Bureaucrats, emailconfirmed
1,221
edits
m
→Simplicity: typo
m (→Iterative Design Process: format) |
m (→Simplicity: typo) |
||
| Line 99: | Line 99: | ||
===Simplicity=== | ===Simplicity=== | ||
When I say simplicity I do neither mean "ease of use" | When I say simplicity I do neither mean "ease of use" nor "looking shiny and smooth". The kind of simplity I mean in this chapter is implementing only the features that are important for your idea and to implement them in a way that they work together greatly. You should not add anything because it is a nice to have or one in ten people thought it would be useful. | ||
Every time you add a feature, you need to make it fit to the rest of your product. It potentially will make it slower, less solid and more difficult to use. And keep in mind: the ressources you use to add features (you are probably student so it is: time) can't be used for refining the really crucial features. | Every time you add a feature, you need to make it fit to the rest of your product. It potentially will make it slower, less solid and more difficult to use. And keep in mind: the ressources you use to add features (you are probably student so it is: time) can't be used for refining the really crucial features. | ||
So how do you decide which features you are going to implement? | So how do you decide which features you are going to implement? | ||
I don't have any instant solution. The most important is that you keep in mind that you should create a unique, easy-to use product that does do what it does greatly. During this course you will learn how to do user research to find out about the goals | I don't have any instant solution. The most important is that you keep in mind that you should create a unique, easy-to use product that does do what it does greatly. During this course you will learn how to do user research to find out about the goals and problems of your users. Try to find out what really matters for all of them. If you see that you have two different groups of people, find out if they are similar enough to serve them one product. If they differ too much, say goodbye to one of them and design just for one of the groups - maybe you come back later to the other, but first concentrate on one thing. | ||
But what about the products that are used by everyone? In case you want to design something like this you should not apply the suggestions above, right? | But what about the products that are used by everyone? In case you want to design something like this you should not apply the suggestions above, right? | ||
Well, when I think about products for everybody I think of facebook for example. It has a vast number of users so this is enough "everybody" for a beginning interaction designer I think. Though strangely, Facebook started with a very restricted target group: Students of the Harvard University. Slowly and controlled it was opened to more people. First Students of other elite US universities ("Ivy League"). Than all other US universities. Than Highschool students, employees of several big companys and finally it was open for everybody. I don't want to put them on a pedestal for great interaction design. I just want to illustrate that they are successful and did not "desgin for everybody". | Well, when I think about products for everybody I think of facebook for example. It has a vast number of users so this is enough "everybody" for a beginning interaction designer I think. Though strangely, Facebook started with a very restricted target group: Students of the Harvard University. Slowly and controlled it was opened to more people. First Students of other elite US universities ("Ivy League"). Than all other US universities. Than Highschool students, employees of several big companys and finally it was open for everybody. I don't want to put them on a pedestal for great interaction design. I just want to illustrate that they are successful and did not "desgin for everybody". | ||
What this illustrates as well is that it is always easier to add features. Removing them if you note that they don't help you is very hard. You can do so but nobody likes it. What if a function that you | What this illustrates as well is that it is always easier to add features. Removing them if you note that they don't help you is very hard. You can do so but nobody likes it. What if a function that you particularly use would disappears after an upgrade of your favourite software? | ||
If you release a successful 1.0 Product you can still extend it in the 2.0 version even with features that are not very-super-crucial. But I write this to help you to release a successful 1.0 version so I did put emphasis on the simplicity. | If you release a successful 1.0 Product you can still extend it in the 2.0 version even with features that are not very-super-crucial. But I write this to help you to release a successful 1.0 version so I did put emphasis on the simplicity. | ||