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

[Alexander Johannesen]

On 7/30/05, Boniface Lau <boniface_lau at compuserve.com> wrote:
> > > When a design is based on the understanding of activities, the
> > > specifics of individual users are no longer that important.

Then me:
> > 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.

Boniface:
> The shoulder-realization applies to users in general, not the
> specifics of individual users.

Huh? What now? The "shoulder-realization" was not an activity when the
violin was made; it *became* an activity as the violin became popular;
design driving activity, not the other way around. It wasn't the study
of what people *were doing* that lead to its design; it was trying to
figure out a way to play music faster and lighter.

> [...]
> > The difference was that specific knowledge of certain users created
> > the violin.
> 
> Your example is about users using their knowledge to improve what they
> use. But what does that has to do with ACD's down playing of the
> importance of adapting to individual user differences?

You tell me. In fact, you tell me why ACD is important. You tell me
what I'm currently doing wrong which could be so much better with ACD.
As all design is based on the activity of the brain, clue me in.


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