Designing for Experience

I have been enjoying the various comments and critiques on the democratic process on the transforming transformation discussion group we just went through here in the United States, and it is clear that we need to have a better way of doing things.  I frame the problem as confusing voting mechanisms, whether it be paper ballots that are hard to understand, or “touchy” touch screen, or electronic voting that mimics bad paper ballots things need to change.

Some have suggested that there be a national standard ballot and that local issues be ballotted separately, but of course many people feel like this is taking away power from states and local municipalities.  The argument is that “we can’t leave something up to local people who may screw it up” or worse yet “let someone like (the now infamous in some places) Susan Harris manipulate it.”  While I will say that I do know that there is some very limited manipulation that goes on in some places I don’t believe it is a wide spread problem.  I am a little repulsed by the notion that the huge lumbering giant that is the federal government could possibly do a better job, and that it must assume control from the people.  I find it somewhat undemocratic to think that, maybe my faith in humanity is misplaced.  I DO think that perhaps a hyrid approach is called for.

Let’s build on the fine work that has already been done on how to design ballots (it has been pointed out that there have already been some studies on this) and make it even better.  Let’s make this a standard that is at least somewhat flexible that must be followed on the local level.  Local municipalities still retain all control over the process, but what the ballot, whether paper or otherwise, looks like and how you interact with it is controlled by the design standards set forth.

Of course all the apple fans were waiting with baited breeath and yes all the details on the new models are very cool for those considering upgrades, but I am impressed that even if Apple is reliant on so-called expert design, (not really doing user testing until after the design is done, and hey they have some of the best experts working for them) which is contrary to the more participatory methods I would recommend, they also seem to understand what people want.

What does your typical laptop user want when they are in the offce? quickly plug in and use a larger display, hence their LED Cinema Display.  Connect the three plugs that are all combined from the display, USB, mag-safe power, and the new mini display port and it seemlessly brings your computer onto the larger display.  No one likes having to have a separate hub, and power cord.  To me this is low-hanging fruit, a basic insight that any UX professional would get within minutes of speaking with or observing laptop users, yet Apple is the first to really do this… Why?

One reason is that Apple is constantly thinking in terms of systems, how each device, service, and piece of software fits together.  While at any given moment not every piece of their line fits together visually (the super mouse for example retains the last generation look and feel) they make every effort to make them all look similar and the white look was with us so long that anyone familiar with Apple will recognize it as part of the family.  The primary reason why ipods are ther #1 mp3 player is because it’s not just a device, it’s a service and software too, the itunes store is flawless when it comes to how easy it is to plug in a device and get music on it (although my readers will know I have never and will never for the forseeable future purchase from the itunes store for other reasons). The new LED Cinema Display matches the new MacBook Pro completely which follows this theme.

I could write much more on this topic, but I couldn’t resist this small post.

While doing some youth research earlier this year I was surprised to see many teenagers on YouTube, but not really to watch, but to listen to music.  A free way to listen to a ton of interesting music.  I hadn’t really thought about doing that, but here they were all doing it. I’m not sure if the fine people at Google knew about that kind of emergent user behavior, but they are sure going to profit from it.

So I’m not sure how I didn’t notice this when it came out last week (oh yah I was sick in bed) but you should read this: Official Google Blog: I clicked to buy and I liked it.

Essentially viewers on YouTube will soon be able to click over to Amazon and the dreaded itunes store and buy music used in a video, or if the video is of a video game, you can buy the game (presumably from Amazon).  No word yet on how much they will get from this, and if they will share with the video creator (not likely).

Many have wondered how Google would monetize it’s massive purchase price of YouTube, aside from a relatively small attempt at ads in the videos in a non-obtrusive way, they haven’t done a lot.  Here it goes, but how will it affect the experience of YouTube?  Let’s wait and see..

I am at the Participatory Design Conference and have really enjoyed the first official parts of the conference and during the opening keynote Finn Kensing he showed a Venn Diagram of several fields and that PD overlapped several including HCI, IS, EPIC, CSCW.  It seems that many times HCI user centered design or user involvement is like PD lite.  I guess you would have to say that a full participation in design in an ideal sense is richer than user participation in HCI as it is practiced now.

Are there any thoughts on this?

It wasn’t part of the new facebook, but recently facebook enabled you to group your friends into different lists.  This is a natural part of someone with a growing list of friends that they may want to keep track of.

Now I don’t even have that many people I follow on twitter just 150 (nice round number, shame to have to add more) but still I wouldn’t mind being able to sort them, and in theory I may want to just message some of them about some events, say some local stuff that is happening here in Bloomington.

This is a natural progression and something that users are expecting, but how does one implement this given the complete fragmentation of the user experience given the tremendous number of clients that have sprung up around the great open API that Twitter has supported from Day 1? This presents a very different set of problems than a more closed network.  I suppose though that in the larger scheme of things as featuers are added to the service and API that because of the huge numer of developers and clients that good uses will catch on quickly as they have in the past.

Comments?