Sensation On Everyday Objects

people intention stream driven the innovation

2010-05-08T20:54:00.001-07:00

google search ad
facebook like
even more, let's see what happens next

UCD or not, that's a problem

2009-09-14T17:47:00.000-07:00

Truth is constant and can be described, with the description changes over time; it can be expressed, with the expression changes over time.

UCD or not becomes hot and discussed, named and re-named these days. Some claim that UCD means user's direct involve (as traditional definition means and practices), some claim it could only be the design focus. As time goes, we could say they are not very different from designer mind-set view. Like for a search product designer, he may analyze the log, take some data metrics, but there's user behind the data and he tries to understand user's behavior, mind-set and mental model. It centers on the user ( neither data nor tech, data/tech driven are very problematic method, if it's really practiced, instead it should be driven by user studies/researches).

For IxD or UCD, we could make the questions simpler

do it need users' direct involve or not?
do the design focus on user or not? if not, is there design focus or not? and if yes, what's the center or focuses ?
could we give some cases for clarification ( like, iPod, PageRank, etc )

By arranging some a list of questions, we could march to the "truth" while putting the name aside for a while.

Everyday Life Search

2009-09-13T23:41:00.000-07:00

As part of LwO, it intends to examine how search interact with our everyday life, change our behavior of learning & living.

If i'm writtng a book on search user interface design

2009-09-05T19:45:00.000-07:00

i'll start with user stories, e.g., a guy who want to study a topic, a guy seeking for a path from zurich to bern, and a guy who want to figure out interesting places around chengdu, as well as a guy who want to plan a interesting weekend with his family, etc.
And continue with the problem behind the scenarios, and current solutions to the problems, and deep into the core of the problems, etc.
Then, i'll figure out the application and research advances in this domain,together with background theory and so on.
And I'll back with previous scenarios by envisioning a better life for the future with the possible advances in near or far future.

Yes, i'm reading the search user interface , it's good but could be great.

Life with my mobile phone, #1

2009-01-02T19:42:00.000-08:00

I have use nokia phones, and se phone, i have palm, ppc, and Nokia tablet, iPod, kindle .
I should admit i'm some kind of electronic gadgets addicts, from 3 months ago, I'm looking for a phone to replace my current SE 810, and as a mac user, the natural target is iphone, which the newest model is iphone 3g, I'm checking what i can do with it, ipod + phone + ?, like jobs said, a very cool choice for me, cause i have a ipod for years, like it very much.
This expectation last for months, until i have a chance for hands on while one day, i saw a new iphone lay on my boss's table, and i asked eagerly, could i have a try, the answer is yes, you can use it as long as you're tied of it. yes, I'll use it, but of cuz, should not tired of it, i thought.
Firstly, i want to plug in my own sim card, the card slot should be open by some needle, fine, the designer don't want the big slot make it looks ugly, and it takes me sometime to find a needle to open the slot after i searching on the web on how to open it.
i check the contact list, the sim card contact information is not there, or maybe i can import it or else.

I gave up the idea to get a iphone, and my wife suggests me to buy a new phone after i hands on it instead of read reviews blah-blah-blah. ah, yes this is the good normal idea, which always be ignored.

To tell if a object fit or not to your using expectation, you should use it for some time. It be called aesthetic of interaction. and there;s more interesting thing on it
#1, A good design is the design that fit the using expectation, or blend into user's life. (Naoto)
#2, To tell if a design is good or not, the final test is real life using user's activity.

it's a good lesson to me.

new year design/tech talking: thinking through interface

2009-01-01T21:45:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, hold the discussion, through the interface. Discussing interface with both tech team and design team in the same talk is very interesting. And this is the good time to appreciate Herbert Simon's great book, The Sciences of the Artificial.
Some guy ask for success discussing on this topic. It may come, if there's enough new inspiring, why not, :) ?

D's Relatiships ( partially )

2008-10-25T07:02:00.000-07:00

Live Interaction Design

2008-10-25T06:23:00.000-07:00

Riddle, which design pattern you would like use?

2008-10-01T18:05:00.000-07:00

There's interface design patterns, and some guys treat it as valuable resoure for design process. And then how one designer use one design pattern in his real world design?

"One student want to learn how to play go game from a master player, and he recite many patterns for opening and ending, still failed often, so he asks his teacher how to apply the pattern freely, the teacher asks back " why you still have the patterns inside your head? Once you learn it's goodness ,grasp it's spirit and then forget it.""

Same for design.

Riddle, how could I design a cool sitemap?

2008-10-01T05:41:00.000-07:00

There's a story, one guy ask a monk how could I go furthur while i reach the end of the street. And the monk ask, "Why you reach the end of the street?"

Interaction Design or Design?

2008-09-29T11:06:00.000-07:00

Riddle

How could a interaction designer succeeds on a crap product? Or a great interaction design from a bad product?

Instead, i would put the design instead of interaction design on the product. Interaction design is a way to thinking about how to makes product good, but better thinking on how to make the product blending into people's using activity instead of only from interaction design's perspective. And definitely, the interaction design thinking follows up naturally.

For e.g., the elements of users experience, put the different design into a hierarchy of different design ( strategy design, information design, interaction design and visual design, etc). Which may scared the product producer, "do i really need such kind of Ds?", and as well, this also makes designer in wild, "how could i put so much Ds in my tool box to make myself capable?". And i guess this is one of the cause why so many guys cant agree with each other on how ixd should be, or UX should be?

But maybe the answer is simple and straight, the goal is something to be used in user's everyday life, and the aim is to make people get goals easier, happier etc. And back from this goal and aim, all the Ds can be considered as a design problem solving method/tool box which is ready for designer's use. Or even better put them into some method cards with smart questions ( as IDEO does) , to make this fun and fruitful. Maybe forget the names, not very bad, cause only results that counts.

And another riddle,
Do chopsticks or forks designer understand what's interaction design? If not, how could they design the objects?

"The truth that can be told is not final truth. The name that can be given can be changed over time." ( LaoZi ) , or, truth is constant while guys apt to give their own favorite name. Now, there seems too many Ds compares to the real insights on everyday life.

Good Design : of the use, by the use, for the use

2008-09-27T04:42:00.000-07:00

" It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."
-- Abraham Lincon

Lincon explains how the U.S. government designed as "government of the people, by the people, for the people". Regardless how current U.S. government is, this design is really target to a good government.

This hits the long discussed question inside design domain, what's good design? and how it comes into been?
Let's turn the saying as, Good design is of the use, by the use and for the use. It has been discussed or studied by designer or design researcher for long time, but here, I would put it after some riddles.

Good design is for the use.
Riddle, if you have a very cool fork, but it's difficult for serving you food, is it a good design or not. Yes, it'll not blend in your life, and you may swith to other forks as soon as you can.

Good design is by the use.
Riddle, could a Chinese ( who never use forks) design a super fork for swiss people? If yes, how could we do it? Some body may say yes, but experience designer never dares to say that.

Good design is of the use.
Riddle, could you pls tell me who design the chopsticks or forks? There's maybe some one design it, but the design be refined along the long term of use ( design evolution) , and even the people even dont think it's designed ( cause it's so naturally combined with everyday life ), I would say the design is devote to everyday activity for something, that's the design's master owner.