Catriona,

I have my own issues with agile, which I'm going to avoid getting
into.

I find it interesting that you claim your projects for scientists
can't be well designed just because of the nature of the product, on
that I disagree. No software is going to be instantly understandable,
which seems to be many people's goals. I hear it all the time at
work, people create a comp and because they and the technosavy people
around them say they get it, they deem it instantly understandable.

I also find it interesting that you say you are mostly informed by
users as to what is an issue with your product.

This will tell you what could be more like something else to be
better, but you'll be hard pressed to find a user that has thought
about the whole of the process enough to give you really valuable
info. The kind of info that would enable you to create a system that
is learnable. That even these scientists can learn to use without a
manual. They need to learn their own terminology and their own trade,
but that should be the only requirement to be able to learn how to use
the software.

The general rule is if the user can figure out how to run the
software, they should be able to figure out how to use it.

I don't think that, "...designing collaborative imaging management
and analysis software for molecular cell biologists that needs
minimal training is impossible."

If it were broken down into modes that meet the scientists mental
models of the process, if they were presented in a clear and
straight-forward way, and if any manipulation was done in a way that
makes sense for the scientist, I think you could have easy to use
software.

I designed software for NASA, I know how complicated some of these
processes can be, it is just a matter of breaking them down.

You might need to have someone who does this work every day to do it,
but it isn't impossible. Why give up on it so easy?

I know it seems like the right thing to do to talk to the users about
what they want, but software companies have been doing this forever
and still release crap software. You need to pass the right info
through the right filter.

I think that Bojhan, and other have all the info needed. The trick
now is getting that info into the hands of someone familiar with IxD.
Even if it means learning all about IxD and doing it themselves.

(I can't believe I got through that without busting on agile)


Best Wishes,

Will


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=34208


________________________________________________________________
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

Reply via email to