That's All Folks!

1. What seminar readings, exercises, or assignments were most challenging, interesting, or rewarding for you? Why?

I think that the most challenging assignment for me in this class was the Wikipedia paper, which coincidentally was also the most rewarding and interesting. I've never had to write a paper like that before, using only encyclopedia-ish talk, and it was really good for me as a writer to use that style. Also it was interesting because we had control over the topic, and I picked something I was passionate about. It was good then to later do an argumentative thesis piece. The contrast of styles really stretched my ability as a writer.

2. What are the most important things you learned in this seminar?

In the future, I can see myself somewhere fancy with lots of important people, and we are going to be discussing many important things and I will think, taking that seminar freshman year was such a good decision! The most important skill I can take away from this class is all the discussion skills we have developed as a class. I had not had very much experience with large group discussions before and I realized they are a lot of fun. I was worried at first that we would all say nothing and that it would be really awkward, but it never really was! It also gave everyone a chance to really get to know one another and was a great learning tool.

3. How might you use this learning in the future?
This class is definitely going to affect how I study, think, and interact with groups in the future.

Architectural Design

1.Some architecture that I think is just really bad is my high school. It's architects failed. Epically. Basically the designer thought that it was a good idea to use the same design principles on my school as they would use on a prison. There were no windows! The building was designed so that over 50% of the classrooms had no contact with the outside world. Great for keeping in prisoners or protecting people from tornadoes, but not great for a good learning environment. The school's design gives its inhabitants the sense of being trapped. The halls where in a square shape and as a result were very disorienting. Y0u could walk around for ever without really finding what you were looking for.

2. Hicks Center is a really well designed building. It has a lot of visceral appeal in the form of its big windows and cool structures and functions well behaviorally, compartmentalizing the different areas to different floors. One thing I don't love is how the stairs are laid out, not being about to climb to the next level on both sides of the building.

3. The biggest problem with the design process is the lack of communication between the builder, designer and commissioner. For a design to be successful these 3 groups of people all have to be on the same page about how the project is going, and how it should look vs. how it can look.

Simplicity is Highly Overrated

1. Identify the thesis statement of this essay.

Because the people want the features. Because simplicity is a myth whose time has past, if it ever existed.

2. Identify at least three points the author makes to support this thesis statement.

Why such expensive toasters? Why all the buttons and controls on steering wheels and rear-view mirrors? Because they appear to add features that people want to have. They make a difference at the time of sale, which is when it matters most.

Marketing experts know that purchase decisions are influenced by feature lists, even if the buyers realize they will probably never use most of the features. Even if the features confuse more than they help.

Yes, we want simplicity, but we don’t want to give up any of those cool features. Simplicity is highly overrated.

3. If you were to write an essay on this same topic, but with an opposing argument, what would your thesis be?

Simplicity is the key to a commercially successful product.

Eggs and the City

1-To what extent do Whyte and Gibbs approach to city design from different perspectives? Do you find one more convincing than the other?

Gibbs and Whyte have similar yet distinct views when it comes to city design. The two both try to focus on the feel of an area, but for very different reasons. Gibbs focuses on the issue strictly commercially; what can I do here to make the customer spend the most money? I think this approach, while valid and in the short run more important to businesses, should not be the primary focus of a cities design. Like Whyte, I think that cities should be designed to feel good. If the feelin' is right, people are going to stay in the district, and almost always spend money. But the distinction is the goal. Gibbs gave me the impression that he couldn't even define what a good urban community was, his only criterion for success was amount of money made. Cities and urban areas are so much more than that however. I feel Whyte has got it right, focusing more on how cities make the pedestrians feel.

2-What elements of an urban area are particularly attractive to you? What elements repel you?

I love cities. I have loved cities since I was a little three-year-old living in Brooklyn NY. I love going to cites now. I am a city person all day. The main thing I like about cities is just the environment of it all. Walking around late at night with all the buildings lit up, still passing people walking along the sidewalks, that is what I love. Reading Whyte's chapter made me think of how even though vendors and street hustlers may seem like a detractant to cites, they actually help the overall vibe. I cannot imagine New York without the noise and shaddy characters on the streets.

Unfortunately, these same things that can make a city great can hurt in to large quantities. Cleanliness is good to a point, but to clean is weird. Conversely, dirtiness makes a city feel right, but to much is definitely a turn off. In the end its all about balance, weighing the pros and the cons and finding a happy medium.

EGGS?

Karl and I had lots of good ideas, however with limited resources and lack of transportation, we could not follow up on them. Instead we somehow decided to build a springy thing that was almost guaranteed not to work. Some of our good ideas were using a substance that absorbs a lot of shock such as peanut butter, or packing the egg in something like mini marshmellos as to take force off the egg. Our design may have worked had it fallen in the intended direction, straight down, however due to whatever it maybe, it landed directly on its side destroying the egg. Oh well. We'll get 'em next time?

Design and the City

1. What do you feel were the author's key points in this chapter?

The author's main points in this chapter were mostly about how cities (primarily main streets) should flow. Whyte thinks that the design of cities should be more in the manner of the old city streets, with crowded sidewalks, loud street vendors, big storefront windows, and stores all along the road. This creates an environment for walkers that makes them look at things and sometimes even go into stores.

2. Compare Whyte's ideas on design to Norman's concepts that we studied earlier. What's similar? What's different?

Whyte touched on a lot of the same principles and ideas that Norman has laid out. Cities should function on several levels including visceral, behavioral and reflective. When a person walks down Lexington, they should instantly have a visceral overload. All the sites and smell, noises and other stimuli attract attract attention right away. All these help move the customer along and guide them into stores. Behaviorally, streets have to work. People need to be able to move, but not necessarily as fast as possible, a slowed pace provides for the best shopping experience. Reflective design plays a lesser role, but still factors into the whole shopping experience. Especially with the street vendors, walking down these avenues and purchasing from the bootleg stands give the buyer a thrill.

3. Create a checklist, based on Whyte's chapter, that could be used to analyze an urban area.

-Street Width: Consumers must be able to walk down sidewalk, but flow should be slow.

-Windows: Stores should have big windows with bold displays that attract everyone's attention.

-Store Variety: Homogenized areas are boring; there should be a wide array of businesses.

-Objects: People want things to use, even as simple as a water fountain, trash can or bench.

-Vendors: Vendors are good. Businesses should take the vendor approach and set up an extension of their store outside.

Isn't it Iconic?

1. To what extent is packaging important in marketing a product? Give an example of how a package influenced your decision to buy (or not buy) something.

Packaging is extremely important to the marketing of products. I think that in a lot of cases, packaging is actually more important than the product itself. Unless a product is already know by the consumer, the packaging is the only piece of evidence they have on whether or not to buy. Water bottles are a good example of this. All bottled water is basically the same, even if some say they have electrolytes or other fancy additives in them. When I'm looking at various bottled waters, I realize all of the brands are going to be giving me basically the same tasting H2O. All I can make my decision on is what the bottles look like. My favorite is the Smart Water, because it looks like it has a goldfish inside of it.

2. What other products have iconic packaging?

Iconic packaging is hard to define, and even harder to create. For packaging be truly iconic, the packaging has to be as much a part of the brand as the product it contains. I think that alcohol, specifically expensive hard liquor, bottles do a really good job of making the package just as important to the product. The good ones catch the eye with sleek, elegant design and remind the consumer of the product, increasing their desire to buy.

3. What usability issues exist for packaging? Give examples of particularly good or bad packaging from a usability perspective.

A product with really quite terrible design is the CD case. CDs are something people put a lot of time and money into collecting, but the jewel cases are so fragile they break at the slightest touch. On the flip side, DVD cases, which hold an identical product in terms of size, shape and weight, do a really good job being usable. They are unbreakable and protect it's contents extremely well. Both hold a lot of value to the consumer, both monetarily and in terms of sentimental value, but the packaging of DVD cases is far superior.

Retail Analysis

The store I observed was the Hollister at the Crossroads mall. Their target demographic is teenagers to college students.

Hollister goes for the surf shop/on the beach type appeal. They have lots of plants, and tiki hut-ish wooden structures. Semi-clothed mannequins flank the entrances. They play music that is both too loud (for me) and not very good (also my opinion but seriously). The layout of the merchandise is actually good. When you walk in the helpful "Dudes" and "Bettys" sign tells the Dudes and Bettys which way to walk. They have basic fashion groupings so the consumers get basic tips, without being told what to buy. One interesting thing was that the only guy's jeans that were actually reachable where the ones smaller than a 32 waist. I'm 6'1 and I had to do work to reach the 33s and forget about the 36s. I guess we know how Hollister feels about fatties. Besides some on the floor, the store basically had no lighting. It was weird because you couldn't actually see the clothes. I noticed one customer, finding a shirt of interest, try it on in a mirror, but there is no way she could actually know what it looks like! The cashier area was pretty standard, way back in the 4th zone. There were some conveniently located chairs for me to chill in for a while. The store was quite potent throughout, but there wasn't much of a change in scent from the Dudes to the Bettys. That was a little odd.

The shop reflects a laid back, casual image; who cares, its only fashion could be their motto. There was live feed from a beach in California, which to me, is a little creepy. The dark shopping environment is reflective of the who cares? appeal Hollister has done so well.

The customers seemed basically to just wander aimlessly, usually walking to the back of the store, then working their way back, to make sure they didn't miss any particularly "nice" clothes. My favorite part of the stores design was the very clear gender lines. Men's and women's clothes were completely separated, leaving no confusion.

The Science of Shopping

What points from this article do you feel are most important?

The author of this piece had a lot of really great points about what stores can do to appease consumers, such as the "Decompression Zone", the women's butt thing, and the Invariant Right. But all of these principles are really just guesses on how customers are going to behave. They may be good predictors, but I think the take away message from Gladwell's article is that the customer is unpredictable. If you do things with the intention of luring him/her in, you will invariably fail; instead designers must look at what the customer does naturally, and react to that.

How much do you personally feel you are influenced by a store's design?

I would like to think I am not influenced by a store's design, but after reading this enlightening, and quite frankly disturbing piece I would guess that I am, on some level, influenced by store design. Usually I go to stores with vary specific purposes, so I am probably not the target audience for these store masterminds, but next time I'm at the Gap I'll bet I feel the strings being pulled on the customer/marionette I have become.

Make a check list you could use to analyze a retail store like Paco Underhill does.

Why are customers coming in?

What are their first impressions?

What is the store trying to say?

Doest the store keep people in?

Is the layout logical?

Will women get their asses grabbed?

Biggest Mistakes in Web Design

1. How does this reading relate to the concept of user-focused design that we have discussed in class?

One of the author's main points, and something he mentions several times throughout his piece, is that the purpose of design is to solve user problems. The only reason for the existence of a website is to help the consumer with what ever needs they might have. Many designers look at their designs not through the eyes of the people who need the sites information, but through their own eyes. This is a mistake because they already know what the site's message is and can often over look grievous errors as a result.

2. What points do you feel are most important?

The points I consider the most important are that it is very easy to understand what the web page is about, that the site has content that will keep people coming back. If your websites point is not immediately clear, it is a failure. People do not want to spend anytime trying to figure out your web page. If they can't figure it out right away they will leave. Second, websites need to have "heroin content". This is harder to do, but if you have it, some design mistakes can be made. Heroin content is content the user is desperate to have and will come back to the site again and again for.

3. Create your own list of important design factors for a webpage.

1. Keep it simple. Simplicity is the most important. People should be able to find what they need quickly and easily.

2. Keep the user in mind. Your site should help the user, so don't let bad design get in the way of this primary focus.

3. Contrast! Make sure your site is legible. This should be the easiest , but lots of people can't do it.

Know it All

What do you think are the author's main points in this article?

I think that the author's goal with this article was to illustrate the cultural phenomenon known as Wikipedia. Wikipedia has become our generations goto source for any and all information. If it wasn't expressly forbidden, it would be my sole citation for every research paper I've ever done. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia at it's core, but it is also so much more. It is a social experiment; the goal being to see what happens when people share information. And the experiment has been successful beyond anyones wildest dreams. The idea, as the article highlights, is crazy, and most "credible" sources say nothing on Wikipedia can be trusted. However, as a study has shown, the error rates between Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica are almost identical. I believe that in 20 years, Wikipedia will be considered the credible source of reference.

An important part of credible writing is selecting good supporting evidence. Select a passage from this article that illustrates the effective use of supporting detail. Explain why you think it is particularly effective.

Wikipedia remains a lumpy work in progress. The entries can read as though they had been written by a seventh grader: clarity and concision are lacking; the facts may be sturdy, but the connective tissue is either anemic or absent; and citation is hit or miss. Wattenberg and Viégas, of I.B.M., note that the vast majority of Wikipedia edits consist of deletions and additions rather than of attempts to reorder paragraphs or to shape an entry as a whole, and they believe that Wikipedia’s twenty-five-line editing window deserves some of the blame. It is difficult to craft an article in its entirety when reading it piecemeal, and, given Wikipedians’ obsession with racking up edits, simple fixes often take priority over more complex edits. Wattenberg and Viégas have also identified a “first-mover advantage”: the initial contributor to an article often sets the tone, and that person is rarely a Macaulay or a Johnson. The over-all effect is jittery, the textual equivalent of a film shot with a handheld camera.

I found this quote to contain good supporting evidence. A statement was made, and it was followed by several quotes and facts which reinforced the initial idea.

Throughout the article, the author compares Wikipedia to the Encyclopedia Britannica, but not specifically on design. How would you compare the two encyclopedias from a design perspective?

From a design perspective, the two are completely different. Wikipedia is designed with the idea that with more people and more ideas, the best information will come out. On the other hand, Encyclopedia Britannica approaches the problem of information with a research and careful thought approach. They both have their merits; the latter probably being more accurate, and the former having more topics and a broader perspective.

Organization and Prepartation Tips

What do you think are the author's three most important points?

Garr Reynolds basically had 3 major points:

1) Simplicity.

A good presentation is about being concise and not saying too much when you don't have to. Knowing what to leave out is often harder than knowing what to include.

2) Structure:

How are you going to present your information? Good presentation needs a structure so that information can build on itself and the audience can follow a clear path through your material.

3) Story:

A story is often the best way to illustrate complex topics and make your audience connect to your presentation. You also have to know your audience to know how they will connect.

How might you apply his advice to your own presentation?

In terms of my own presentation, I'm going to try and follow most of his guidelines. I hopefully know my audience pretty well! Simplicity is the main thing I want to shoot for. Trying to put too much information into presentations has been a problem of mine in the past. I want to make sure I have a well structured and easy to follow presentation.

What do you think presentation preparation has in common with product design?

Product design and presentation "design" have a lot in common I think. The first question is do each do what they were intended (serve it's function or convey it's info). The second thing you ask is how the consumer/viewer liked the "design" and how effectively it performed. Both need to focus on how they make the consumer/viewer feel.

Also...

I, like several of my peers it would appear, would like to focus more on the reflective design. I find this level very interesting and think it would be fun to study farther.

Either that or pipe, we could go on that all day!

Emotional Design Again

1. Select a brief passage from Chapter Three of Emotional Design by Donald Norman and post it on your blog. Explain why you thought it was interesting.

"Whether we wish to admit it or not, all of us worry about the image we present to others-- or, for that matter, about the self-image that we present to ourselves. DO you sometimes avoid a purchase "because it wouldn't be right" or buy something on order to support a cause you prefer? These are reflective decisions. In fact,, even people who claim a complete lack of interest in how the are perceived-- dressing in whatever is easiest or most comfortable, refraining from purchasing new items until the ones they are using completely stop working-- make statements about themselves and the things they care about. These are all properties of reflective processing."

I chose this passage because I found reflective design, and the concept of reflective processing one of the most interesting things that Norman has talked about. Thinking this way makes me see a lot of things in my life and the lives of others that are reflective; trying to project some image of self.

2. Norman uses the terms Visceral Design, Behavioral Design, and Reflective Design. Do these categories seem useful to you? Would other names or phrases make the categories clearer?

I like these names, even though I think that some of them could be a little more clear. Visceral and behavioral design both seem like good names for the attractiveness and functionality. I think that reflective design could be a little vague and I might use a word like projective but I do like to think about as "reflective" because it makes me think of deep thought, which is like reflective design; there are lots of levels to it.

3. How could a designer decide if Visceral Design, Behavioral Design, or Reflective Design is more important for a particular product? Are some types of products more visceral, behavioral, or reflective?

I think that designers probably have a sort of shifting mental scale balancing out the 3 types of emotional design. It depends a lot on the product which one should be favored, but all three have to be present. I am trying to think of products that have only one of these design categories, but I don't think it could be done. Maybe paper could be something with purely behavioral design? "Livestrong" bracelets might be just reflective, because you don't really need one but it says out support a cause. I'm really curious about this. Comments?

Designing the Emotions

What do you feel were the author's key points in this chapter?

In this chapter the author was trying to convey that design goes deeper than just function and aesthetics. He broke it down into 3 categories, visceral, behavioral, and reflective. Visceral is basically just pure, carnal emotions provoked by a product. Behavioral design is much more about practicality and how well the product functions. Reflective is probably the most complex. It is about what a product says about the user. It is about the feelings it evokes. It is about self image. The author describes these 3 in great detail, and shows how they can work together to give us the best consumer experience.

How does this chapter compare the the earlier writing (The Design of Everyday Things) by the same author?

This selection seemed quite similar in style to the early work. Norman makes a statement, then goes on for several pages giving numerous examples of his ideas in the real world. In terms of content I found this chapter quite different from the first one. The first writing was for the most part only about what made designs "good" from a use standpoint. It wasn't about what the designs meant, but what they did and if the did them well. This writing was much deeper. It focused more on what things mean, and how products make us feel.

Give examples, from your own experience, of something that succeeds as visceral design something that succeeds as behavioral design, and a reflective design success. What do you think makes each thing successful?

The thing that I own that is most visceral, is probably my speakers. Do they sound great(do they have behavioral design)? Absolutely! But there are lots of speakers that do that. Mine just look better. Instead of being unattractive black boxes, they are slick transparent works of art. Sure they cost more, but they are worth it to me because they are appealing. I saw them and it wasn't about what they sounded like, but about how fantastic they would look in my room.

In terms of behavioral design the thing I own that best sums it up is my alarm clock. It looks like an alarm clock. It sounds like an alarm clock. It is an alarm clock. It was made to arouse me from my slumber, and it does just that without fail.

Reflective design is a little bit trickier for me to come up with an example with, because for the most part I try to avoid nice, status symbol-y things. I guess some of my clothes would be an ok example. Why do I wear what I do? It's not necessarily because my wardrobe is super practical, because it's not. Now that I think about it, the only reason for wearing the things I wear is because I like the way they look, and what they make people think about me.

More About The Design of Everyday Things

Select a brief passage from Chapter One of The Design of Everyday Things (Donald Norman) and post it on your blog. Explain why you thought it was interesting.

"How do people cope? Part of the answer lines in the way the mind works-- in the psychology of human thought and cognition. Park lies in the designer to make the operation clear, to project a good image of the operation and to take advantage of other things people might be expected to know. Here is where the designer's knowledge of the psychology of people coupled with knowledge of how things work becomes crucial."

I found this quote interesting because the previous statement, what people are coping with, referred to the fact that there are some 30,000 "readily discriminable objects for the adult." That blew my mind a little bit. It is something that we don't usually think about, but even just on the desk in front of me are multiple designs that either I have learned how to use, or are just intuitive to the user.

Norman's book was first published in 1988 and it still influences designers today. Why do you think this book continues to be influential 20 years later?

Norman's book is equally, if not more, relevant today as it was when it was written. In 1988 the technology bubble was still in it's early days and there where so many less features and cool tricks products could do to mess up a design. The paradox of technology is probably worse now than it was then, and we have all kinds of U-Shaped curves. The principles of design, like the people who use them, don't change. Good design is good design no matter when it was made.

Based on this chapter, what factors would you include on a checklist for evaluating design of a product?

The three main factors that I got out of this chapter were the principles of visibility, mapping and feedback. If all three of these are criteria are met, a design should be good. Obviously the product must work. Simplicity is also important.

The Design of Everyday Things

what do you feel were the author's key points in this chapter?

I feel that Donald's main theme of this article is the psychology of design, such as why we feel certain ways about certain designs. He broke this down into 4 major points; affordance, visibility, mapping, and feedback. When one, or in many cases all, of these points aren't there, a product is hard to use and takes a longtime to figure out. When these 4 points are present, we are left with an intuitive, easy to use product.

think of a specific product that you have had difficulty using. how did design contribute to making it difficult to use? does the usability problem arise from one of the principles that norman discusses in this chapter?

There are so many products, now that I think about it with all my mad design knowledge, that are just bad from a usability standpoint. Refrigerators that cant change temperature, telephones that have countless (often unused) features which are impossible to access, doors that you don't know how to open. But I think the product that I have had the most unnecessary trouble with is my car radio. Trying to deal with all the buttons that aren't labeled and afford nothing at all. After 5-1o months of experimenting I was finally able to program the presets. Yay! But the next time I got into my car, they were gone again. I never did figure out how to use that device. I think that in terms of the Norman's principles none of the buttons had visible functions, and none of them afforded any purpose.

how did the designers of the iPod address the principles that norman discusses here?

Reading this chapter, almost everything that Norman said made me think of the iPod. It seems to follow all the rules perfectly. The scroll wheel has a natural relationship between scrolling up and scrolling down. There are 5 buttons to do 5 different features. It has aesthetic value without giving up function. It gives you a visual feedback as to whether or not your command did anything. It has got it all. Steve Jobs and co. must know what they are doing.

The Perfect Thing

What elements of the design process does this article illustrate?

The design process, from start to finish, are illustrated in this article. It starts with the general idea for the product, a digital music player that is portable enough to carry around in your pocket. We are later showed more specific aspects of what goes into the making of a product such as making the product easy to use, making it attractive to the buyer, and making it durable to wear.

What factors would you use to evaluate a "perfect thing"?

For an item to be perfect it primarily has to do what it's supposed to do, and do it better than any other competing product. In addition to functionality, it's very important to me that a product looks cool. All other things being equal the one that looks sweet gets my vote. Equally as important is durablity and whether or not it stands the test of time. Combine all these factors with a small/reasonable pricetag, you got yourself a perfect thing.

Whether you own and iPod or not, you probably have some opinions of this product. What do you feel are its strengths and weaknesses?

I think the iPod's only weakness, at least from Apple's point of view, is that it is a little too awesome. They last so long and almost never break. This makes it so that iPods have to get updated about every year or so, making it so that my iPod, that I spent so much money on is now out dated. I mean did you know that Nano's now have a video recorder? Seriously. I guess what I'm trying to say is I love the iPod and wouldn't change anything.

Cerimonial First Post

To whom ever may happen to read this,

I'm Joe Barth. I've lived in Kalamazoo for the past 11 years about a five minutes walk away from where I am now writing this. I pretty much grew up on and around campus (my father is a prof in the math department), and all throughout high school I told myself I would never come here. It's way to close to home! But for a number of excellent reasons here I am. I'm really looking forward to starting the year, and I'm sure now that K was the right choice.

As far as the class, not sure what to expect but I think that's good. It's why I'm here right?