I like your slideshow format. Text is a lot easier to read when it is divided up and intermixed with comics and pictures. I was thinking of Twitter too while reading of Norman’s examples of tools with adequate usability cues. As someone who has never used most of the technologies we’ve discussed in class, I must say they have been remarkably easy to use. For example, Google Reader marks in bold the feeds I haven’t read as well as telling me how many messages there are. To go along with your Pea/Norman mashup, this “natural mapping” (well, almost) of clicking on the bold text and having an article pop up in the right side of the browser (which is in turn automatically marked as Read after I’ve read it: feedback!) allows me to effortlessly access the intelligence embedded within Google Reader and the RSS feeds I’ve subscribed to.
I think one of the reasons why the designs of Google Reader and other technologies are so successful is because the barriers between designers and users are significantly weakened, if not broken down completely. Open source coding and tools such as Google Labs allow the very people who use these tools to reinvent them (Rogers, p.17). I only wish I could do the same with my washing machine.
TRACY THOMPSONsays
I actually like the mashup you created for Pea and Norman. When I read the statements on slide 5 (Pea and Norman side-by-side), I didn’t immediately come to a conclusion that they were at odds with each other. Norman doesn’t refute the idea that tools contain intelligence. Rather, he seems to indicate that the intelligence has to be easy and intuitive for the user to access. So, turn to slide 6, and although I might not have drawn the same diagram, I think you’re making the same point that I would have made.
To Megan’s point – I think that the idea of designing for the user is key (also repeated in team 2’s videos about human-centered design, and in Team 4’s video about the salt and pepper shakers…. In the end, how the designer thinks something should be used is less important than how the consumer/user thinks it should be used. Tutaleni’s comment also applies here – if the designer doesn’t understand the community where the innovation is to be implemented, the likelihood of adoption is low.
DOLORES M BODERsays
I like the format you used this week, however I couldn’t read the information on the comic slides. It may have been because my computer sreec is small; I didn’t take notice if there was a zoom function though.
I am becoming more comfortable with technology as this course progresses and I have been noticing that using technology has allowed me to simplify some parts of my life. I think that the design of a product needs to be user friendly in order for it to be useful for me. Companies try to make products that are supposed to simplify our lives by combining similar features (like iPhones and BlackBerries). But often times, these new tools have too many features to the point of being complicated and inefficient to use.
The value of a product depends on how each individual views that product and how useful/user friendly they find it to be. For example; I have a BlackBerry and I think I would be lost without it. I’m able to multitask and stay organized. I use just about all features on the phone and find it easy to use. Last weekend my husband decided to upgrade to a smart phone. He spent the whole weekend trying to figure out how to use his BB. I sat down with him and tried to show him all the features and how to use them. He stopped me in the middle and asked me: “Does it make phone calls? I just want to make a call. Why do I need all these other features?” The design of the BB didn’t match up to his needs. It had too many features. For him, this was not a human-centered design. He switched back to a phone that was more in line with what he needed and wanted; he found a product whose design fit him.
I enjoyed your posting this week … the use of google presenter created an interesting “graphic novel” like feel to your ideas. I especially liked the reuse of the same comic strip at the end with new content. That struck me in a way that I didn’t really expect.
MATTHEW J HEFFRONsays
I agree with Megan’s comment about designing courses for students. It is very important to look at it from the students’ perspective because the professor may be too far removed from taking courses. The way in which a student will attack a course can vary by each individual student. That is the difficult part about design for a large amount of people.
Mark Brian Baker says
I like your slideshow format. Text is a lot easier to read when it is divided up and intermixed with comics and pictures. I was thinking of Twitter too while reading of Norman’s examples of tools with adequate usability cues. As someone who has never used most of the technologies we’ve discussed in class, I must say they have been remarkably easy to use. For example, Google Reader marks in bold the feeds I haven’t read as well as telling me how many messages there are. To go along with your Pea/Norman mashup, this “natural mapping” (well, almost) of clicking on the bold text and having an article pop up in the right side of the browser (which is in turn automatically marked as Read after I’ve read it: feedback!) allows me to effortlessly access the intelligence embedded within Google Reader and the RSS feeds I’ve subscribed to.
I think one of the reasons why the designs of Google Reader and other technologies are so successful is because the barriers between designers and users are significantly weakened, if not broken down completely. Open source coding and tools such as Google Labs allow the very people who use these tools to reinvent them (Rogers, p.17). I only wish I could do the same with my washing machine.
TRACY THOMPSON says
I actually like the mashup you created for Pea and Norman. When I read the statements on slide 5 (Pea and Norman side-by-side), I didn’t immediately come to a conclusion that they were at odds with each other. Norman doesn’t refute the idea that tools contain intelligence. Rather, he seems to indicate that the intelligence has to be easy and intuitive for the user to access. So, turn to slide 6, and although I might not have drawn the same diagram, I think you’re making the same point that I would have made.
To Megan’s point – I think that the idea of designing for the user is key (also repeated in team 2’s videos about human-centered design, and in Team 4’s video about the salt and pepper shakers…. In the end, how the designer thinks something should be used is less important than how the consumer/user thinks it should be used. Tutaleni’s comment also applies here – if the designer doesn’t understand the community where the innovation is to be implemented, the likelihood of adoption is low.
DOLORES M BODER says
I like the format you used this week, however I couldn’t read the information on the comic slides. It may have been because my computer sreec is small; I didn’t take notice if there was a zoom function though.
I am becoming more comfortable with technology as this course progresses and I have been noticing that using technology has allowed me to simplify some parts of my life. I think that the design of a product needs to be user friendly in order for it to be useful for me. Companies try to make products that are supposed to simplify our lives by combining similar features (like iPhones and BlackBerries). But often times, these new tools have too many features to the point of being complicated and inefficient to use.
The value of a product depends on how each individual views that product and how useful/user friendly they find it to be. For example; I have a BlackBerry and I think I would be lost without it. I’m able to multitask and stay organized. I use just about all features on the phone and find it easy to use. Last weekend my husband decided to upgrade to a smart phone. He spent the whole weekend trying to figure out how to use his BB. I sat down with him and tried to show him all the features and how to use them. He stopped me in the middle and asked me: “Does it make phone calls? I just want to make a call. Why do I need all these other features?” The design of the BB didn’t match up to his needs. It had too many features. For him, this was not a human-centered design. He switched back to a phone that was more in line with what he needed and wanted; he found a product whose design fit him.
Cole W. Camplese says
I enjoyed your posting this week … the use of google presenter created an interesting “graphic novel” like feel to your ideas. I especially liked the reuse of the same comic strip at the end with new content. That struck me in a way that I didn’t really expect.
MATTHEW J HEFFRON says
I agree with Megan’s comment about designing courses for students. It is very important to look at it from the students’ perspective because the professor may be too far removed from taking courses. The way in which a student will attack a course can vary by each individual student. That is the difficult part about design for a large amount of people.