> In mountain climbing there's the term used to describe the style of > climbing that Reinhold Messner and Peter Habeler used (climbing > without oxygen or fixed ropes) - "Alpine Style."
And nobody outside of climbing knows what that means. So is the benefit of the term to differentiate to experts or convey to lay audiences? By defining a new term, the world has to be educated on it's meaning, who is to bear the responsibility of that? > And this approach is very much in the service of the "user," and > that's why I, personally, dislike the term, "user-centered > design," as it implies that other approaches are not aimed at or > centered around the benefit of the end users. This is simply not > true. I disagree. I To me it's not describing the end benefit, every successful product benefits end users (sometimes by accident sometimes by intention), but rather the approach that needs of the end user (and often very specific workflows) are considered first and high in the proriorites, vrs: a) feature centric design, the let's expose everything we can possibly do in the ui b) technology centric design, what new possibilities can we do with innovation? (e.g often pushing the boundaries of what users think they need). Troy ________________________________________________________________ *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
