On Jul 4, 2009, at 10:01 AM, Russell Wilson wrote:
Jared's additions make my definition so much better!
I specified software for 2 reasons:
1) that's how the question was worded to me
2) I don't feel qualified to define design beyond software design
As for my choice - we aren't designing Ferrari's... we are designing
tools for people to
buy children's clothing and calculate their taxes. Hence the
"ordinary"...
I'm really confused. Because if this is for NetQoS, from the company
web site, it doesn't like you're designing any tools for buying
clothing or calculating taxes. It looks like the company makes network
performance monitoring and analysis tools. (The big clue was "Network
Performance Management" on the home page.)
If you're talking about downstream users, many generations away from
your product, then you are designing Ferraris as much as you're
selling clothing.
Which is why I'm confused by the inclusion of "software".
It sounds like you're trying to create some sort of tag line or
elevator pitch.
Scene: Cocktail party
Her: So, cutie, what do *you* do?
You: I make the ordinary extraordinary.
Her: ooooh. Can you make some of my ordinary a little extraordinary?
You: Um, I should go see what my wife, who I love very much, is doing
right now... [scampers quickly to the kitchen, sweat beating from his
brow.]
Taking Chauncey's entry (minus the poetic linefeeds), "Creating
quality code that drives useful usable engaging user interfaces," and
tightening it a bit, why not just say, "Creating great experiences for
our customers and their users"?
Jared
________________________________________________________________
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
