I am a UX designer for Google.
I wish I could dig deep into this discussion with you all, because
it's
very relevant to some of the work going on there. Sadly, there
are many
things about my employer that I'm not at liberty to talk about --
I'm sure
many of you can understand that. I'll make a few points, and then
make a
graceful exit to my usual lurking state. :-)
* Different product teams at Google have very different approaches to
design, data, research, and "soul" in design. Some product
designs I've
seen there are truly amazing and beautiful, and some designers do
indeed
take risks. The cultural fit between a UX designer and a product
team
depends very much on where in the organization they are. I'm
confident that
that's true in most large technology companies.
* The main search properties, especially Google's main page and
search
results page, are managed extremely carefully. I've seen some of
the A/B
experiments run on those pages, and while I can't share much, I
will say
that the results are fascinating -- you would be amazed at the usage
variations that arise from tiny design changes. And no, those
variations
are not always predictable from first principles. This convinces
me that we
collectively have a lot yet to learn about design.
* Yes, Google is successful at search. Very. Rhetorical
question: how
much design risk SHOULD such a company take with a product that
still works
so well? In that context, I think we designers would actually be
irresponsible to not test our designs with good experiments --
countless
people depend on Google's main properties, and there are lots of
ad dollars
(much of which go to actual advertisers, not us) and shareholder
value at
stake. It's not just about designers and our good ideas. The
point about
hill-climbing with data-driven incremental changes is well taken, but
honestly, don't you think that It Would Be Bad to accidentally
send Google
Web Search into a design valley while you blundered about looking
for a
higher hill?
* I never had the chance to meet Doug Bowman while he was at
Google, though
I regret not having had a chance to work with him. I have no
reason to
think of him with anything but deep respect, and I wish him well.
- Jenifer
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 2:38 PM, David Malouf <d...@ixda.org> wrote:
Jarod, I don't like it. I find it to be ..
1) reminiscent of MS
2) too brash and distracting
More importantly it has in no way shape or form improved my
relationship with Google (or diminished it).
I think people have missed my point.
I think design is not for or against data, but design should always
be for imbuing human expressionism beyond the measurable. A designer
of worth, merit, etc. should always be encouraged to express
themselves in any way that does not break Raskin's 1st law of
interaction design (don't fuck w/ the content, purpose or utility of
what you are designing [paraphrasing]).
When I look at a site like google, I see a souless design. Now, I
use
google over Yahoo & Adobe for most things but that has nothing to do
with aesthetics. But Google would never take a risk like adding a
"Liam" (mail spelled backwards) character to their software. They
would never use the iconographic vivid imagery of a Buzzword
interface (Adobe). Because of this, these applications at least
attempt to have soul--connectedness to human expression to the world
around them.
I think people need to stop lauding Google as a design success
story.
I think it hurts us b/c it is clear that it is an engineering
success
story. Does that mean that engineering is better than design. I
think
looking at Apple, answers that question. It doesn't. There are SOOOO
many ingredients that go into success and we would be fooling
ourselve as designers or engineers to think that any one of us
controls all of them.
BTW, the one place funny enough that Google DOES allow for a
taste of
humanity is on their most precious search home page (Google.com).
Their use of holiday and historic event treatments is beautiful!!!
However, I can count on 1 hand how many times I go to Google.com
(home page) any more. Its in the chrome of my browser or in my
browser's home page, etc.
Soul!!! Time to swing the pedullum back from the austere periods
towards the more expressionist. I think we can do that and still
maintain simplicity, clarity, usability, findability, and overall
effectiveness. In fact, I'd like to challenge us to do it!
-- dave
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=40237
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
--
---------------------------------------
Jenifer Tidwell
jenifer.tidw...@gmail.com
http://designinginterfaces.com
http://jtidwell.net
