Archive for December, 2008
Final Paper for Com597 – Theories & Practice of Interactivity
Add comment December 3, 2008
Journal Summery
This quarter had a new beginning. A new class, new students and a new teacher. Befor I took this course, I did not know what to expect. At the end of this quarter, I think I learned something that I did not realize before from Carolina Mellow-e-Souza’s “Theories and Practice of Interactivity”.
Before taking this class, I did not pay much attention on the design, background and interactivity when playing a video or computer game. From our guest speaker, Jimmy, I understand that designing a game it not just about how to make it looks cool and sounds amazing. There are a lot to consider about during the long process. The target market, the budget, hardware/software issues, those are few of the limits require designers to comply with when trying to make a good game.
We evaluated some websites in the class at the third week. It was interesting to see how some big companies ignored the design and function of their websites by cluttered images and crammed information. But it was also nice to see more companies take mobile-phone users into their account by adapting simple design and page arrangement.
Shelley Armstrong gave us a insight edition of the production procedure of XBox 360. The reason for its success is simply because the design team created this product from a general user’s angle. Microsoft did what a company with $38 billion in the bank can do. It poured money into the effort, flying around the world to interview consumers about their tastes and hiring a cadre of design and engineering firms. The success of XBox 360 tells people that when a designer/ producer puts the heart into the product, customers will see it.
Then I found an incredible designer, Henry Dreyfuss, who really cared about people and tried to design for people. His idea was simple: every point of contact between what is designed, and the customer/user, must be positive, a delight, it must make people happier. Dreyfuss also told us that good design gives to the user self-assurance, efficiency, and satisfaction. Further, he emphasizes how industrial designers need to understand the producers’ points of views as well. His honorable recognition was not just a random surprise. By his thoughtful design for people and by his world-changing innovations, he is one of the most important designers of the past century.
At week 5, Amanda McCoy showed us the constraints that designers need to face. But without constraints, design would become “art”, constraints make good design. I chose IKEA’s cushion “FAMNIG” as my jounal subject of that week. I was amazed by IKEA’s designer, Anna’s clever and bold idea to make almost-dead raw materials into new products. To get more from less, IKEA’s magic also matches Maeda’s “make it simple” principle.
After reading Donald Norman’s “The Design of Everyday Things”, I started to look at my “everyday things” from a different aspect. I gradually recognize what products I see are “good designed” and “bad designed”. And I hope to develop this ability more so I won’t waste more money on crappy stuff anymore.
Good design
Bad design
(http://www.goodexperience.com/tib/archives/product_design/)
Overall speaking, this is a interesting and different class to me. It gave me the chance to see what prospects we can see on current point, and it also allow me to think deeper when it comes to “design versus usability”. And, at last, thanks to this class for finally understand the answer of a dummy question – the difference between “site map” and “flowchart”.
Reference:
Dreyfuss H. (2003) Designing for People. New York: Allworth Press
Frog design (2000). Case study. T-Mobile website strategy and design. Retrieved Oct 14, 2008, from http://www.frogdesign.com/case-study/t-mobile-website-strategy-and-design.html
Add comment December 3, 2008
