described a desired installation experience that he wanted to be straightforward. His own difficulty in setting up devices for his father influenced this requirement. He wanted the product to arrive with a pre-configured setup and a simple, easy-to-understand activation process.
The proposal included the main parrot and elements for various spaces. This architecture distributes functions, but it also adds steps for placement and connection. The overall experience needs to explain what goes in each space and how it’s determined when the whole system is ready.
The interview outlines two distinct profiles: the person who acquires or prepares the product, and the person who uses it on a daily basis. The development should cater to both of these profiles. A family member could set up an initial configuration, while the end-user needs a daily interaction that is appropriate for their abilities and preferences.
That difference is typical of support products. Simply purchasing a product doesn’t necessarily reflect how it’s used. Observing the delivery, installation, and ongoing support allows you to identify needs that wouldn’t be apparent if you only evaluated the device on a table.
The casing and the function require separate testing.
Pablo breaks down the development process into several stages. Firstly, he organizes the idea into a proposal; secondly, he works on the physical aspect; and finally, he integrates the necessary technology. During the interview, he identifies the following as an ongoing task:
“The implementation of electronics”.
Pablo Mariñosa 34:08.
It also recounts that they were already conducting experiments with a computer connected and with conversational capabilities. This activity allows them to explore aspects of behavior, but it doesn’t equate to having the entire system integrated in its final format. Each test provides different evidence.
The acceptance of the form and technical functionality should come after. An object that is desired needs to house components and maintain a consistent interaction. A system that performs correctly in a test environment must also function effectively within the product and its intended environment of use.
A program of prototyping Help organize those questions. You should first validate the appearance and manipulation aspects, followed by a specific function, and finally, the complete process. It’s important to keep track of what each version demonstrates, to avoid confusing a positive reaction with a validation of all the features.
Marketing and feedback to continue development.
The conversation explores potential routes to market, focusing on both individual buyers and organizations. Pablo is considering various channels and collaborations to facilitate product access. These are plans that still needed to be finalized and tested for commercial viability.
It also explained their interest in a pre-sale linked to a community of early users. Beyond resources, they were looking for people who could provide feedback on usage. This subsequent learning process was intended to help review features and guide future versions.
The episode explores the relationship between ambition, development timelines, and launch preparation. Every technical advance needs to be coordinated with what is communicated to the market. Maintaining clarity about what has been tested and what is being developed helps to maintain realistic expectations.
What can another development team learn?
- Investigate how users perceive technology, as well as what functions they require.
- Distinguishing between the buyer, the configurator, and the user of the product each day.
- Validate each of the appearance, interaction, and integration aspects separately before evaluating the entire system.
- Clearly communicate the demonstrated capabilities and ongoing development objectives.
Onorato AI offers a reflection on the relationship between form, companionship, and technology. For companies developing devices where user acceptance is crucial, i-mas can help transform interaction requirements into tangible designs and effective testing. Tell us what product you’re looking to develop..
To continue reading: The development of a communication application using pictograms with TalX..
Source of article: Interview with Edgar Guerrero and Pablo Mariñosa on Toque de Ingenio, published on January 13, 2025. The quotes link to the relevant sections in the video; the key takeaways are a summarized editorial, and future functions are presented as proposed elements of the project.
