Ok, back to Andrei ... Digital vs. Software. Ok, then we are in agreement. I was thinking of "software" more specifically, meaning that which is presented through a screen, but if you want software to mean anything running through silicon, great. Of course, a lot happens on the firmware level and I'm not sure you expect prototypers to be working on firmware when they are doing prototyping, right? I was thinking of software as that which is "touchable" by the end-user, and exists within UI Frameworks, not all software. I mean my car has software, but I don't really think of it is "soft" as it is all embedded on ROMs. Even my Radio/CD player/iPod Interface in my Car has a "screen" of LEDs, but I wouldn't consider this "software design" though it is definitely in the realm of non-production prototyping, really easily (BTW, this horrible system is an example of the eco-system design most needing of an interaction designer and NOT an interface designer, but that's a long story.)
But if in your mind, its all "software" then we are in agreement about scope. We are also in agreement about the "agnostic" piece as well. Part of the reason for my take is that I just got out of a conversation with my manager who was reacting to my piece on Core77 based on his 20-30 odd years experience as a practicing industrial designer where "interactions" was a core component to the solutions he worked on, whether it was a vacuum cleaner, a bank teller machine, or many other devices that were designed and used way before the ubiquity of the transistor in everything in the world. I think the other aspect of the discussion is that I think, knowing what you expect in terms of coding skills, you are limiting your hiring to people who work on "screen software" design. I mean, what is the purpose of having good PHP/JavaScript skills if you are designing a TV remote control. You'll never be doing the type of prototyping you have discussed in previous postings. You CAN! do prototyping of a remote control with those skills, but they would not be at the level of fidelity that I've heard you mention before. They would be more akin to abstractions, and not representative of real-use, so I think that is what has skewed my interpretation of your message of "software". But it sounds like we are good! Now I'm sure there are others on this list who would like to think of interaction design more generically. But I think once you leave the digital world of some sort of transistors, you are just talking about "design" generally or maybe 'experience' design. We'll see. -- dave -- dave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=26170 ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
