Sunir Shah wrote: (01)
> In response to:
>
>
>>> "Being people-centric isn't just about user interface,
>>> however. It's about attitude...
>
> Eric criticizes:
>
>>Uh. It *is* an attitude -- an attitude that says "I want to make
>>it easy for people, I want to solve their problems". Selfishly,
>>so they'll love me and/or pay me, but it is that attitude which
>>produces both the functionality and the access to it (interface)
>>the results in sex appeal.
>
> While I wouldn't doubt that many people in fact only pay
> heed to other people for selfish reasons, such as pandering
> to some audience
>
> http://usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?TheAudience
>
> I would have to disagree that being people-centred is the
> same as pandering. Meatball is people-centred because we
> like people.
>
I didn't mean to imply that being people-centered was pandering.
I meant to say that it's "about" attitude, it *is* an attitude,
and that everything stems from that attitude -- quality,
reliability, functionality, and power, as well as ease of use. (02)
>>There was something about fancy black dress shoes that made me
>>realize the connection between good taste and simplicity. After
>>all, it is gaudy, ornate shoes with bananas and grapes on the
>>tassels that seem gauche, compared to shiny black shoes.
>
> Depends what culture you're from... Be careful! ;)
>
Yes, the analogy has cultural overtones. But the heart of the
matter -- the functionality and the interface -- still requires
simplicity. One can only imagine the interfaces that would have
been constructed in Elizabethan England. (03)
--
This message is archived at: (04)
http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=tools-yak&i=407B1684.8040008@sun.com (05)
|