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

[Alexander Johannesen]

Hi,

Me:
> > 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.

Boniface Lau <boniface_lau at compuserve.com> wrote:
> Design drives activity? Do you really believe in such extremist view?

When you stop asserting that the world is black and white, then maybe
you'll see my point.

> Acknowledging that activity and design influence each other tends to
> produce better design.

I've not stated that activity and design are seperate. In fact, the
last part of my initial lament stated ; "If all he wanted to do was to
focus on activites as a major success-factor in human-centred design,
then why not just say so?" This still is the gist of what I'm saying;
sometimes focusing on the activity is good. Other times there are
other factors that it is good to focus on. Don't understand why this
is such a hard concept to grasp, nor do I understand the *need* for
this separation.

> BTW, even though it was not your intention, your violin example turns
> out to be a case for ACD, not against it. 
> First, ACD emphasizes a deep understanding on activity. 

But that's just the thing, isn't it? There was no current activity to
drive the design. The violin was designed for an activity that no one
were doing. How can you focus on an activity when that activity
doesn't yet exist? Because it involved a movement? Because they were
similar? (pointing to the sky and picking your nose have similarites
too, you know)

Ah, maybe ACD includes *both* types of activity, and all activity,
from looking with your eyes, brain activity, finger-licking and
walking and so forth. Uh, what was the point of this seperation again?
Anything you want can be broken down into activities. I thought the
charm of human-centred design was that it already embraced this and
*more*, and put it in a more holistic aspect, that what we wanted was
*not* to _only_ focusing on activities or requirements or colors or
shapes or intent ...

> Thus, ACD is
> more likely than HCD to discover ways of improving existing
> activities, e.g. playing a string instrument that is placed in between
> legs. That means ACD is more likely to consider the violin-equivalence
> of tool.

Oh this is nonsense. First of all you need to be very specific about
what any given activity might be. A vague wave of the hand in the air
certainly didn't 'design' kung-fu. Where does the vagueness of that
hand movement become the defining factor of any design?

I reckon the dangerous part of all this is to call it *activity*
based. "Activity : A named process, function, or task that occurs over
time and has recognizable results." Where does the line go? I've asked
this repeatedly, but people tend to stay clear of it. If you really
want to argue, then pretty much anything comes down to some form of
activity, stretched to a point of stupidity where we can't talk about
anything anymore.

In fact, can you think of any design that is separated completely from activity?

> Second, ACD believes that user should adapt to tool. Thus, even when
> both ACD and HCD designers have considered violin while looking into
> the way users play viola, the ACD designers are more likely to
> actually produce a violin and expect users to adapt. 

Huh? This sounds more like propaganda than a well-defined argument.
"More likely"? Why? By what? Who? How?

> Since HCD
> believes that tool should adapt to user

Hmm, I do a lot of HCD, and I don't believe in what you just said, so
obviously you must be mistaken unless I'm not a HCD practicioner.
Where in the HCD manual is this stated? Google brought me this
(http://www.processforusability.co.uk/Usability_test/) ;

The principles for Human-Centred Design (HCD) are:
 - the active involvement of users and a clear 
   understanding of user and task requirements
 - an appropriate allocation of function between users 
   and technology
 - the iteration of design solutions
 - multi-disciplinary design.

> HCD is more likely to give you an improved viola;
> ACD is more likely to give you a violin.

Prove it.


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