I still say interaction designers doing user study is kind of like an architect asking what parts of the house they should knock down so they can make what the people really wanted to live in.
If you are doing your job right, you should have gotten it right the first time. Rather than wasting countless dollars developing something that doesn't work, in the hopes that you can fix it by seeing how users deal with it. I'd like to see study for the sake of study only, much like we have science for the sake of science. Then take what we learn through study, create rules based on long chains of study, and then never have to do those same studies again. You know, apply the scientific method to informing us, and then use our expertise to make better products cheaper and faster. We know a lot about how to build systems that make sense and have intelligent saving. I don't think we need to do any study to solve the saving problem we were presented with here. Will . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=34463 ________________________________________________________________ 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
