What do you mean that changes can't be tested after implementation? That is the whole point of this discussion. Where should you test, how should you test, when should you test, how should you use data.
"UCD = consider users in defining architecture" That is by no definition neither in theory nor in practice what UCD is from what I have seen. UCD is a set of tools for making sure that the users is part of the process in making decisions. If the proponents of UCD is simply saying "consider users" then we are all doing UCD. But that is not what they are saying. They are saying that you need to involve the user and use their inputs from focus groups, usability tests etc. "No, users will not design the most compelling product, but they will give ideas, push you in the right direction, and help you see things from their POV." I am not interested in their POV. I am interested in how they actually behave. I am not interested in their ideas, I am interested in their problems, there is no such thing as a "right" direction. All these things don't need UCD it needs proper designers that understands both users and how to solve problems for the users. It's no coincidence that quite a few UCD companies don't do the actual implementation. "participatory/crowdsourcing" That field is something completely different from UCD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45486 ________________________________________________________________ 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
