11 Untitled

I complain with Jeffrey that that the article is just a start of a very complex field. While i was reading the article I thought about online shops and how they could use the advices. Customers for online shops often heaving different claims to a website. Usability and trust are more important than inspiration and enchantment.

posted at 03:00 am on June 27, 2007 by Katja Schiemann

12 in response to Katja

I am not saying that the ideas in the article could not be applied or might be interesting food for thought. I am just saying that I’m really looking for concrete examples of these principles being applied to the web. I have a feeling that we are just starting this development. I’ve read and heard about the internet enabling non-linear narrative and real interaction, but so far these developments are still relatively marginal. I agree with you that usability and trust are often more important. But in that sense I also feel that it might be a good idea to see the internet a bit like a city, with multiple functions, and therefore different kinds of behaviour. After all, a library is very different from a postoffice and a bar. You don’t want to mix these things up…

posted at 10:54 am on June 27, 2007 by Jeffrey Postma

14 Quite a vague approach...

A pleasant, enjoyable work of words, your article was. One should ask, whether you are such a good designer as you are a writer. :) The think is, you surely have a way with words and this proves that anyone who wishes to convey his message successfully within the visual medium must be a good storyteller. I just thought your article lucks the insight, but again, I might be wrong. I don’t know… Are good storytellers perceptive? Or do they provoke their listeners to think a little further?

posted at 01:25 pm on June 29, 2007 by Zoe Marmara

15 Thank you...

… so much for this wonderful article. I never could have said it that way, but it’s exactly how I feel about what I do.

posted at 09:01 am on June 30, 2007 by Caspar Huebinger

16 Providing some examples

Great article Sharon! You really got a lot of heavy points on the tricky field user experience across in a very accessible way, I’m thoroughly impressed.

I commented and expanded on your article on my blog where I tried to also give some pointers on how to implement these ideas and some examples on how they have already been implemented. It’s obviously not as refined as this article but hopefully it will be a good read to someone anyway since examples where requested.

posted at 02:10 am on July 2, 2007 by Mattias Lundmark

17 Craft of the {human} Experience

This article is certainly a timely piece. As a user experience designer to some interesting and large projects, I’ve had to advocate the persons on “the other side of the screen” numerous times. Much of the time to the humbling response of something along the lines of “well, because of the business goals…” [insert objection here].
It seems we – as the craftspeople in this industry – are in the position to take this type of stand for the humans who must use our clients’ [insert service here.]
In fact, this weekend, I’ve started a process in myself to stoke some emotionality for the “user” and move away from two heavily used terms that I think are actually hindering us from totally empathizing with our audience and creating the best experiences imaginable.
First, the word, “user.” This has discussed around on various platforms and not really new, but I want to make a push to re-ignite this notion. From the cold, steely, technical aspect, they are “users,” but at the end of the day, they’re people, other humans, just like you and just like me.
The second word we should move away from – and this will probably bother some because it is so the vogue thing – is “design.” This includes all derivatives. Primarily for the same reason as the above. If you do a search at Thesaurus.com for the word “design” you’ll find cold terminology like, “model” “map” “configuration,” etc.
Do a search for the term, “craft.” In contrast, you’ll find warmer words like, “skillful” “art” “ingenuity” “workmanship.”

Sure, it’s semantic hair-split, but I think there is value in this reorientation of our perception. If you’re interested, I’ve started a new group at ma.gnolia.com as a starting point to gather some of these thoughts together. I’d love to hear from folks on their opinions on this matter: http://ma.gnolia.com/groups/craft-of-the-human-x

posted at 03:05 am on July 2, 2007 by Chris Pallé

18 a fresh approach?!

First, thanks to Sharon for responding to my commentary: i think these kinds of discussions can really help one to find new directions!! keep it up! After reading the comment on Mattias blog, I had to think of a site we have recently completed at my agency. It is in Dutch, but you might get the idea anyway. It is about life questions, and functions in an associative way, to lead you from one notion or question to the next. You can also search for a more specified theme, respond and read responses by others. It is rather experimental, and this indeed might put some people of, but it’s worth pushing some boundaries once in a while. Please do check it out on: www.levensvragen.nl – If you have any comments please let me know!

posted at 11:37 am on July 2, 2007 by Jeffrey Postma

19

The second word we should move away from – and this will probably bother some because it is so the vogue thing – is “design.� This includes all derivatives. Primarily for the same reason as the above. If you do a search at Thesaurus.com for the word “design� you’ll find cold terminology like, “model� “map� “configuration,� etc. Do a search for the term, “craft.� In contrast, you’ll find warmer words like, “skillful� “art� “ingenuity� “workmanship.�

Oh dear Lord in heaven, where do I begin?

First of all, calling ourselves “designers” and what we do “design” isn’t about being in vogue. It’s because design is the cornerstone of what we do. What you’re describing as warm tones—art, skill, ingenuity—are important aspects of the total package, but it’s not what my job is built upon. The foundation of what we do is make things that are intuitive and lovely to use. Design intentionally fills a recognized need. It does something. It doesn’t just sit there looking good.

Brilliant design is absolutely integral to the brilliant user experience. Don’t be deceived by the language on dictionary.com—you don’t go to the general populace’s tool to find technical definitions of industry terms (for example, the entry for “Chaos” on dictionar.com is quite different from the way my husband, a physical scientist, uses the term). There isn’t anything cold or standoffish about real design. In fact, just the opposite. Design brings people and their needs together. Design fills a void in human experience. Design elicits emotions, creates opportunities, forms relationships.

Design is a craft, but it is so much more than that. Design is about making people love something. How you do that in various circumstances depends on the product, the designer, the user, and the environment. But that’s what we do. People don’t love things that are hard to use. They don’t love tools that don’t make sense, aren’t intuitive, and don’t work well. They love their iPods, Dyson vacuum cleaners, and KitchenAid mixers because they’re lovely, elegant, and well-made, and because they work well. They fit seamlessly into the rest of our lives. We actually look forward to using them.

The problem isn’t the notion of design. The problem may be that we sometimes forget what design really is.

posted at 06:30 pm on July 2, 2007 by amber simmons