|
May 27, 2005
Want to be an interaction designer? Spend some quality time playing video games and watching TV. I just finished reading Steven Johnson's latest book, Everything Bad is Good for You. It's a great, provocative read and makes me feel much better about the hours I've wasted spent productively on Lost, Survivor and Medal of Honor. The book posits a number of concepts that are interesting to think about as a designer. Johnson's basic premise is that over the last twenty years, popular culture has gotten more complex and is making people smarter. He calls this the Sleeper Curve, after the Woody Allen "sci-fi" movie Sleeper where scientists from 2029 are astounded that people in the 1970s didn't know the nutritional merits of cream pies and hot fudge. The type of intelligence that pop culture is training us in is the same sort of intelligence I use every day as a designer: pattern recognition, decision-making, and the ability to assess and respond appropriately to emotional signals. Television, video games, and the internet have all conspired to make us smarter in specific ways. Johnson gives names to two types of activities that interaction designers not only engage in, but also observe all the time with users: probing and telescoping. Probing involves the discovery of the rules of the system through exploration, through playing with it. You discover not just rules, but the physics of the system: the patterns and tendencies. Probing can take the form of testing the limits of a system, pushing it until its artificiality (the seams) show. Telescoping is about the nesting of objectives inside each other like a collapsed telescope. It's about focusing on immediate tasks while keeping in mind the ultimate goals, something both designers and users often need to do. "Telescoping is about order, not chaos; it's about constructing the proper hierarchy of tasks and moving through the tasks in the correct sequence. It's about perceiving relationships and determining priorities." Johnson argues that the heightened probing and telescoping that we're seeing is a result of complex forms (e.g. video games, the internet, etc.) that "encourage participatory thinking and analysis" and that "challenge the mind to make sense of the environment." Johnson has a lot of interesting things to say about form, and about learning new digital forms. "Learning the intricacies of a new interface can be a genuine pleasure," he writes. "I've often found certain applications more fun to explore the first time than to use." It's an interesting, quick read, right up there with his other books, Interface Culture (a must for interaction designers), Emergence, and Mind Wide Open. I recommend it.
Posted at 10:12 AM | Link
May 19, 2005
I usually don't like books, movies, or TV shows about Hollywood: they seem too self-serving. The one exception to this is the reality show Project Greenlight, where industry neophytes get to make a movie. One thing that's great about it is that it shows like nothing else I've ever seen the effect of business decision on the creative process. Only have three million dollars? Ok, well, the monsters are going to look terrible and we need to rewrite half the movie. CEO doesn't like the movie? It only opens in three theaters. The effect of these types of business decisions upon what gets made is something that is seldom shown. This season of Project Greenlight was particularly interesting because of the director they chose: John Gulager. Gulager was a very untraditional choice: introverted, older, and uncommunicative. And yet very talented. What was so interesting was watching him grow into the role of director, having to actually tell people his vision of the movie they were making. The producers and crew assumed he had a vision, but had no idea what that was, and so there was chaos until he learned how to talk to people like a director. In a collaborative field like filmmaking or interaction design, all the vision and all the talent in the world doesn't matter if you can't communicate it to the team you are working with. And not just communicate it, communicate it like a designer, with a design attitude. You need the right ethos (the authority of a designer) to meet the expectations of the audience (that you know what you are doing). You are crafting an argument, after all: an argument of what the product should be. Like many of the intangibles of our field, I'm not sure this can be taught, only learned.
Posted at 08:59 AM | Link
May 18, 2005
Yahoo's announcement today that it's "jazzing up" its instant messenger amounts to adding in VOIP service to it and linking it to blogs. Yawn. It seems to me that Yahoo, third place in the IM game (behind AIM and MSN), has missed the boat on this one. Instant Messenger can be a platform for new things (see SmarterChild) and could be expanded to add more variations and emotional richness, but what Yahoo doesn't seem to get is that people use IM in particular ways as a form of communication, not as a replacement for another form of communication (voice calls). In much the same way I don't blog because email is unavailable, I don't IM because I can't use my cell phone: I IM because it let's me have interactions that I otherwise wouldn't be able to (or want to) have. IM has a lot going for it as a communication method: it's silent, fast, indicates availability, and flexible enough for pauses that would be awkward in almost any other medium. It's personal, yet not, allowing you to reveal as much of yourself as you want with as much control over your availability as you want. If Yahoo really wanted to move out of third place, there's lots of other enhancements they could do to an IM client besides tethering it to other mediums of communication.
Posted at 04:53 PM | Link
« April 2005 |
|