Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On 1/30/08, Andrei Herasimchuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So I guess the question is: Pankaj, do you also agree that aesthetics > are a fundamental requirement of practicing IxD? No I dont agree aesthetics is a fundamental requirement for IxD. But to me Interaction design is all about interface design. If you arent designing an interface what else are you designing when you talk about designing behaviours. Every interaction needs an interface. Period. Show me an interaction that happens without a medium/interface between them. You and me exchanging our thoughts here are using email as the interface. Had we been face to face we would be using voice and language as the interface. Wonder what would happen if you talked spanish and I german. There is no interface and hence no interaction. The whole confusion is really around the usage of the word Interaction. To me interaction is fundamental whenever two entities communicate - whether communication is human-human, human-machine or machine-machine. The way Interaction Design as a craft was coined way back in 1980s, it really meant Interaction design at the Human-Computer Interface level on lines of Industrial Design which was Human-Machine interface design. Since Industrial had the context of machines it was always easy to understand but Interaction Design (which is more fundamental) was used in context of Human-Computer Interface but without qualifiying the context explicitly. That implicit qualification (Human-Computer) lead to it everybody giving their own interpretaion and hence all the confusion. Hope I didnt add to more confusion :) Cheers Pankaj *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On Jan 30, 2008, at 10:43 AM, James Bond wrote: > I have been doing customer support and network design most of my > career and have started looking for a change when I discovered > Interaction Design. This debate is important to me for the simple > reason that I don't have a background. As a quick aside: One of the best things about being a designer, it's like being a writer. No amount of school, degrees, learning, etc., will prevent you from being one even if you lack formal training or background. Why? Because design, after all is said and done at the end of the day, cannot be faked. Anyone who learns how to do it can do so regardless of background or how they obtained that background. So take that as encouragement to dive in if you feel so inclined. But the water will probably be icy cold in those first few moments. Don't worry... you'll acclimate soon enough. > To completely honest I am a bit overwhelmed and frustrated. I have > read this board (I may not post, but I pay attention!), been to Core, > been to EVERY link that is mentioned (I have massive amounts of one > off reading), I am on safaribooksonline reading, and I have tapped > most of my resources. The verdict: no one knows! I'll let others chime in here, because even though I'm the trenches to a large degree, even after 20 years of practicing what I do for a living, I'm still in the same boat as you here. Now imagine how I feel! > This is a little disconcerting as there does not seem to be any real > way of knowing if I am learning the right material to become an > interaction designer. The only other way to cover my bases is to > learn everything under the sun which is a major undertaking. One way for you to narrow the scope to get on a path that leads in a tangible, more definitive direction: What kind of products do you want to make or be part of making? Software? Web Sites? Digital Devices like an iPod? Appliances like in your home? Environmental spaces? Do you have something in mind you really want to do? If you ask the list: Where should I start if I want to learn how to design the interaction for the iPhone? I'm more than sure you'll get a plethora of very good answers to help you start down a path to get the ball rolling. > I am sorry if I come off as grumpy I have a ton of reading / research > to do on this topic and I am battling a cold. Neither seem like it > will ever end! Fair warning: Being a designer is like a life long journey on a ship. If you are prone to sea sickness from the off and on occurrence of swells, then either bring along some dramamine or learn to love the rocking of the waves. On days when I can't handle the motion, my drug of choice is a really good bottle of Ridge. -- Andrei Herasimchuk Principal, Involution Studios innovating the digital world e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] c. +1 408 306 6422 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On Jan 30, 2008, at 12:29 PM, dave malouf wrote: > Hi Andrei, we're close. Not possible! 8^) Yes. We are close. We were always close, and that has largely been my frustration for so long since I'm obviously unable to communicate this in way that makes that clear and not abrasive or confrontational. > I think that the foundations taught in architecture and ID programs > are quite specific. I.e. Graphic design is not included in > foundations for most IDs and quite honestly the IDs I've worked with > would make horrible graphic designers. Architecture also has a > foundation, but type is not really a full-semester studio class from > my recollection of looking at those programs. This is all true. I agree. The question then, if I read you correctly, is the degree and what aspects of general design practice would be required? The fact ID folks aren't trained in traditional graphic design does not mean they skip specific training in material aesthetics as it applies to craft and skills. And in fact, things like color theory largely cross disciplines as it applies to both industrial design and graphic design, so there is shared knowledge. I agree with Jeff that Tufte isn't enough, and I didn't mean to imply it was. I was only pointing out his book and its concepts as one of the kinds of specific skills in craft that are directly applicable to IxD. So the question is, how much is needed and what is enough? My personal recommendation would be along the lines I mentioned in a different thread a few weeks back: Color, Type and Composition. If you want to be brave, I'd love to toss in Form as well. (As in the kind of form making needed to design a physical product.) Those core pieces seem to be the best place to start. Everyone should learn those core pieces and then develop a deeper understanding of these concepts and how to apply them later on as they grow as an IxDer. And with those core skills under your belt, one better understands the principles of a Tufte and how to use them for specific forms of interaction design. One can also examine a Paul Rand, a Henry Dreyfuss, a Charles Eames or Gerrit Rietveld and see deeper ways those various aspects of design apply to interaction. Beyond that, designers will more than likely find their own paths based on their own personal strengths and desires. Some might find photography more their liking, some might get into illustration or poster design, some may enjoy making furniture, none of which needs to be considered a core competency of IxD, but all skills that encourage and expand the strength of IxD as a profession. And of course, you'd have to fold in core interaction principles to all this to create the proper balance as well, like understanding time and motion, narrative, context, feedback mechanisms, patterns, metaphors etc. I'm for all of it. By outlining one aspect of the design skillset like I did above, I don't mean the imply that's the only skillset, I'm just trying to point out the material aesthetic and craft that have been lacking explicitly to this day from my point of view in the context of IxD. Is all of that too much? I honestly don't think so. It only feels like a lot to someone who might have to go back to square one on some of these things having not been given an opportunity to do so when they were in the headspace of being in an academic environment. But when I look at what it takes to become an architect, an industrial designer, a graphic designer, even a lawyer or doctor... I honestly don't believe that the combination of the skills I'm advocating combined with the skills I see emerging in IxD as an agreed foundation for all of IxD to be more overwhelming in scope that any other of the great design professions. > Now that being said, I believe there is a crisis in IxD education in > the US specifically b/c of the dearth of programs, but globally b/c > of the lack of consistency between programs (thus the definition > problem). This I also agree with. Especially as it relates to above. > If I would create an Masters of Design program in IxD, it would first > off be 3 years... All good stuff. > Now, if it were a bachelor's program, it would be a 5 year program. > But does anyone want to be an interaction designer when they are 17. > ;) The day they do is the day you'll know the profession has arrived. I also eagerly await the day http://ixda.org/about_interaction.php changes to reflect this sort of direction in more explicit language. -- Andrei Herasimchuk Principal, Involution Studios innovating the digital world e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] c. +1 408 306 6422 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ Welcome to the Interaction Des
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
I am interested in this topic from a different perspective. I am on the outside looking in. I have been doing customer support and network design most of my career and have started looking for a change when I discovered Interaction Design. This debate is important to me for the simple reason that I don't have a background. I am starting new and as such am at the mercy of conventional thinking as to what skills I must learn to become an interaction designer. Right now my list is huge and I feel that I am no closer to understanding how to start out than when I first stumbled across the job, accidentally, on Monster.com. To completely honest I am a bit overwhelmed and frustrated. I have read this board (I may not post, but I pay attention!), been to Core, been to EVERY link that is mentioned (I have massive amounts of one off reading), I am on safaribooksonline reading, and I have tapped most of my resources. The verdict: no one knows! This is a little disconcerting as there does not seem to be any real way of knowing if I am learning the right material to become an interaction designer. The only other way to cover my bases is to learn everything under the sun which is a major undertaking. While this is a conversation of semantics to those that are already in the business, it's a worrying element to those (me) trying to break in. If you don't know what you "are", how am I supposed to learn what to do so I can one day be hired as well? I am sorry if I come off as grumpy I have a ton of reading / research to do on this topic and I am battling a cold. Neither seem like it will ever end! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Dmitry, I hear ya on the time cost thing. It's why I didn't do an ID degree about 2 years ago. 3 years, no life and no pay, was a bit too much for someone who already had over 10 years experience. I do REALLY wish that I could do such a program, or pick and choose what I need in terms of studio/craft/theory work and somehow combine that with my real world experience to then create a degree out of that. That would be an interesting educational program that I have never seen. A part time program that assumes experience as credit towards a degree. Maybe it is like an executive program where there are concentrated pieces like 2 2wk. concentrations for studio work, and then weekends for course work on specific supplemental theory, and then a thesis project of some sort "proving" acquired skills from both experience and formal education. hmmm? -- dave On Jan 30, 2008 3:40 PM, Dmitry Nekrasovski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dave, your proposal actually sounds like a great bachelor's degree > curriculum (or last 3 years thereof). > > A 3-year masters degree, while great for curriculum breadth/depth reasons, > would likely attract few students of high caliber due to the opportunity > cost. Even 2-year master's degrees face this challenge (which is why a > number of MBA programs have moved towards 12 or 18 month curricula). > > Dmitry > > On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:29:22, dave malouf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Andrei, we're close. > > I think that the foundations taught in architecture and ID programs > > are quite specific. I.e. Graphic design is not included in > > foundations for most IDs and quite honestly the IDs I've worked with > > would make horrible graphic designers. Architecture also has a > > foundation, but type is not really a full-semester studio class from > > my recollection of looking at those programs. > > > > Now that being said, I believe there is a crisis in IxD education in > > the US specifically b/c of the dearth of programs, but globally b/c > > of the lack of consistency between programs (thus the definition > > problem). > > > > If I would create an Masters of Design program in IxD, it would first > > off be 3 years. > > year 1 is all about foundations and core theory (and probably is the > > "life? what's a life?" year). Besides the usual suspects, this > > would also include at least 1 class in Java, or programming in > > ActionScript or Visual Basic/XAML (you get my point). > > > > Year 2 is 1/2 about theory and then about focus. This is where the > > HCI stuff meets the tangible interfaces vs. the software stuff vs. > > systems/services. > > > > Year 3 is a continuation of focus, 1st semester growing towards a 2nd > > semester thesis/portfolio piece. > > > > Electives in business, tools, management (it is a masters after all) > > > > Now, if it were a bachelor's program, it would be a 5 year program. > > But does anyone want to be an interaction designer when they are 17. > > ;) > > > > -- dave > > > > > > > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > Posted from the new ixda.org > > http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 > > > > > > > > *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* > > February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA > > Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ > > > > > > 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 > > > > -- David Malouf http://synapticburn.com/ http://ixda.org/ http://motorola.com/ *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
The program that I come from (Kansas) has a fairly dated approach to teaching graphics (IMHO. In the 5 year undergrad ID program, graphics are emphasized as are presentation skills. The interaction design classwork stems largely from the ID facult. They work in teams on most projects... and many of them already code. Dave, if the masters student already has a design undergrad degree, so they skip the first year? Mark On Jan 30, 2008, at 7:29 AM, dave malouf wrote: > Hi Andrei, we're close. > I think that the foundations taught in architecture and ID programs > are quite specific. I.e. Graphic design is not included in > foundations for most IDs and quite honestly the IDs I've worked with > would make horrible graphic designers. Architecture also has a > foundation, but type is not really a full-semester studio class from > my recollection of looking at those programs. > > Now that being said, I believe there is a crisis in IxD education in > the US specifically b/c of the dearth of programs, but globally b/c > of the lack of consistency between programs (thus the definition > problem). > > If I would create an Masters of Design program in IxD, it would first > off be 3 years. > year 1 is all about foundations and core theory (and probably is the > "life? what's a life?" year). Besides the usual suspects, this > would also include at least 1 class in Java, or programming in > ActionScript or Visual Basic/XAML (you get my point). > > Year 2 is 1/2 about theory and then about focus. This is where the > HCI stuff meets the tangible interfaces vs. the software stuff vs. > systems/services. > > Year 3 is a continuation of focus, 1st semester growing towards a 2nd > semester thesis/portfolio piece. > > Electives in business, tools, management (it is a masters after all) > > Now, if it were a bachelor's program, it would be a 5 year program. > But does anyone want to be an interaction designer when they are 17. > ;) > > -- dave > > > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > Posted from the new ixda.org > http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 > > > > *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* > February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA > Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ > > > 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 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Dave, your proposal actually sounds like a great bachelor's degree curriculum (or last 3 years thereof). A 3-year masters degree, while great for curriculum breadth/depth reasons, would likely attract few students of high caliber due to the opportunity cost. Even 2-year master's degrees face this challenge (which is why a number of MBA programs have moved towards 12 or 18 month curricula). Dmitry On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:29:22, dave malouf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Andrei, we're close. > I think that the foundations taught in architecture and ID programs > are quite specific. I.e. Graphic design is not included in > foundations for most IDs and quite honestly the IDs I've worked with > would make horrible graphic designers. Architecture also has a > foundation, but type is not really a full-semester studio class from > my recollection of looking at those programs. > > Now that being said, I believe there is a crisis in IxD education in > the US specifically b/c of the dearth of programs, but globally b/c > of the lack of consistency between programs (thus the definition > problem). > > If I would create an Masters of Design program in IxD, it would first > off be 3 years. > year 1 is all about foundations and core theory (and probably is the > "life? what's a life?" year). Besides the usual suspects, this > would also include at least 1 class in Java, or programming in > ActionScript or Visual Basic/XAML (you get my point). > > Year 2 is 1/2 about theory and then about focus. This is where the > HCI stuff meets the tangible interfaces vs. the software stuff vs. > systems/services. > > Year 3 is a continuation of focus, 1st semester growing towards a 2nd > semester thesis/portfolio piece. > > Electives in business, tools, management (it is a masters after all) > > Now, if it were a bachelor's program, it would be a 5 year program. > But does anyone want to be an interaction designer when they are 17. > ;) > > -- dave > > > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > Posted from the new ixda.org > http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 > > > > *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* > February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA > Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ > > > 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 > *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Hi Andrei, we're close. I think that the foundations taught in architecture and ID programs are quite specific. I.e. Graphic design is not included in foundations for most IDs and quite honestly the IDs I've worked with would make horrible graphic designers. Architecture also has a foundation, but type is not really a full-semester studio class from my recollection of looking at those programs. Now that being said, I believe there is a crisis in IxD education in the US specifically b/c of the dearth of programs, but globally b/c of the lack of consistency between programs (thus the definition problem). If I would create an Masters of Design program in IxD, it would first off be 3 years. year 1 is all about foundations and core theory (and probably is the "life? what's a life?" year). Besides the usual suspects, this would also include at least 1 class in Java, or programming in ActionScript or Visual Basic/XAML (you get my point). Year 2 is 1/2 about theory and then about focus. This is where the HCI stuff meets the tangible interfaces vs. the software stuff vs. systems/services. Year 3 is a continuation of focus, 1st semester growing towards a 2nd semester thesis/portfolio piece. Electives in business, tools, management (it is a masters after all) Now, if it were a bachelor's program, it would be a 5 year program. But does anyone want to be an interaction designer when they are 17. ;) -- dave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Andrei, if I understand your position, you're saying that a command of visual aesthetics should be core to the discipline of interaction design. I don't mean to gloss over my disagreement. If it were "core" to the discipline, browsing through a few Tufte books as you suggest upstream wouldn't nearly cover it. It might be enough to kickstart the basic understanding I advocate for interaction designers, but not to cover the core skills of a specialization like interface design. I view the degree of focus necessary for good interface design as similar in intensity to industrial and graphic design. Comparing interaction design is more difficult; I view it as a generalist discipline. It's like comparing apples and produce. Interestingly, Carnegie Mellon had been exploring the possiblity of breaking down the walls between their degrees and simply graduating "designers" a few years ago. I don't know if they're still on that or not. // jeff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On Jan 30, 2008, at 10:41 AM, dave malouf wrote: > Jeff, actually, what bothered me about Andrei's response was not his > declaration that some on this list are not interested in aesthetics, > but the assertion (implicit) in his last responses that aesthetics > lies in the realm of form (visual, auditory, and spatial). If it's somehow coming across that I only believe material aesthetic is important or required, then let me clarify now that I don't mean that and do not want to imply that, implicitly or otherwise. I tend to approach my job as inclusively as possible, using material and immaterial qualities to achieve my aesthetic goals. > I also > feel it is a bit of a burden to think about a career & education path > where all junior people have to understand ALL the aspects of all > aesthetic qualities. To me they should start with a core and build on > that over time. Of course. But given what architect, graphic and industrial students are taught these days, I think its fair to say that any educational program around interaction design as a discipline asks far less of its students than those other established disciplines. So there's plenty of room to add to the foundation as near as I can tell. And I think students would jump at the chance to have a program that covered the breadth of interaction if its defined as both interactivity and aesthetic from the craft and skills point of view. After that, if it wasn't clear that I think this is a life long journey, then I clarify that now and say it explicitly. It is. -- Andrei Herasimchuk Principal, Involution Studios innovating the digital world e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] c. +1 408 306 6422 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On Jan 30, 2008, at 9:49 AM, Jeff Howard wrote: > I believe that understanding and caring about aesthetics makes > interaction designers better at their job. But there's a leap from > understanding and caring about the fundamentals to being responsible > for form-giving. Once you make that leap you're practicing Interface > Design. I agree. But I also think you did exactly what I have a problem with, you gloss over the main concern as I expressed here: - My take and fear on this is that "aesthetics" are deemed to be not needed in other aspects of interaction, and are therefore not required as a core skill. That actually winds up being exclusive, not inclusive. Lacking that core skill or focus at the higher definition of IxD trickles down to the medium, and it winds up actually placing walls and barriers in ways that make IxD narrowly focused in the trenches, rather than broad enough to cover what's needed to do the job, which in this particular case would be aesthetic skills and knowledge. Interaction design that requires screens and displays require aesthetics to be successful. - Read "not needed" as "not being responsible for form-giving." I'm not tilting at windmills. I've been doing this work for quite some time now (coming up on 20 years). I have seen the progression from "interface designer" being someone who primarily worried about visuals and less about interaction, to someone moving into a realm where interface designers were given control over both form and function, which was great. And then the web hits and "interaction" becomes popular a few years later, which moved the field in the other opposite extreme, which is primarily worrying about interaction but less about aesthetic. Which is not great. Being solely focused on visuals or solely focused on interaction in my experience is not the best way to approach software and digital product design. Why? for the very same reasons an industrial designer doesn't need to ask someone else what color their product should be. It's just lacking as a discipline when there is that split. This is not theory. This actually happened over the last two decades. Further, the latest trend of having interaction designers paired with visual designers as the desired means of practice is a direct result of interaction coming into its own while at the same time *not* making the leap that interaction designers should be responsible for "form-giving." Those issues are very much connected. Here's the bottom line for me: There's a field of work out there that is the equivalent of industrial design or graphic design in terms of weight, importance and theory. Those professions are what Dave calls the "discipline." This new discipline needs a name! If that name is going to be "Interaction" then I think it needs to solve the problem I see out there and as I have outlined above. If the discipline is "Interface" or "Digital" design then maybe its time a new group needs to be formed to finally address the problem and let IxD continue on its merry way being a discipline that addresses a broader need and that can be integrated into industrial, digital or graphic design practices. I'm fine with either situation or scenario, but its completely unclear if this particular group wants to be the "discipline" that desperately needs a cohesive name and organization rallying behind it to change corporate culture and hierarchies. On the one hand, you say "aesthetics" are important, but on the other not important enough to make it core to the *discipline to the degree the designer should actually be responsible for it. (Again, regardless of how it is put into practice, due to logistics of the corporate environment.) How can the inclusion or exclusion of that distinction not be important to an organization that is defining a new field of practice? -- Andrei Herasimchuk Principal, Involution Studios innovating the digital world e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] c. +1 408 306 6422 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Jeff, actually, what bothered me about Andrei's response was not his declaration that some on this list are not interested in aesthetics, but the assertion (implicit) in his last responses that aesthetics lies in the realm of form (visual, auditory, and spatial). I also feel it is a bit of a burden to think about a career & education path where all junior people have to understand ALL the aspects of all aesthetic qualities. To me they should start with a core and build on that over time. Some may focus on aesthetics of interaction (non-formative, embodied in action and thought) and others may be interested in aesthetics of the sensory (formative and embodied in our senses: site, smell, hearing, touch -- ok, taste if you are a chef). Then as we mature and grow as designers we get to either dive deeper into areas or broaden. There is room for both possibilities. What seems unlikely is the creation of a DaVinci out of the box. -- dave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On 30 Jan 2008, at 02:50, Jeff Howard wrote: [snip] > I'll never lay out an architectural blueprint, wire a circuit board > or write a line of C. But I should be able to have intelligent > conversations with the people who do. As a discipline we're not > there yet. [snip] Yup. I think as many project failures are due to communication, or the lack thereof, as there are due to lack of folk with the appropriate skills. Cheers, Adrian *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On 30 Jan 2008, at 16:28, Andrei Herasimchuk wrote: [snip] > I can't tell you how many "interaction" designers I meet that say > things along the lines of "I don't draw the buttons, I just work with > someone else that does." > > This is a massive problem if the field is to be inclusive and support > digital product and software design. [snip] If they work together well as a team and make great things - where is the problem? Adrian *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On 30 Jan 2008, at 06:56, dave malouf wrote: [snip] > I realize this might have leaped a lot onto the conversation. But > what it means is that an interface designer IS an interaction > designer, but not all interaction designers are interface designers > and not all designers are interaction designers. > > Does that work? Or did I mess everything up again. I was just trying > to bring it back to the original question of What's the difference? That works for me. Adrian *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Andrea wrote: > My take and fear on this is that "aesthetics" are deemed > to be not needed in other aspects of interaction, > and are therefore not required as a core skill. Andrei, I feel like you're tilting at windmills. No one in this thread is suggesting that aesthethics aren't important. I just re-skimmed it to be sure. I believe that aesthetics are even important to the "other aspects of interaction" like service and process flows. I would only point out that aesthetic concerns transcend visual aesthethics. None of the following quotes from this thread should be taken to mean that interaction designers are unaware of aesthetic concerns or dismiss their importance: > IxD exists outside the form. > UI designer delivers the interface, the IxD plans it. > Interface design is the form-giving counterpart > to interaction design. > IxD primary focus is on defining... I believe that understanding and caring about aesthetics makes interaction designers better at their job. But there's a leap from understanding and caring about the fundamentals to being responsible for form-giving. Once you make that leap you're practicing Interface Design. We've had threads in the past that debate whether Interaction Designers should know how to program. Perhaps it would be useful to devote a similar thread to exploring the aesthethic demands on the discipline. // jeff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On 30 Jan 2008, at 16:46, Andrei Herasimchuk wrote: [snip] > So I guess the question is: Pankaj, do you also agree that aesthetics > are a fundamental requirement of practicing IxD? [snip] Why do I get the horrible feeling that somebody is going to ask for a definition of "aesthetics" now :-) Adrian *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Hi David, On 29 Jan 2008, at 13:56, David Malouf wrote: > HI Adrian (I wish the web version had better "quoting" features.) Me too! > see adrian's reply to me above ... > Yes, you can do both. You should do both, but you shouldn't do one > w/o the > other. I'm not saying that you are or aren't, but your posts (my > limited > insight into who you are) project that you are focusing on one > aspect, at > least in a unbalanced way, so I'm probably reacting in a further > unbalanced > way. If it's any comfort - I had the opposite unbalanced view of your focus (all "big" no "little".) Absolutely 100% both. No argument from me there. Not necessarily all of both in the same person (in my opinion anyway). Not necessarily all "big" or all "little in one role (in my opinion anyway). But all of those skills need to be in the product development team. What I'm not getting is the need/motive in drawing a ring around a particular subset of "big" things and naming it Interaction Design that can only be done by an Interaction Designer - which is what I mistakenly took to be your view. Folk with that view worry me. > As for studio. I understand how agile environments have become more > collaborative, but it is still not studio. It's hard to explain, > but what is > hard is that even in design studios today b/c of the focus on > computers, a > lot of the studio experience of ID is lost. Imagine if you had a > big wall > and on that wall was a projection of everyone's code, and everyone > can see > it. Imagine a place where people can see your name attributed to > your code, > and then if someone sees something they want to comment on, they > just walk > up to you and butt their noses right into your space and tell you > what they > think. Something like that. ;). > > There is a frenetic creativity (not > efficiency) that evolves from this environment. I'm not saying it > would work > for coding. That sounds exactly like an agile development environment to me. Seriously. That "if someone sees something they want to comment on, they just walkup to you and butt their noses right into your space and tell you what they think" is a thing joy and something to foster whatever you're doing. It's a bloody excellent way of working - ideally with coders and designers and business owners all together. In my opinion anyway. Possibly you need to try harder to explain the "hard to explain" :-) > As for what can this do? > Ok, here is the example. Cooper's concept on posture. I'm not > saying this is > a foundation of IxD, but it is a good axis. Understanding the > posture of > application will radically change the forms you use communicate the > interaction paradigms. You might have really similar task (i.e. > messaging) > but b/c email has a different posture than instant messaging (even > though in > reality they are REALLY the same thing), the forms take on a very > different > flow. Surely you don't have a similar task of "messaging". You have two radically different user goals, which you can describe with certain postures, which drive you towards certain kinds of interface... which both end up doing some sort of message passing The message passing isn't the point. I always saw postures a descriptive - not prescriptive myself. You work from the user goals to a solution, and along the way you get to a stage where you can say whether an interface is sovereign/transient/ parasitic/whatever-the-other-one-was-called. I don't suddenly get to a stage in the process where I go "We Shall develop a Sovereign Posture Application" :-) Instead a Sovereign Posture application emerges from the design constraints of the system as a whole. ... but it's been a long time since I've read About Face so I could be misremembering the way Cooper used them. ... but I get the point. There are issues in developing products that are "higher level" than the form. No argument from me. (Not seeing the connect with this and the design school stuff though...) > This in my mind explains two things: > 1. IxD exists outside the form. Don't see that. Not reliant on any _particular_ form maybe - but "outside" form... that doesn't sound quite right to me. Interdependent on form maybe. With a big damn fuzzy spot between the two. > 2. Understanding foundations can have a profound effect on your day > to day. Well duh :-) > I'll take it back to studio. > A real foundation of IxD is pacing. Like any narrative, there is > pacing. In > a studio setting what a student or practitioner might do is play with > various forms to embody different pacings. They would then hone in > on the > right source. > > This is very similar to how a graphic designer will do different > comps that > change specific axis of color, line, text, white space, etc. > > Unless we have the same foundations to sketch against, it is hard > for us in > a processed/controlled and explainab
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
"An unequivocal '1 million %' (to quote my American Idol Buddy Randy Jackson) YES!", Dave's answer to Andrei's question regarding aesthetic skills. I have been following this post and many others like it, as I'm sure other newbies are, to see what's the best preparation to enter this field, especially if they are not coming from an art or graphic design background. Since reading these posts, graphic design fundamentals have opened my eyes. So, I do believe that those fundamentals are very helpful to know when a page is unbalanced or over crowded, etc. But how deep does the aesthetic abilities have to run? Please forgive me if this throws another layer of annoying discussion regarding definitions, but here is one from Webster's dictionary. Aesthetics: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/aesthetic My point is that graphics/web/visual designers do more than just have a knack for knowing when something looks pleasing. For example, there are many people who have, never drawn, coded a web site, etc. that can naturally tell what's beautiful and what is not. So to make the question more direct, do IxD's need to know how to manipulate graphics, create from scratch or make touch-ups? Do they need to know how to use photoshop, illustrator, and other graphic design tools at a proficient or expert level? Do they even have to know how to implement CSS? I could be wrong, but I think this is where people are wondering if most "interaction" designers creates the form & layout, but then hand that over to "interface" designers to make the lines curve, swirl, add color schemes, blink, slide, etc, using some the nifty tools just mentioned above. Dave, I think you are absolutely right here: "an interface designer IS an interaction designer, but not all interaction designers are interface designers and not all designers are interaction designers." But where is the line drawn when one person is not both? And knowing how companies try so hard to get more & more out of less & less people, how realistic is it to be an IxD, but not a UID, especially when IxD/IA/usability in general has to be sold to companies as useful? ~ Lukeisha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On Jan 30, 2008, at 7:07 AM, Pankaj Chawla wrote: > This one seems to be bang on target. I hope it once and for all > puts the > debate to an end. Let's be clear. There is only a debate, especially from someone like me, because many people will agree with Dave on this point (the medium:discipline:category analogy), but not explicitly agree on the point Dave said earlier in message: that IxD requires training and a core understanding in aesthetics. So I guess the question is: Pankaj, do you also agree that aesthetics are a fundamental requirement of practicing IxD? -- Andrei Herasimchuk Principal, Involution Studios innovating the digital world e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] c. +1 408 306 6422 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Hi Dave, On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:56:56, dave malouf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So is UI Designer:Interaction Designer : designer what thoracic > surgeon: surgeon : doctor? > > Medium : discipline : category > > I realize this might have leaped a lot onto the conversation. But > what it means is that an interface designer IS an interaction > designer, but not all interaction designers are interface designers > and not all designers are interaction designers. This one seems to be bang on target. I hope it once and for all puts the debate to an end. Cheers Pankaj *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On Jan 30, 2008, at 6:56 AM, dave malouf wrote: > Aesthetics is HUGE. > And understanding fundamentals of communication design (Visual, > audio, 3D, spatial, etc.) is at the core of a good IxD education/ > training career path. Then this is either not agreed upon or not well understood at large. I suspect it's both, but mostly the former. (And even in looking at the Interaction 08 speaker schedule, aesthetics seems a million miles away in the conference.) Further, the whole interaction/visual designer split used in most technology companies today further entrenches interaction design as a field that is not also about aesthetics. I can't tell you how many "interaction" designers I meet that say things along the lines of "I don't draw the buttons, I just work with someone else that does." This is a massive problem if the field is to be inclusive and support digital product and software design. And has been since people have been replacing "interface" designers with "interaction" designers, and in the process creating a divide where interaction people as a profession are given a means to avoid practicing and being responsible for aesthetics, even if on a particular team for a particular project they are do not need to exercise those skills. If aesthetics are indeed fundamental to interaction design, then it also trickles down to skills and knowledge. Interaction designers SHOULD know how to use tools like Photoshop, Illustrator, Fireworks or other professional grade tools and state so on their resumes. Even 3D software if it means that. And by know how to use, I mean really know how to use. Industrial designers use Illustrator all the time to make isometric drawings! And learning a 3D program is far more complicated than Illustrator, and Industrial designers are also trained on those as well. The requirements and expectations in aesthetics for industrial designers far exceeds what current interaction designers are expected to know, and that's a problem if IxD is supposed to be more inclusive. > If I understood the spirit, I would say, that yes, IxD's have to > understand and quite often DO UI Design. On their own or as a pair? If on their own, which also means being able to draw icons if that's what required to make the product real, then we are in agreement. The whole team approach and pairing of skillsets is a means to an end, not the definition of what the person needs to be able to design. Or how they are trained as a designer. Teams are needed for a variety of reasons -- workloads, project scale, collaboration, idea generation, etc. -- but when a team is not needed or not possible due to a variety of factors, if a business executive hires an "interaction" designer, I think that exec should expect the interaction designer to be able design the total product. > So is UI Designer:Interaction Designer : designer what thoracic > surgeon: surgeon : doctor? Quick sidenote: I loathe the acronym "UI." It's so arcane. I just prefer "interface." Is Interface Designer: Interaction Designer:Design like Thoracic Surgeon:Surgeon:Medicine? If the core skills of the interaction field require aesthetic, then I could see how that is tenable and even desirable. However, it would *require* a change in definition of: http://ixda.org/about_interaction.php "Interaction design (IxD) is the branch of user experience design that illuminates the relationship between people and the interactive products they use. While interaction design has a firm foundation in the theory, practice, and methodology of traditional user interface design, its focus is on defining the complex dialogues that occur between people and interactive devices of many type -- from computers to mobile communications devices to appliances." On that page, there is nary a requirement for interaction designers to also be steeped in aesthetics. And again, it even encourages someone who calls themselves an interaction designer to be paired with others who are trained in aesthetics: "While interaction designers often work closely with specialists in visual design, information architecture, industrial design, user research, or usability, and may even provide some of these services themselves, their primary focus is on defining interactivity." And there's that word again: "defining." Designers don't define. They make and create and design, and as often as possible with their own two hands. > I realize this might have leaped a lot onto the conversation. But > what it means is that an interface designer IS an interaction > designer, but not all interaction designers are interface designers > and not all designers are interaction designers. That would be true only if aesthetics is indeed required as part of the definition of an IxD. My take and fear on this is that "aesthetics" are deemed to be not needed in other aspects of interaction, and ar
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Andrei asked: "The larger issue is actually more fundamental: do interaction designers need to have aesthetic skills?" An unequivocal "1 million %" (to quote my American Idol Buddy Randy Jackson) YES! Aesthetics is HUGE. And understanding fundamentals of communication design (Visual, audio, 3D, spatial, etc.) is at the core of a good IxD education/training career path. As for your post following Jim. I didn't give it a full read, but what I did read seemed right on target. If I understood the spirit, I would say, that yes, IxD's have to understand and quite often DO UI Design. So is UI Designer:Interaction Designer : designer what thoracic surgeon: surgeon : doctor? Medium : discipline : category I realize this might have leaped a lot onto the conversation. But what it means is that an interface designer IS an interaction designer, but not all interaction designers are interface designers and not all designers are interaction designers. Does that work? Or did I mess everything up again. I was just trying to bring it back to the original question of What's the difference? -- dave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
I'm doing some visual design prototypes this evening, preparing to call "my" visual designer tommorrow, and thinking this isn't an academic subject or splitting hairs.I feel interaction designer and visual designer are not idealized roles, but are how people break down at the mastery level. If you're trying to do world class work these 2 people are different. A competent interaction designer will have a visual aesthetic, and intuit what avenues are worthy of exploration for the client/project, but they may look to an expert visual designer for backing on the visual design front. The interaction designer better be the one who is so embedded in the client's world view that s/he's probably the one chomping at the bit with tangents and avenues worth looking into from a visual designer. At least that's how I feel. Interaction designers key attributes have to be empathy for the user's you are working for, and intuition about some end state of the user experience. The interaction designer probably is "calling in" the visual design expert to help achieve that end-state. I thought I would share what I'm working on because it seems clear to me by example. At my company, I'm the in-house IxDesigner, and the visual designer is contracted out. In my case, it is a matter of when I call in the "big guns."I do interaction design in the medical imaging space. Things are changing here quick, 3d imaging data from the newest scanners is becoming available to physicians and those virtual human images will no longer be something you only see on the Discovery channel but in the hospital. For a facile analogy, think flight simulator is now available to your gastroenterologist, who has only ever played the arcade version of Pole Position. Problem: With all of these fancy images in all planes, we find that even imaging experts have a hard time visualizing where one image (one slice) is in relation to another spatially. Surprise, surprise, non-expert physicians (e.g. surgeons) have even a harder time, and shy away from using imaging systems in a lot of cases. Instead, they cut people open to find what out what the anatomy is, or to find out what size stent to use etc. Uneeded operations? Yes. People avoid technology if they aren't confident with it. So, while working on some interaction scenarios tonight, I thought "can we modify some visual cues on these images to give people a better sense of where one plane is in relation to another?" This is not the objective of our project (remember we're making flight simulator for the medical world), but just an inkling of one of many such intangible user needs I keep near at mind.So I tried a visual design prototype in 20 minutes (temporary link http://phosted.com/0801/ixda_work_screen.jpg). The prototype isn't there yet, but I can see it might go somewhere if we can give physicians a perceptual sense of "looking" into the planar relationships. I could continue doing visual design, but now having honed in on a specific problem worth solving and what looks like a possible fruitful path I'm going to hand it off. I'd rather steep the visual designer in the problem and user's needs and have him come back at me with new ideas. Is this prettying up an interface? No. Is it branding? No. It is visual communication, mostly of a static form, and there are visual designers who are specialists there. My goal for these users to give physicians people a sense of spatial relations so they use fancy-shmancy images and can "see" where they are in the body. I'm well aware that my current initiative may not be the one, we may need to envision a rotating orb with plane slices all through it, or something else entirely. I think it is part of the interaction designer makeup to really persevere until the user's goals are met, and a visual designer is one person to enlist on the way there. To summarize, I'm sure some interaction designers can do the gamut of branding, icongraphy and top notch static visual communicaiton. I'm sure many visual designers can create a sensible interaction design in the complex space of business, technology and people. But do people really find that there are people who are equally motivated to do it all, and are equally talented in both...or is it more the case that people naturally fall into these two roles? I think it is something like to do world-class work you'll generally find that the interaction designer and visual designer have two skill set domains that overlap, but they are different roles and these people fallout naturally.The interaction designer better be breadth heavy in more skills and the visual designer better be depth heavy in fewer. You want both on your team. Navid Sadikali Interaction Designer Agfa Healthcare On Jan 29, 2008 6:12 PM, Andrei Herasimchuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 29, 2008, at 9:01 AM, Jim Leftwich wrote: > > > I'm not that worried about Interaction Design, or IxDA, bein
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Andrei wrote: > With interaction design, the desire to go broad with > the core definition but exclusionary on what the skills > are actually winds up limiting the designer's role... I'm not suggesting that interaction designers abandon aesthetics or that we silo ourselves within an exclusionary vertical skillset. Quite the contrary. Interaction designers can only benefit by understanding the fundamentals of graphic design. But it's not enough. We also need to understand the basics of materials, environments and organizations. I see interaction designers as requiring generalist skills in form-giving across many disciplines. I'm never going to fire up solidworks and render a shipping product. I'll never lay out an architectural blueprint, wire a circuit board or write a line of C. But I should be able to have intelligent conversations with the people who do. As a discipline we're not there yet. The best interaction designers will tend to supplement their generalized expertise with specialization in an area of form-giving such as UI design or service design or policy design. I see no conflict with t-shaped individuals embodying multiple roles and switching focus when required. // jeff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
It seems futile to argue over title/terms of what means what when majority would agree that these are essentially roles/phases in a larger system design approach%u2026yes, they do have overlaps, of course, in terms of required skills, knowledge, and even certain processes. yet they are essentially different in terms of their individual focuses and outputs. All the great products, services, end-results that provide a delightful and successful experience are most often that way because of their underlying structural units/attributes work cohesively with each other to serve the purpose. So in an ideal world, interaction design & UI design would not exist or work in isolation%u2026but rather in tandem. Pretty much the same idea that Jeff underlined earlier with "I think of interface design as the form-giving counterpart to interaction design". Essentially, Interaction designer role takes care of high-level interaction or, in other words, chalking out the planning part of interaction. Similar to a holistic system design approach where one is not just designing the product in isolation but also considering how it fits in a larger system and works in that environment. Therefore, Interaction designer role has to take care of various permutation and combination of activities that need to be supported (again, high level); the orders of activities (process flows); relationships among design elements, etc. And afterwards, UI designer role kicks in and starts refining those big pictures to the levels of individual pixels. Or course, there is fair amount of overlap of activities and intentions, therefore, the disagreements, misunderstandings, and apparent heartburns. That is precisely the reason that I tend to agree with Dave on the value that semantics and defining these roles (not the titles!) provide. Not only it would give us perspectives on finer nuances of these roles, such as what we do in these roles that make sense and what does not? What are the finer distinctions between two? or even better, what lies in that overlapping space of Venn diagram between two? Could we discuss activities/processes and their orders in these different roles? It may be another of those endless debatable issues, nonetheless, a rewarding one as we may stumble upon insights that have always stared us in the face and we never noticed. To further the point, there are other fields/professions that have the same role (or have a similar focus and set of outputs) , albeit, with a different title. My question is what can we learn from those professions that share the same attributes of IxD? May be it would help us get deeper insights. May be it would stop us from reinventing the wheel so yes, Dave you have my vote on the need and value-addition of exploring the semantics. To Jared: It seems like a yam/sweet potato discussion only when we are focused on two terms/titles in pure isolation. However, once we treat IxD and UI designer as the roles or set of processes in a given endeavor and not just two standalone entities; we would see value in discussing. So a more apt analogy could be designing a house plan, brick laying, and coloring while building a house. In the end, Sold to Adrian who said, "I'm all for talking about more ways to practice the art. That seems to be a more productive conversation than trying to define what the art is." May we move beyond the silliness of comparing inane titles and get deeper insights into what we do and why we do. Jai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 13:15:14, Jeff Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Try not to think of it as interacting with the brochure. That's a > red herring. Instead, think of it as interacting through the brochure > with something else. The brochure mediates an interaction. Here's an > example. No one goes to Expedia to interact with it. They operate the > interface in order to interact with United or Southwest Airlines. Same > thing with MySpace. It's not about interacting with the site. It's > about using the site to interact with your friends. > This put me in mind of the "hanging chad" Florida ballots of a few years back. Paper-based interaction design writ large. Michael Micheletti *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On Jan 28, 2008, at 11:42 AM, dave malouf wrote: > Andrei does interaction design require pixels? I.e. is there always a > need for a screen? Is what the interaction designer/UI designer > working on always embedded inside of said screen? In my market space, yes. In other market spaces, I can see how it would not. But you are also talking to someone who calls that person an "interface designer," so I never had to worry about that sort of confusion since interfaces are largely digital in conception. > If we are limiting to just screen-based IxD/UID then we are probably > looking at the opposite orientation of making a SIG for the type of > work you are discussing. See the message I posted out of order. (Been spending the past few days on a new contract, so I'm out of order on what has been said. My apologies.) The larger issue is actually more fundamental: do interaction designers need to have aesthetic skills? The answer to that question makes the rest of the entire debate/ argument/discussion, etc., simplified. If the answer is yes, then the whole discussion is VASTLY simplified. If the answer is no, then I think it begs the question on whether interaction design is the field to help define things like what it means to work on digital products, since aesthetics are integral to those products in the same way aesthetics are integral to industrial design. -- Andrei Herasimchuk Principal, Involution Studios innovating the digital world e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] c. +1 408 306 6422 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Nicely framed Andrei. While have been pushing for broad sweeping inclusive definitions, it was pointed out to me that that approach greatly limits their usefulness. Perhaps if the majority is included, and it give a more finite description, we will be better off. Mark (trying to be less pedantic ;) On Jan 29, 2008, at 6:12 PM, Andrei Herasimchuk wrote: > On Jan 29, 2008, at 9:01 AM, Jim Leftwich wrote: > >> I'm not that worried about Interaction Design, or IxDA, being >> limited in definition or scope however. There are a number of >> generalists that have been around for a long time that will continue >> to point out the value of embracing a more encompassing view of >> Interaction Design as IxDA moves forward and grows. As for the >> specialists and those practicing within specific domains - perhaps >> they would benefit by forming specialist sub-groups *within the >> larger and inclusive organization*. But it will prove impossible and >> impractical to artificially limit the profession that's been being >> practiced for decades, nor the organization that's beginning to >> represent us all. > > That's all fine and good and makes plenty of sense at a high level. > The major issue I've had is the outward claims by some that > interaction design is "bigger than digital" on the one hand, but then > bypass issues that are claimed to be outside the scope of > "interaction" on the other. > > To be fair, I don't think anyone intends that to be the case, but > when people say things like "interaction design is to interface > design like art direction is to graphic design," or that "interface > designers draw while interaction designers don't," well... that's > exclusionary. (And in the art director analogy, a bit on the absurd > side since art director's are notoriously seen by many in the graphic > industry as outsiders who never learned how to draw, so they tell > others what to draw. I'm generalizing obviously, so my apologies to > any art director's in the audience.) > > To me, it seems if you want to have a larger and more inclusive > definition of what interaction design is, then the core skillset has > to be broader as well. In this specific case, that broader definition > is going to have to include visual and aesthetic at some fundamental > level. Not to the degree of needing a major in graphic design, but > core fundamentals that are needed that apply to interaction, > especially when interaction has to be defined for technology > products. Most of this core set of skills are probably found in a few > books like Tufte's Envisioning Information, among a few others. It's > not needing an entire Art History degree or getting into the nitty > gritty of making posters with letterpresses, but certainly some level > competency with aesthetic needs to be a core interaction designer > skill. > > Why is this? I personally think has to do specifically with digital. > I understand at a conceptual level how an interaction designer can > help design an analog telephone or rework a service flow for FedEx. > But when you start making digital products -- desktop client > applications, web sites, web applications, stand alone kiosks, mobile > interfaces, interfaces for the iPhone, etc. -- the aesthetic part is > integral to the success of the interactive part in a way that's not > easily separated, like it might be for non-digital forms of > interaction design. Given that, for the large swath of people that > are going to focus on digital, if they are calling themselves > interaction designers, removing the aesthetic from the definition of > what they do isn't going to help matters. It's fine for teams of > people today to work together on the interaction and aesthetic > collaboratively, but in the future, you really are going to want more > and more people who know how to do both, and are trained in how to do > both, even if they focus on one or the other in a team environment. > > Why? For the very same reasons industrial designers are trained in > both form and function. > > If a designer is compartmentalized to ignore or not having > accountability on the aesthetic at a personal level, then the > definition of interaction design is narrowed vertically as a job > description, even if it's horizontal as a job that applies to broader > market spaces. This is the crux of the problem, as near as I can tell. > > At a high level, having interaction design not be responsible for the > aesthetic or be a core skill of an interaction designer is obviously > fine, and can work for a variety of people. But for the ones that are > looking to work in narrow market sectors, like focusing on digital > products), they need a broader job definition horizontally on what it > is they are held accountable for in the overall design of the > product. To not do so would, it seems that calling oneself an > "interaction designer" does neither the designer in that position nor > the field of interaction any justice. The designer
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On Jan 29, 2008, at 9:01 AM, Jim Leftwich wrote: > I'm not that worried about Interaction Design, or IxDA, being > limited in definition or scope however. There are a number of > generalists that have been around for a long time that will continue > to point out the value of embracing a more encompassing view of > Interaction Design as IxDA moves forward and grows. As for the > specialists and those practicing within specific domains - perhaps > they would benefit by forming specialist sub-groups *within the > larger and inclusive organization*. But it will prove impossible and > impractical to artificially limit the profession that's been being > practiced for decades, nor the organization that's beginning to > represent us all. That's all fine and good and makes plenty of sense at a high level. The major issue I've had is the outward claims by some that interaction design is "bigger than digital" on the one hand, but then bypass issues that are claimed to be outside the scope of "interaction" on the other. To be fair, I don't think anyone intends that to be the case, but when people say things like "interaction design is to interface design like art direction is to graphic design," or that "interface designers draw while interaction designers don't," well... that's exclusionary. (And in the art director analogy, a bit on the absurd side since art director's are notoriously seen by many in the graphic industry as outsiders who never learned how to draw, so they tell others what to draw. I'm generalizing obviously, so my apologies to any art director's in the audience.) To me, it seems if you want to have a larger and more inclusive definition of what interaction design is, then the core skillset has to be broader as well. In this specific case, that broader definition is going to have to include visual and aesthetic at some fundamental level. Not to the degree of needing a major in graphic design, but core fundamentals that are needed that apply to interaction, especially when interaction has to be defined for technology products. Most of this core set of skills are probably found in a few books like Tufte's Envisioning Information, among a few others. It's not needing an entire Art History degree or getting into the nitty gritty of making posters with letterpresses, but certainly some level competency with aesthetic needs to be a core interaction designer skill. Why is this? I personally think has to do specifically with digital. I understand at a conceptual level how an interaction designer can help design an analog telephone or rework a service flow for FedEx. But when you start making digital products -- desktop client applications, web sites, web applications, stand alone kiosks, mobile interfaces, interfaces for the iPhone, etc. -- the aesthetic part is integral to the success of the interactive part in a way that's not easily separated, like it might be for non-digital forms of interaction design. Given that, for the large swath of people that are going to focus on digital, if they are calling themselves interaction designers, removing the aesthetic from the definition of what they do isn't going to help matters. It's fine for teams of people today to work together on the interaction and aesthetic collaboratively, but in the future, you really are going to want more and more people who know how to do both, and are trained in how to do both, even if they focus on one or the other in a team environment. Why? For the very same reasons industrial designers are trained in both form and function. If a designer is compartmentalized to ignore or not having accountability on the aesthetic at a personal level, then the definition of interaction design is narrowed vertically as a job description, even if it's horizontal as a job that applies to broader market spaces. This is the crux of the problem, as near as I can tell. At a high level, having interaction design not be responsible for the aesthetic or be a core skill of an interaction designer is obviously fine, and can work for a variety of people. But for the ones that are looking to work in narrow market sectors, like focusing on digital products), they need a broader job definition horizontally on what it is they are held accountable for in the overall design of the product. To not do so would, it seems that calling oneself an "interaction designer" does neither the designer in that position nor the field of interaction any justice. The designer silo's themselves in a way that limits what the business expects them to work on or can work on, and profession suffers from confusion on what interaction designers actually do and are best suited for, since it would be market dependent in a way that's not accessible to those not in the know. Yes. Job titles and semantics matter, for these very reasons. That's pretty much it. Does interact
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Hm. For a static brochure I could see that logic. But paper forms require thoughtful layout in order for me to "interact (??)" with them. Or is that where the term "usability" comes in? *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Here's an example I do consider significant from Dan Lockton's Architectures of Control weblog: Mentor Teaching Machines - 1971 Depending on the answers the reader gives, he or she is routed through the textbook in a different order, with areas of weakness addressed in more detail to ensure better understanding before allowing the reader to progress to the next level. http://tinyurl.com/3bules His entire blog is a treasure trove of analog interaction design examples. Well worth digging through. // jeff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Will snarked: > Beside turning the page of a brochure - what are some > other types of interactions between a user and a brochure? > Taking it out of the envelope? Try not to think of it as interacting with the brochure. That's a red herring. Instead, think of it as interacting through the brochure with something else. The brochure mediates an interaction. Here's an example. No one goes to Expedia to interact with it. They operate the interface in order to interact with United or Southwest Airlines. Same thing with MySpace. It's not about interacting with the site. It's about using the site to interact with your friends. It's certainly possible to create interactive paper-based artifacts (choose your own adventure, pop-up books, etc) but for the most part I don't consider them to be significant examples of interaction design. // jeff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Where am I when I get it? How did I get the brochure - mail, handed, pick it up? How do I interact with it... flip pages, fold outs, turn it over, etc What do I you do if interested? What if I am not? Who do I contact? Do I save it? Is there a part I can send back in the mail? Should I read the rest on the web site? Is there enough information? Maybe too much? How does it relate tot he trade show booth I am standing in front of? Ooh, I like this! Where can I see on in person? You might call this user experience design... or just graphic design, but these are definitely interactions. On Tuesday, January 29, 2008, at 12:13PM, "W Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Beside turning the page of a brochure - what are some other types of >interactions between a user and a brochure? Taking it out of the envelope? > > > >On Jan 29, 2008 12:11 PM, Mark Schraad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I agree entirely Jim. I know interaction designers that specialize in >> brochures. >> >> The definition of this group, as a desciption of self is getting a bit >> tiresome. >> >> Mark >> >> >> On Tuesday, January 29, 2008, at 12:02PM, "Jim Leftwich" < >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >The phrase "interface design up to this point" and calls to limit >> >the definition of Interaction Design and the scope of IxDA invites an >> >examination of the term's history. *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Beside turning the page of a brochure - what are some other types of interactions between a user and a brochure? Taking it out of the envelope? On Jan 29, 2008 12:11 PM, Mark Schraad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree entirely Jim. I know interaction designers that specialize in > brochures. > > The definition of this group, as a desciption of self is getting a bit > tiresome. > > Mark > > > On Tuesday, January 29, 2008, at 12:02PM, "Jim Leftwich" < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >The phrase "interface design up to this point" and calls to limit > >the definition of Interaction Design and the scope of IxDA invites an > >examination of the term's history. > > > >The definition of Interaction Design isn't, (and more importantly) > >won't *ever* be, limited to just the "digital" domain because it > >never was and isn't inherently limited in that manner as a practice > >in reality. The term "Interaction Design" itself, which was coined > >by Bill Moggeridge and Bill Verplank at IDTwo (one of the three > >companies that combined to become IDEO) in the mid-to-late 1980s, > >represented the design of interaction across a variety of > >technologies and product and system design boundaries.Interaction > >Design certainly involves design of any and all patterns of usage. > > > >Interaction Design was a term I was able to easily adopt around 1987, > >for something I'd been practicing in the design consulting field > >since 1983 on products, software, systems, and combinations thereof. > > > >The first interaction designs I did involved designing and modeling > >the interaction of users with physical components in devices and > >equipment that had multi-step processes. As more and more equipment > >began to include digital components and digital control and > >information, that also became part of what was involved in the > >interaction design. Fairly recently, an interaction design project > >of mine (as a component of designing medical equipment that I also > >did the industrial design, physical controls design, and information > >architecture for), involved analyzing, modeling, and designing > >physical components involved in the device's physical interaction > >that were not associate with the product's digital features and > >functions. To separate various aspects of the device's interaction > >into technological domains (presumably to be handled by separate > >designers, or one designers who's very conscious to take off a hat > >with one label and put on another hat with another label) is, in my > >opinion, somewhat absurd and completely overlimiting to our field as > >a whole. > > > >I'm happy to see Victor Papanek's name come up in this thread, as > >he was the head of my alma mater, KCAI's School Of Design, and left > >an indelible mark of wholistic approach to Design at our department. > >There's probably not a day that goes by that I'm not grateful for > >having had the great fortune to study a wide scope of Design (from > >typography and corporate identity to computers and software to > >industrial design and manufacturing technologies) and thus having > >been equipped to enter my career without the limiting boundaries and > >categories that have preoccupied so many in the field, and kept many > >more from pursuing the opportunity to design a greater range of the > >interactive aspects of products, systems, and environments. > > > >I realize that many of the members of IxDA are web designers, and > >live and breathe entirely within the virtual realm or within the > >bounds of software running on devices. This is understandable. > > > >But it's altogether another thing, and a highly regrettable thing at > >that, when the specialists begin to demand that the field of > >Interaction Design, or IxDA be similarly limited in scope. > > > >Limiting Interaction Design, or IxDA, to just the digital stems from > >a myopia of the non-generalists, who make up the wide part of the > >field's Bell Curve (due to the huge number involved exclusively in > >the web and software). And furthermore, I think this myopic > >insistence on categorization, limitation, and specialization has led > >to many products and systems being very poorly designed, > >interaction-wise. Think the vast majority of mobile phones and > >devices and equipment. Specialization and insistence on limited > >scope for something as *necessarily* all-encompassing as Interaction > >Design is the first step towards a dangerous "dilution of > >responsibility" among specialists. At best, this leads to inelegant > >bolted-together separate design efforts. At worst it leads to more of > >the type of poorly designed products and systems the world is already > >plagued by. > > > >I'm not that worried about Interaction Design, or IxDA, being > >limited in definition or scope however. There are a number of > >generalists that have been around for a long time that will continue > >to point out the value of embracing a more encompassing view of >
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
I agree entirely Jim. I know interaction designers that specialize in brochures. The definition of this group, as a desciption of self is getting a bit tiresome. Mark On Tuesday, January 29, 2008, at 12:02PM, "Jim Leftwich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The phrase "interface design up to this point" and calls to limit >the definition of Interaction Design and the scope of IxDA invites an >examination of the term's history. > >The definition of Interaction Design isn't, (and more importantly) >won't *ever* be, limited to just the "digital" domain because it >never was and isn't inherently limited in that manner as a practice >in reality. The term "Interaction Design" itself, which was coined >by Bill Moggeridge and Bill Verplank at IDTwo (one of the three >companies that combined to become IDEO) in the mid-to-late 1980s, >represented the design of interaction across a variety of >technologies and product and system design boundaries.Interaction >Design certainly involves design of any and all patterns of usage. > >Interaction Design was a term I was able to easily adopt around 1987, >for something I'd been practicing in the design consulting field >since 1983 on products, software, systems, and combinations thereof. > >The first interaction designs I did involved designing and modeling >the interaction of users with physical components in devices and >equipment that had multi-step processes. As more and more equipment >began to include digital components and digital control and >information, that also became part of what was involved in the >interaction design. Fairly recently, an interaction design project >of mine (as a component of designing medical equipment that I also >did the industrial design, physical controls design, and information >architecture for), involved analyzing, modeling, and designing >physical components involved in the device's physical interaction >that were not associate with the product's digital features and >functions. To separate various aspects of the device's interaction >into technological domains (presumably to be handled by separate >designers, or one designers who's very conscious to take off a hat >with one label and put on another hat with another label) is, in my >opinion, somewhat absurd and completely overlimiting to our field as >a whole. > >I'm happy to see Victor Papanek's name come up in this thread, as >he was the head of my alma mater, KCAI's School Of Design, and left >an indelible mark of wholistic approach to Design at our department. >There's probably not a day that goes by that I'm not grateful for >having had the great fortune to study a wide scope of Design (from >typography and corporate identity to computers and software to >industrial design and manufacturing technologies) and thus having >been equipped to enter my career without the limiting boundaries and >categories that have preoccupied so many in the field, and kept many >more from pursuing the opportunity to design a greater range of the >interactive aspects of products, systems, and environments. > >I realize that many of the members of IxDA are web designers, and >live and breathe entirely within the virtual realm or within the >bounds of software running on devices. This is understandable. > >But it's altogether another thing, and a highly regrettable thing at >that, when the specialists begin to demand that the field of >Interaction Design, or IxDA be similarly limited in scope. > >Limiting Interaction Design, or IxDA, to just the digital stems from >a myopia of the non-generalists, who make up the wide part of the >field's Bell Curve (due to the huge number involved exclusively in >the web and software). And furthermore, I think this myopic >insistence on categorization, limitation, and specialization has led >to many products and systems being very poorly designed, >interaction-wise. Think the vast majority of mobile phones and >devices and equipment. Specialization and insistence on limited >scope for something as *necessarily* all-encompassing as Interaction >Design is the first step towards a dangerous "dilution of >responsibility" among specialists. At best, this leads to inelegant >bolted-together separate design efforts. At worst it leads to more of >the type of poorly designed products and systems the world is already >plagued by. > >I'm not that worried about Interaction Design, or IxDA, being >limited in definition or scope however. There are a number of >generalists that have been around for a long time that will continue >to point out the value of embracing a more encompassing view of >Interaction Design as IxDA moves forward and grows. As for the >specialists and those practicing within specific domains - perhaps >they would benefit by forming specialist sub-groups *within the >larger and inclusive organization*. But it will prove impossible and >impractical to artificially limit the profession that's been being >practiced for decades, nor the organization
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
The phrase "interface design up to this point" and calls to limit the definition of Interaction Design and the scope of IxDA invites an examination of the term's history. The definition of Interaction Design isn't, (and more importantly) won't *ever* be, limited to just the "digital" domain because it never was and isn't inherently limited in that manner as a practice in reality. The term "Interaction Design" itself, which was coined by Bill Moggeridge and Bill Verplank at IDTwo (one of the three companies that combined to become IDEO) in the mid-to-late 1980s, represented the design of interaction across a variety of technologies and product and system design boundaries.Interaction Design certainly involves design of any and all patterns of usage. Interaction Design was a term I was able to easily adopt around 1987, for something I'd been practicing in the design consulting field since 1983 on products, software, systems, and combinations thereof. The first interaction designs I did involved designing and modeling the interaction of users with physical components in devices and equipment that had multi-step processes. As more and more equipment began to include digital components and digital control and information, that also became part of what was involved in the interaction design. Fairly recently, an interaction design project of mine (as a component of designing medical equipment that I also did the industrial design, physical controls design, and information architecture for), involved analyzing, modeling, and designing physical components involved in the device's physical interaction that were not associate with the product's digital features and functions. To separate various aspects of the device's interaction into technological domains (presumably to be handled by separate designers, or one designers who's very conscious to take off a hat with one label and put on another hat with another label) is, in my opinion, somewhat absurd and completely overlimiting to our field as a whole. I'm happy to see Victor Papanek's name come up in this thread, as he was the head of my alma mater, KCAI's School Of Design, and left an indelible mark of wholistic approach to Design at our department. There's probably not a day that goes by that I'm not grateful for having had the great fortune to study a wide scope of Design (from typography and corporate identity to computers and software to industrial design and manufacturing technologies) and thus having been equipped to enter my career without the limiting boundaries and categories that have preoccupied so many in the field, and kept many more from pursuing the opportunity to design a greater range of the interactive aspects of products, systems, and environments. I realize that many of the members of IxDA are web designers, and live and breathe entirely within the virtual realm or within the bounds of software running on devices. This is understandable. But it's altogether another thing, and a highly regrettable thing at that, when the specialists begin to demand that the field of Interaction Design, or IxDA be similarly limited in scope. Limiting Interaction Design, or IxDA, to just the digital stems from a myopia of the non-generalists, who make up the wide part of the field's Bell Curve (due to the huge number involved exclusively in the web and software). And furthermore, I think this myopic insistence on categorization, limitation, and specialization has led to many products and systems being very poorly designed, interaction-wise. Think the vast majority of mobile phones and devices and equipment. Specialization and insistence on limited scope for something as *necessarily* all-encompassing as Interaction Design is the first step towards a dangerous "dilution of responsibility" among specialists. At best, this leads to inelegant bolted-together separate design efforts. At worst it leads to more of the type of poorly designed products and systems the world is already plagued by. I'm not that worried about Interaction Design, or IxDA, being limited in definition or scope however. There are a number of generalists that have been around for a long time that will continue to point out the value of embracing a more encompassing view of Interaction Design as IxDA moves forward and grows. As for the specialists and those practicing within specific domains - perhaps they would benefit by forming specialist sub-groups *within the larger and inclusive organization*. But it will prove impossible and impractical to artificially limit the profession that's been being practiced for decades, nor the organization that's beginning to represent us all. Jim James Leftwich, IDSA CXO - Chief Experience Officer SeeqPod, Inc. Emeryville, California http://www.seeqpod.com Orbit Interaction Palo Alto, California http://www.orbitnet.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.or
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
HI Adrian (I wish the web version had better "quoting" features.) see adrian's reply to me above ... Yes, you can do both. You should do both, but you shouldn't do one w/o the other. I'm not saying that you are or aren't, but your posts (my limited insight into who you are) project that you are focusing on one aspect, at least in a unbalanced way, so I'm probably reacting in a further unbalanced way. As for studio. I understand how agile environments have become more collaborative, but it is still not studio. It's hard to explain, but what is hard is that even in design studios today b/c of the focus on computers, a lot of the studio experience of ID is lost. Imagine if you had a big wall and on that wall was a projection of everyone's code, and everyone can see it. Imagine a place where people can see your name attributed to your code, and then if someone sees something they want to comment on, they just walk up to you and butt their noses right into your space and tell you what they think. Something like that. ;). There is a frenetic creativity (not efficiency) that evolves from this environment. I'm not saying it would work for coding. As for what can this do? Ok, here is the example. Cooper's concept on posture. I'm not saying this is a foundation of IxD, but it is a good axis. Understanding the posture of application will radically change the forms you use communicate the interaction paradigms. You might have really similar task (i.e. messaging) but b/c email has a different posture than instant messaging (even though in reality they are REALLY the same thing), the forms take on a very different flow. This in my mind explains two things: 1. IxD exists outside the form. 2. Understanding foundations can have a profound effect on your day to day. I'll take it back to studio. A real foundation of IxD is pacing. Like any narrative, there is pacing. In a studio setting what a student or practitioner might do is play with various forms to embody different pacings. They would then hone in on the right source. This is very similar to how a graphic designer will do different comps that change specific axis of color, line, text, white space, etc. Unless we have the same foundations to sketch against, it is hard for us in a processed/controlled and explainable manner communicate the differences between different interaction models. They are just different, and the only way we can communicate about them is in terms of usability. -- dave -- David Malouf http://synapticburn.com/ http://ixda.org/ http://motorola.com/ *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Yes, I would call it the "interactive design" community. But even then, that might be MORE specific than Andrei was thinking, and that is my question. Andrei does interaction design require pixels? I.e. is there always a need for a screen? Is what the interaction designer/UI designer working on always embedded inside of said screen? If code can be manipulated by other means: voice, 3D (snap domes; other), gestures (not screened), presence determined/spatial (I think you get my point) then I think there is no disagreement for the vast majority of those on this list about what IxD is. The only exception are the small group of people who are doing services. But I see this as applying interaction design techniques and methods to non-technological problems. I think that this is healthy and natural in any design organization. If we are limiting to just screen-based IxD/UID then we are probably looking at the opposite orientation of making a SIG for the type of work you are discussing. With about 5500 people on this list, and 7000 total subscribers, maybe we have finally reached the critical mass where we can start having topic specific communities. No thinking about this has been done yet (multiple lists vs. one list), but heck, anything is possible. -- dave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
IMHO, there are plenty of groups out there for people who want to "design for technology". They are called developer forums. "The desire to define interaction at a technology agnostic level" is a wonderful thing, and is what differentiates the IxDA community from so many others. I, for one, would like to keep it that way. Dmitry On Jan 28, 2008 10:17 AM, Andrei Herasimchuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Will it ever be the > IxDA or is the desire to define interaction at a technology agnostic > level going to be something that keeps it too general to support > folks who want to design for technology and all that entails? > > -- > Andrei Herasimchuk > > Principal, Involution Studios > innovating the digital world > > e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > c. +1 408 306 6422 > > *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* > February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA > Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ > > > 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 > *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On Jan 28, 2008, at 8:41 AM, mauro pinheiro wrote: > Interaction design is NOT limited do computer screens, wireframes, > menus...we should set our vision of our profession onto another level. With that being the case, the issue as near as I can tell becomes: What's the group for those people who do and have done "interface" design up to this point? And what interface design will become in the very near future, which is the digital component design of products that will have a software or code component? Interface design being defined as the need to deign both the interaction and visual components, either by a single person or team of people. Is that group the IxDA or is it some other group? Will it ever be the IxDA or is the desire to define interaction at a technology agnostic level going to be something that keeps it too general to support folks who want to design for technology and all that entails? -- Andrei Herasimchuk Principal, Involution Studios innovating the digital world e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] c. +1 408 306 6422 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 07:16:07, Bill Abel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You know, no one seems to have mentioned that user interface design
> typically refers to a graphic designer working on the visual design
> of some sort of software-driven product.
>
Bill, we should avoid generalizations...I've worked in a company where
I was responsible for a group of people that we could call interface
designers, (and another group of information architects) but none of
them were concerned about visual design...in fact, there were another
group (they called themselves "brand designers") that were 100%
concerned about visual aspects of the user interface. Basically, we
(information architects and interface designers) designed the user
experience, working closely with the marketing guys, who defined
strategy and other not-so-funny stuff. But to say that user interface
designers typically work with "visual design" is not precisely what
interface design is, IMHO.
> And interaction design is concerned with the underlying design (the
> system) of how a product works - even why it exists in the first
> place. Interaction design requires the understanding of the user's
> behavior, the user's mental model, etc... Interaction design is more
> like product designer/industrial designer/architect in my mind, while
> user interface is more like art direct/graphic designer/visual
> designer.
>
> [...]
>
> But, the interaction design in my opinion is about how it works and
> why, while interface is much more about aesthetics.
>
> It's the interface designer who will make it pretty.
>
I think the best word would not be "aesthetics", but "surface".
Interaction design works more closely to the structure, the
foundations of the experience/software or whatever. Interface
designers work more closely to the surface, to the presentation level.
Not necessarily with the "aesthetics". Those who deal with aesthetics
are really visual designers (sometimes could be the same guy).
6 or 7 years ago George Olsen wrote a nice article ("Names are for
tombstones, baby") about this fuzzy discussion - what is this, what is
that... Although many of us have a different concept about what is
interface design, interaction design, Olsen did a good job on defining
some boundaries.
It was published on Boxes and Arrows, among an article wrote by Adam Greenfield.
http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/whats_in_a_name_or_what_exactly_do_we_call_ourselves_
What strikes me is that, as we can see by this discussion that took
place on this thread, the article is still valid, even after years!
I would like to stress an important concept here...many of us define
"interface design" or "interaction design" using computer screens as
the output of our work, as interaction would be something limited to
computer screens.
We're entering the helm of ubiquitous and pervasive computing,
nanotechnology. We should broaden our minds and think far beyond
computer screens. ANYTHING could be a "computer", an interaction
device. This gives us another perspective of what experiences we
should be designing.
Interaction design is NOT limited do computer screens, wireframes,
menus...we should set our vision of our profession onto another level.
cheers,
--
prof. mauro pinheiro
universidade federal do espírito santo
centro de artes
depto. de desenho industrial
*Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah*
February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA
Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/
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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
You know, no one seems to have mentioned that user interface design typically refers to a graphic designer working on the visual design of some sort of software-driven product. And interaction design is concerned with the underlying design (the system) of how a product works - even why it exists in the first place. Interaction design requires the understanding of the user's behavior, the user's mental model, etc... Interaction design is more like product designer/industrial designer/architect in my mind, while user interface is more like art direct/graphic designer/visual designer. An individual may actually perform both roles under either title, or a completely different title. But, the interaction design in my opinion is about how it works and why, while interface is much more about aesthetics. It's the interface designer who will make it pretty. But, it's the interaction designer who understand that a 'pretty' interface tested beside a 'dull' interface will always work better in the minds of most people. It's the cognitive psychology element. Interaction design goes beyond software, it includes pretty much anything man-made. Bill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Maybe this article from AIGA.org website will shed some light on the confusion. What I get from the quote/article, is that interaction design and ui design are both design of the user interface, but one may contain more of an "art" element, which is the visual design aspect. The "art" element is one where some interaction designers may implement in conjunction with functional design, but others may not. Unfortunately, the titles really do not make a clear distinction between the two. Therefore, titles do not matter, but what matters are the tasks that a position asks for, and what an individual is willing to do. So, that individual must choose the appropriate position for them, regardless of title. http://www.aiga.org/content.cfm/art-vs-design [Start Quote] "Now it is my understanding that design in the commercial sense is a very calculated and defined process, it is discussed amongst a group and implemented taking careful steps to make sure the objectives of the project are met. A designer is similar to an engineer in that respect and must not only have an eye for color and style but must adhere to very intricate functional details that will meet the objectives of the project. The word 'design' lends itself to a hint that someone or something has carefully created this "thing" and much planning and thought has been executed to produce the imagery or materials used for the project. On the other hand Art is something completely separate, any good artist should convey a message or inspire an emotion it doesn't have to adhere to any specific rules, the artist is creating his own rules. Art is something that can elicit a single thought or feeling such as simplicity or strength, love or pain and the composition simply flows from the hand of the artist. The artist is free to express themselves in any medium and color scheme, using any number of methods to convey their message. No artist ever has to explain why they did something a certain way other than that this is what they felt would best portray the feeling or emotion or message." [END Quote] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Jared wrote: > Isn't this just a Yam/Sweet Potato thing? That's an apt analogy. If two tangible objects so objectively distinct (the yam is over two meters long) can be confused and treated as identical, how much more difficult to recognize and agree on subjective differences? One of President Lincoln's favorite riddles was this: How many legs does a dog have if you call its tail a leg? The answer? Four. Just because you call the tail a leg doesn't make it so. // jeff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On 25 Jan 2008, at 12:13, Adam Connor wrote: [snip] > To be honest I stopped caring about my title a few years ago. Perhaps > it would be different if I weren't an in-house, but it seems more > important to me to just deliver the best products I can. Me too! Adrian *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On 25 Jan 2008, at 17:34, lukeisha carr wrote: > "Just curious how some of you would differentiate an interaction > designer from a user interface designer? Apologies if it's been > discussed to death before." > > I think these kind of questions keep coming up again & again for some > of the following reasons: [good reasons snipped] > Unfortunately, I'm not sure if these kind of questions will slow > down, until the field is many years old and dedicated training will > define what these positions do. But the challenge will still be how > to keep different companies from making a mis-mash of all the title. The thing is I just don't care whether the roles are defined or not :-) There's a whole bunch of knowledge, skills and practices that need to be applied to get a successful product from inception to release. I care a great deal that there are people involved that have all of the necessary knowledge, skills and practices - and know how to apply them and work together well. I care very, very little for picking a subset from the list and calling it interaction design, or usability, or information architecture, or accessibility, or software architecture, or domain design, or ... Talking about knowledge, skills and practices. How to learn and apply them well. That helps me a huge amount. Talking about what a particular subset should be called and where a person with that subset sits in the org chart doesn't help me at all. But maybe that's just me... Cheers, Adrian (possibly being unnecessarily grumpy :-) *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Scott: " I liked Luis' definition: "UI designer delivers the interface, the IxD plans it" " I would expand that a little. Interaction Design as I perceive the role I play considers how the user interacts with the system/product, not just the interface. So while I do truly hate semantics I have to agree with Dave that defining/differentiating what we practice is very necessary. Therefor, for me; Interface Designer focuses on the presentation layer. IxDs are generalists who utilise aspects of the fields of IA, Industrial & Interface design in a world of increasingly complex products & services. I think the fact that most IxDs are/were Interface designers, and the majority of the work is in the web, really clouds the issue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Dan Safer (by way of Carnegie Mellon I believe) does a nice job of this in his book, and includes a helpful vin diagram. While it is not the end all answer to your questions it is an excellent place to start. Mark On Jan 25, 2008, at 12:34 PM, lukeisha carr wrote: > "Just curious how some of you would differentiate an interaction > designer from a user interface designer? Apologies if it's been > discussed to death before." > > I think these kind of questions keep coming up again & again for some > of the following reasons: > > 1. Companies give many different titles to the same group of duties. > So, which titles does one need to look for in a job search to ensure > that you cover all of your bases? > > 2. Many people have different backgrounds. So, how does one know if > he/she has the correct experience or training for the any of the > multiple titled positions. i.e. My background is mostly in > "back-end" web development. Even though, I've coded in > HTML/JavaScript, but the "design" parts, like image > croping/creation, colors, etc. was done by someone else. So, does one > with that kind of background need to become proficient in Photoshop, > Illustrator, or Flash to be a good IxDer? > > Unfortunately, I'm not sure if these kind of questions will slow > down, until the field is many years old and dedicated training will > define what these positions do. But the challenge will still be how > to keep different companies from making a mis-mash of all the title. > > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > Posted from the new ixda.org > http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 > > > > *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* > February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA > Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ > > > 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 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
"Just curious how some of you would differentiate an interaction designer from a user interface designer? Apologies if it's been discussed to death before." I think these kind of questions keep coming up again & again for some of the following reasons: 1. Companies give many different titles to the same group of duties. So, which titles does one need to look for in a job search to ensure that you cover all of your bases? 2. Many people have different backgrounds. So, how does one know if he/she has the correct experience or training for the any of the multiple titled positions. i.e. My background is mostly in "back-end" web development. Even though, I've coded in HTML/JavaScript, but the "design" parts, like image croping/creation, colors, etc. was done by someone else. So, does one with that kind of background need to become proficient in Photoshop, Illustrator, or Flash to be a good IxDer? Unfortunately, I'm not sure if these kind of questions will slow down, until the field is many years old and dedicated training will define what these positions do. But the challenge will still be how to keep different companies from making a mis-mash of all the title. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
If I recall correctly this topic has come up before on IxDA. I've been working in house for the same company for almost 7 years now. In that time I've held the following titles. Web Designer Interactive Designer Interaction Designer User Interface Designer Online Experience Architect User Experience Specialist Through all those titles though, my activities have never really changed: I work on Info Architecture, Interactions, UI, etc. To be honest I stopped caring about my title a few years ago. Perhaps it would be different if I weren't an in-house, but it seems more important to me to just deliver the best products I can. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Isn't this just delaying the inevitable? Sure, (Kumbaya!) we are all "D"esigners, great! (I actually think that most of us aren't designers, btw, but that's a separate topic). Ok, so you get your MD (masters of design). So then what? do you go for boards in Interaction Design? Oh wait!!! don't you need to define IxD so that you can build a specialty around it? I mean how will I know I graduated from ixD (thoracic surgery) instead of ui (cardiology). Guys! please, you might not like it, but semantics are required to build, reflect, advance, and advocate for any profession. we need to be able to communicate value inside and outside and all around the eco-system. We need to be able to educate, elucidate, explore and experiment. Sometimes the definitions are "easy"; In our case it is a challenge b/c we are the bastard children of design. Now, a possible more important question is whether these conversations are useful on THIS list. The frustration level is obvious to many. At one point, we had a list called "working group" that was for the purpose of defining IxD and IxDA. We knew we wanted to keep the primary list balanced on tactics and theory, but not distracted on semantics and logistics of the org. The logistics part is well taken care of by the relatively new Board of 7 (soon to be 9). But the definition piece has fallen back on this list time and again especially over the last 2 years. To me this speaks of a great need to do either 2 things: 1) Turn the definition page on the web site into a "wiki" page with commenting capabilities. It will be the living permanent answer to this question once and for all. 2) We create a list for people like myself who will forever be obsessed with defining the damn thing! But i'm afraid these threads on this open list is turning into noise for too many people. But then again, since less than 1% of the total subscriber base actually posts anything, it is almost impossible to know (BTW the poll request response rate is even lower than that). -- dave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
On 1/25/08, Demers, Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just curious how some of you would differentiate an interaction designer > from a user interface designer? Apologies if it's been discussed to > death before. Looked quickly on the discussion archive and didn't see > anything. If you're talking in terms of selling the concept to people (which I am having to do right now!) I'm finding that picking out and using their buzzwords 'against them' is very persuasive. I'm selling IxD with two main points: 1) They align the products with processes(!) - and then you qualify this with high-level business strategy(!), all the way down to the work minutiae of the people on the coal-face (my worklplace is where clichés come to die). I then use the example of: 2) During work I staple, and remove staples from, things. I keep my stapler on my desk and my remover in my drawer as I staple far more often than I unstaple, and I want my desk to be clear. Obviously I flesh these out slightly and change the emphasis depending upon my audience, but it seems to work pretty well and seem to I get a lot of 'this guy knows what he's talking about' looks. Either that or I'm fooling myself ;) -- Alex. *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
I think that the idea of having a single profession with specialties is right on. As a designer I do UI, IxD, IA, Ux and probably a few other thing. I can do all this things competently -- that does not make me a specialist in these areas and when I have a complex problem I will bring in someone who specializes in one of these areas. The medical profession has had this model for years. You get an MD and that qualifies you to basically do anything in medicine (e.g. you are a physician and surgeon." If you want to specialize in a particular field you can do so and get as many specialization credentials as you want (e.g. you can be a psychiatrist and a neurologist). By doing this you can present a simple, easily comprehended profession to the outside world. It also suggests a curriculum for training new professionals. And in the future, if we ever move to certification of some sort (don't panic!) it will provide a model that enables people go gain basic certification and then go after their "merit badges." Charlie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Differnce between user interface and interaction design?
Hi Scott, One aspect of your question could cause confusion. Are you asking about the difference between disciplines or between roles? I think the answers you receive may vary depending on which question people choose to answer. Here's how I see the difference: Interaction designer is to interface designer as art director is to graphic designer. It's an imperfect analogy but it demonstrates how the roles are linked. I think of interface design as the form-giving counterpart to interaction design. I believe that interface design differs from interaction design primarily in its focus on the behavior of artifacts rather than the behavior of humans. Although the two roles can certainly be embodied in a single individual in the broad strokes you might be able to tell the difference between an interaction designer and an interface designer by their tools. Whiteboards and Post-it notes or Omnigraffle and Flash? // jeff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25077 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ 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
