1 Safety Net Design

Sometimes I think that we get too caught up in what I call “Safety net design” We make a clean and safe design, that while it looks good. It doesn’t have that soul, it doesn’t break that boundary that others are doing.

Google is a good example of taking a logo and making it interactive and fun during special events. As of this writing, Lucy Ball’s birthday was the last one they presented in a fun way.

Great article!

posted at 02:33 pm on August 9, 2011 by jcgallaher

3 Not sure about the Reuters v Bloomberg example

Nice article, and broadly I agree with it.

Not sure about the Bloomberg v Reuters example though. I agree that the Reuters map is superficially more attractive, and ‘playable’, but you assume that both UIs share a common purpose, and that users approach them with the same goals.

If I want to understand where each stock exchange is located, then Reuters does that best. But, if I want to quickly compare and contrast the state of various indexes, then the Bloomberg table wins hands down. I can process the data on Bloomberg quickly and efficiently. On Reuters comparisons are more difficult to make.

The Wanderfly v Orbitz example though was a better example of improving the user experience through ‘play’. Again though, each site begins with different assumptions about its’ users. Wanderfly, that you don’t know where you want to go, and so it will help you find out. Orbitz, that you know where and how, but need to book the flights, hotels etc. Neither approach is wrong, they are just catering for slightly different customers.

This doesn’t undermine your article, but it doesn’t provide the reinforcement that the argument deserves.

posted at 04:27 am on August 10, 2011 by BarryRichards

5 Might work better as two articles...

This has a lot of useful insight into meeting client expectations.

I think the title of the article sells it a little short – this is relevant whether you’re designing for ‘fun’, or for ‘vibrant’,‘quirky’, etc.

posted at 06:22 am on August 11, 2011 by heyjames

7 'FUN"

I’ll defintely agree with your insights. With that ‘steps of designing of fun’ to follow you’ll achieved the said design you’ll think is fun.

posted at 03:17 am on August 13, 2011 by bertkinsman10

8 Feel the fun

I was going to point out that you could do a search and replace on the word “fun” in your article with buzz word du jour, but then in your response to Heyjames you made that exact point.

Doesn’t it seem odd to approach a right-brain, emotive, empathetic need with a left-brain formulaic approach? (“Look at all these fun things I’ve added to our website that I got off of A List Apart”)

Honestly, has your best work come about because you followed a process? Or because you felt emotionally engaged and excited, creative, passionate, and you knew the client felt the same way?

posted at 02:15 am on August 18, 2011 by martypdx

9 good processes important

i like the way youve broken down the design process into a type of system. sometimes people think design is an ethereal type procedure like an artist with a flash of inspiration but you showed that design involves methodical groundwork

does anyone have any good recommendations for online design courses – i can build a website but my design needs help!

posted at 08:19 pm on August 18, 2011 by pogostick

10 Intangible

Always a tough brief to create fun especially the first time you do it. But it seems to fall back into the category of most sites you develop for your clients. Take the time to understand/research their business/motives and you will be a long way down the track to a mutually pleasing outcome.

posted at 03:16 am on August 19, 2011 by IamDAMO