In my opinion, no single design is apt to be optimal for everyone.
If you think of the product as a service, then the separate parts make no sense - the point of a product is to offer great experiences to its owner, which means that it offers a service. And that experience, that service, comprises the totality of its parts: The whole is indeed made up of all of the parts. The real value of a product consists of far more than the product's components.
Too many companies believe that all they must do is provide a 'neat' technology or some 'cool' product or, sometimes, just good, solid engineering. Nope. All of those are desirable (and solid engineering is a must), but there is much more to a successful product than that: understanding how the product is to be used, design, engineering, positioning, marketing, branding-all matter. It requires designing the Total User Experience.
Everything has a personality: everything sends an emotional signal. Even where this was not the intention of the designer, the people who view the website infer personalities and experience emotions. Bad websites have horrible personalities and instill horrid emotional states in their users, usually unwittingly. We need to design things-products, websites, services-to convey whatever personality and emotions are desired.
I think a successful company is one where everybody owns the same mission. Out of necessity, we divide ourselves up into discipline groups. But the goal when you are actually doing the work is to somehow forget what discipline group you are in and come together. So in that sense, nobody should own user experience; everybody should own it.
When you have trouble with things—whether it's figuring out whether to push or pull a door or the arbitrary vagaries of the modern computer and electronics industries—it's not your fault. Don't blame yourself: blame the designer.
So what does a good teacher do? Create tension - but just the right amount.
The major problems facing the development of products that are safer, less prone to error, and easier to use and understand are not technological: they are social and organizational.
Also note that invariably when we design something that can be used by those with disabilities, we often make it better for everyone
Attractive things work better When you wash and wax a car, it drives better, doesn’t it? Or at least feels like it does.
I'm not a fan of technology . I'm a fan of pedagogy, of understanding how people learn and the most effective learning methods. But technology enables some exciting changes.
To me, error analysis is the sweet spot for improvement.
Everyday people are not very good designers.
The design of everyday things is in great danger of becoming the design of superfluous, overloaded, unnecessary things.
Complexity is acceptable as long as it is intelligible and necessary. We want to avoid needless complications.
Rule of thumb: if you think something is clever and sophisticated beware-it is probably self-indulgence.
If people keep buying poorly designed products, manufacturers and designers will think they are doing the right thing and continue as usual.
We are victims of our own success. We have let technology lead the way, pushing ever faster to newer, faster, and more powerful systems, with nary a moment to rest, contemplate, and to reflect upon why, how, and for whom all this energy has been expended.
AS for all those mistakes I make - they are on purpose - to teach you how to deal with them
Scientists are always skeptics.
Go to the bookstore and look at how many bookshelves are filled with books trying to explain how to work the devices. We don't see shelves of books on how to use television sets, telephones, refrigerators or washing machines. Why should we for computer-based applications?
The current paradigm is so thoroughly established that the only way to change is to start over again.
Computer scientists have so far worked on developing powerful programming languages that make it possible to solve the technical problems of computation. Little effort has gone toward devising the languages of interaction.
Academics get paid for being clever, not for being right.
It is relatively easy to design for the perfect cases, when everything goes right, or when all the information required is available in proper format
Follow AzQuotes on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Every day we present the best quotes! Improve yourself, find your inspiration, share with friends
or simply: