I think there is enough proof that something emotionally appealing CAN
make up for its lack of usability.  Philip Starck's lemon squeezer
shouldn't be judged on it's functional usability. I guess it was
never meant for squeezing lemons. It's purpose is to appeal.

Personally we don't disagree - and neither will Don Norman I
presume. I prefer usability over aesthetic appeal. But my personal
taste doesn't dictate a universally right design.

The user experience of a product is a mix of usability, usefulness
and desirability. Which aspect takes the biggest part of the pie
should be based on the intended purpose of the product.

- Yohan

20 OCT 2009: Design by Fire Conference
Spoorwegmuseum, Utrecht, NL
http://www.designbyfire.nl/2009



. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45847


________________________________________________________________
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