[Sigia-l] Human-Centered Design 99% bad

[Alexander Johannesen]

On 7/29/05, Boniface Lau <boniface_lau at compuserve.com> wrote:
> The difference lies in the word "particular". Is it that critical to
> understand the "particular" users of a product? If so, what happens
> when designing for the mass?

It is not that I don't actually understand the difference; there are
some, yet they are not the same as human-centered design vs.
activity-centred design.

> When a design is based on the understanding of activities, the
> specifics of individual users are no longer that important.

No, I don't agree with that one bit. Most people were happy with the
viola until someone figured out that placing it on your shoulder as to
compared to between your legs would improve things. The early
cremonans (who adopted designs from the braccio) got a boost to local
economics because of this simple design alteration.

The viola and violin were both string instruments, roughly same sound
(don't flame me!), roughly same playing style, played roughly same
part in music; the activities were the same as you can play the same
music on both (again, roughly). The difference was that specific
knowledge of certain users created the violin. Don't kid yourself.


Alex
-- 
"Ultimately, all things are known because you want to believe you know."
                                                         - Frank Herbert
__ http://shelter.nu/ __________________________________________________