I've given this idea (that any interface can be learned given enough time) some thought for the past few years, and I have (for now) two direct observations about this idea.
#1 What about Blinking 12? Enough time could not save Blinking 12, because there was enough motivation. Actually, these days, I don't even bother putting numbers into the memory of my landline phone anymore, because it is just easier to look up the number on my cell, and then call with the landline (when I'm wanting to make a landline call) #2 In a past life I was a photographer who worked avidly in a good old stinky chemical darkroom (sexy places, those stinky chemical darkrooms... don't ask me why, and don't telll OSHA). I've been out of it for a long time, but I did love the magic of that work, which caught hold of me from about age 12 on when I saw my first image appear in a tray of developer. You could say I was highly motivated to learn the "interfaces" of almost all darkroom processes, from enlarger operation to the finer points of transferring images through the trays, contrast control, flashing an image while in the developer to solarize it, combining negatives in a single print, trick photography. I actually preferred darkroom work to shooting a lot of the time (never grew to like lugging equipment). Now these days we all know our Photoshop arcana, same difference, and that is fine, but consider the different assumptions made about the usability of "darkrooms." I also taught photography and darkroom work for many years, so I hit this head on too. In short, most darkroom processes would not meet even the more power user standards for mass market usability. They were far too imprecise, artful, intuitive, and interdependently extended, for most beginners and many advanced users to even be able to produce an identical print twice (although work in PR, and you will soon learn to do it). What does this mean, as Martin Luther might say? Darkroom processes weren't developed (heh) for the mass market? Neither are many software programs, but that doesn't mean their processes aren't often honed to standard (dumbed down?) usability design patterns. I also had many colleagues in the humanities (journalism) who have raging cases of technophobia. Yet many of these same people would have no hesitation walking into a darkroom and dusting off their rusty skills to make a print. I've told them, when they throw up the wall at me and say BS like "blog software is TOO HARD for me to use" or "how can I be expected to do this (search a database) when I'm no good with computers!" that the things I'm asking them to do are actually EASIER technically than working in a good old fashioned sexy stinky darkroom, with far fewer processes to remember, formulas and calculations to apply, or even dexterity required! As you may guess, my arguments get nowhere. I think my bigger question here (if I have one) has to do with our assumptions about lowest common denominators, and how many technological solutions in our world we might be blowing off, just because interfaces are "too hard to use." Applying that logic, we might never have developed photography at all, let alone mass market photography, from Brownies to stereoscopic cameras to glass negs and view cameras, flash powder and flash cubes, Instamatics and ordinary people actually able to thread 120 film in old twin lens reflex cameras without accidentally exposing the whole roll? Usability is a great thing, but I don't know if I'm blaspheming the in temple if I say, I kinda miss interfaces that challenged me to master their mysteries and discover their Easter Eggs. Chris On Jan 22, 2008 2:57 PM, Ari Feldman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > i don't have the research to cite but i also suspect that virtually any > interface can be learned given enough time. > i used to do data entry for custom mainframe software as a summer job and > later i beta tested Merrill Lynch's DOS-based brokerage information system > in the early 90s. both interfaces sucked but people dumber than the corn > in > shit were able to master them given enough time... > > > > On 1/22/08, Nasir Barday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >> But these kind of products have been around for what? 15 years? > > > > Bruno, I think that's the very root of the problem: inertia. When there > > are > > only one (or few) players in the field, the market for a product tends > to > > mature slowly. The financial and medical industries are classic > examples. > > Especially in these industries, upper management sees a different > approach > > as something that needs additional training and integration work. Never > > mind > > that the "new thing" would make people more efficient and offset the > > costs. > > On the customer and the vendor side, they see it all as extra cost that > > doesn't make sense, especially when there are shareholders to report to. > > > > Not sure what the market is for the CD product, but I'm guessing once > > another company wants a piece of the pie, it'll come up with a slick new > > way > > to do things and give your client a run for its money. That's when > there's > > incentive for someone like your client to use that extra cost to "buy a > > competitive advantage." And when the competitors of customers in the > > market > > become more efficient by using the new, more efficient product, they > have > > an > > incentive to demand more efficient products, too. > > > > - N > > ________________________________________________________________ > > *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 > > > > > > -- > -------------------------------------------------- > www.flyingyogi.com > -------------------------------------------------- > ________________________________________________________________ > *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 > ________________________________________________________________ *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
