> > What I don't agree with is the idea that you must discard the past to move > forward. For me, that's too cheap and easy an approach. >
I greatly respect your willingness to pay close attention to and consider opposing arguments, but this particular point bothers me. "The past" is filled with far more examples of products, innovative thinking, and success stories based on activity-centered research, magic, genius design, and just plain luck than UCD can claim even on its best day. What's cheap and easy is the idea that we can dissect a chef's work and call it a recipe. That we can simply analyze genius and come out with a one-size-fits-all plan for success. -r- ________________________________________________________________ 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
