Comments for The Characteristics of User Experience http://charux.com Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:55:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ Comment on The Experience of a Live Conference vs a Recorded Video by Dominic LaCava http://charux.com/2009/08/16/the-experience-of-a-live-conference-vs-a-recorded-video/#comment-11 Dominic LaCava Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:55:29 +0000 http://charux.com/?p=60#comment-11 This is a great comparison between live and recorded presentations. However I think that live conferences can be Configurable. It’s common for presenters to make their presentations interactive, such as having the audience participate in mini design slams, asking survey questions (i.e. how many people have the title Information Architect, how many people have used Photoshop in the last month), encouraging the audience to ask questions throughout the presentation, etc. This gives the audience some ability to control the presentation by participating directly. By encouraging interaction, presenters might customize their presentations on-the-fly to address audience feedback. Presenters might think up examples that weren’t part of the original presentation or provide added detail to specific topics, basically shaping the content to suit the feedback. Just as presenters are playful to engage the audience to make a connection, they can take advantage of this connection to customize the presentation, which is unique to live conferences. To add another dimension to this, it would be cool to think about the different experiences of a live conference viewed in-person vs. remotely. This is a great comparison between live and recorded presentations. However I think that live conferences can be Configurable. It’s common for presenters to make their presentations interactive, such as having the audience participate in mini design slams, asking survey questions (i.e. how many people have the title Information Architect, how many people have used Photoshop in the last month), encouraging the audience to ask questions throughout the presentation, etc. This gives the audience some ability to control the presentation by participating directly. By encouraging interaction, presenters might customize their presentations on-the-fly to address audience feedback. Presenters might think up examples that weren’t part of the original presentation or provide added detail to specific topics, basically shaping the content to suit the feedback. Just as presenters are playful to engage the audience to make a connection, they can take advantage of this connection to customize the presentation, which is unique to live conferences. To add another dimension to this, it would be cool to think about the different experiences of a live conference viewed in-person vs. remotely.

]]> Comment on Two Principles redefined, Three Characteristics added by davidsless http://charux.com/2009/08/07/two-principles-redefined-three-characteristics-added/#comment-8 davidsless Sat, 08 Aug 2009 08:30:13 +0000 http://charux.com/?p=54#comment-8 You might find it useful to have a look at the approach to this issue by Information Designers. We have been applying a set of criteria for some time now and they apply across a range of media. Here are some publications that feature these: http://communication.org.au/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=85 http://communication.org.au/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=118 This is just a small selection from our own web site You might find it useful to have a look at the approach to this issue by Information Designers.

We have been applying a set of criteria for some time now and they apply across a range of media.

Here are some publications that feature these:

http://communication.org.au/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=85

http://communication.org.au/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=118

This is just a small selection from our own web site

]]> Comment on The UX of a printed book vs the Kindle by Steve http://charux.com/2009/07/29/the-ux-of-a-printed-book-the-kindle/#comment-7 Steve Sat, 01 Aug 2009 13:49:26 +0000 http://charux.com/?p=30#comment-7 Another dimension to consider "Fidelity vs. Convenience" - similar to (but not the same as)the Speed vs Safety dimension that we talked about around the car example. In this example, you might compare a coffee table book with huge, full-color pictures at the full end of fidelity, while the Kindle, with thousands of books in a device with the ability to download more on demand, is really a device largely of convenience. It might not work 100% in your model, but I thought I'd point it out since I ran across it ... http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/08/fidelity-vs-convenience.html Another dimension to consider “Fidelity vs. Convenience” – similar to (but not the same as)the Speed vs Safety dimension that we talked about around the car example.

In this example, you might compare a coffee table book with huge, full-color pictures at the full end of fidelity, while the Kindle, with thousands of books in a device with the ability to download more on demand, is really a device largely of convenience.

It might not work 100% in your model, but I thought I’d point it out since I ran across it …

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/08/fidelity-vs-convenience.html

]]> Comment on The UX Characteristics of Cars by Pimpformation Architect http://charux.com/2009/07/28/the-ux-characteristics-of-cars/#comment-6 Pimpformation Architect Wed, 29 Jul 2009 05:21:12 +0000 http://charux.com/?p=23#comment-6 I also think a specific example would be more interesting. The first thing I thought of when I saw your 10 characteristics was a sort of Likert scale for each one (from brief to thorough, etc.) Maybe it would be worthwhile to set up a detailed example on this blog and then create a survey that UX practitioners can take. After several folks have gone through the mental exercise you could discuss the results. I'm not sure, but it might help you spot ambiguous or troublesome characteristics. It would also let people apply the model and take it for a test drive. :-) I also think a specific example would be more interesting.

The first thing I thought of when I saw your 10 characteristics was a sort of Likert scale for each one (from brief to thorough, etc.) Maybe it would be worthwhile to set up a detailed example on this blog and then create a survey that UX practitioners can take. After several folks have gone through the mental exercise you could discuss the results. I’m not sure, but it might help you spot ambiguous or troublesome characteristics. It would also let people apply the model and take it for a test drive. :-)

]]> Comment on The UX Characteristics of Cars by Richard http://charux.com/2009/07/28/the-ux-characteristics-of-cars/#comment-5 Richard Wed, 29 Jul 2009 03:14:50 +0000 http://charux.com/?p=23#comment-5 You're probably right Dave. I was originally thinking about this from the perspective of a 3-series BMW I had a while ago but during a discussion with some colleagues some other examples crept in. You’re probably right Dave. I was originally thinking about this from the perspective of a 3-series BMW I had a while ago but during a discussion with some colleagues some other examples crept in.

]]> Comment on The UX Characteristics of Cars by Dave Malouf http://charux.com/2009/07/28/the-ux-characteristics-of-cars/#comment-4 Dave Malouf Wed, 29 Jul 2009 03:13:18 +0000 http://charux.com/?p=23#comment-4 On another note, I would like to encourage you to go deeper. On 2nd and 3rd readings I see room for so much more depth in the study/critique. I.e. actionable ... I mean, where is sex & camping and drive-ins and sitting on the hood & tailgating, etc. etc. And look at how the Element is designed for one set of use, and Xtera another, and a Mini quite a different tale. This is the important meat of the story. -- dave On another note, I would like to encourage you to go deeper. On 2nd and 3rd readings I see room for so much more depth in the study/critique.

I.e. actionable … I mean, where is sex & camping and drive-ins and sitting on the hood & tailgating, etc. etc. And look at how the Element is designed for one set of use, and Xtera another, and a Mini quite a different tale.

This is the important meat of the story.

– dave

]]> Comment on The UX Characteristics of Cars by Dave Malouf http://charux.com/2009/07/28/the-ux-characteristics-of-cars/#comment-3 Dave Malouf Wed, 29 Jul 2009 03:09:21 +0000 http://charux.com/?p=23#comment-3 Wow! I have to say i can't get past the fact that you are generalizing the "car experience". I mean the whole point of design is to differentiate. I think what might be better is a case study that looks at a specific car, or a few cars so we can understand the subtleties being explored here. I can say from experience that driving a mini-van is nothing like driving a great sports car, nor should it ever! That experience starts from the moment you pick up the keys, or even think of walking at the door. Wow! I have to say i can’t get past the fact that you are generalizing the “car experience”. I mean the whole point of design is to differentiate.

I think what might be better is a case study that looks at a specific car, or a few cars so we can understand the subtleties being explored here.

I can say from experience that driving a mini-van is nothing like driving a great sports car, nor should it ever!

That experience starts from the moment you pick up the keys, or even think of walking at the door.

]]>