The site UseFull Usability is edifying. From new and invented words, we re-explains the history of common sense and European design. On arrival this approach of "Usability pull product design sad, 'the' Innovation death" and gives me the feeling that the user is tracked and targeted as game ...
The Web is an object which are seized ergonomics, user experience and other "scientists". Beginning work as a guru J. Nielsen and Don Norman, they dictate and impose what is good or not.
Read: Perceived Affordance, Usability and Online Sales:
According to William Gaver, there are three categories of affordance:
- Perceptible
- False
- Hidden
> 
This site has false affordances
> 
This site has hidden affordances
These sad "lords" polish the mediocrity of "only market Centred" or "Customer Centred Design" by pretending to think and do everything for the "User" object of all attention. Everything is good for better understanding, it is "EyeTrack," he tells stories (storytelling), but he speaks very little innovation, attractiveness, quality servicielle, sensory sensitivity, comfort, real earnings or artistic dimensions of the product they are offered.
A consumer spent the act becomes a user, and is therefore subject to all fantasies. A human is it that? Marketing talks about "Customer Centred Design", the agency Ideo, our British friends and ergonomists speak of User Centred Design. Given the theoretical limits of this, these players are now talking UCD Human Centred Design (Ideo, a French company ergonomic expert usability, etc ....).
- People First
- The creation always helps
- The desire is important
- Art design exceeds the sum of observation and correction.
The web is not a disease and it must indeed be assumed that a site is usable what seems a clear duty for every designer. Too much theory and approach of this type can produce havoc on small businesses tempted by innovation, invention and creation. I recall that innovation and being clever is the way to allow young shoots and mastodons moribund rebound and survive.
The Guru of "usability" Don Norman also seems to reflect an evolution of his thinking during a recent RULE where he said that designers had never produced inventive and values. We can talk about the value of design and did not completely wrong.
4 Responses to "Difference between good and bad design!"
Mael
2 months ago
There is a difference between optimizing the usability of a site and establish a design rule "any ergonomic"!
Indeed, I note that the sites used as examples by the "gurus" tend to all look the same force. Conversely ergonomists a bit more involved on the ground would tend to let the creative do his job.
Jean-Louis Frechin
2 months ago
Hello Mael, I agree with you. I would add that usability often avoids asking the essential questions. It is important, as a pre-flight inspection airplane. It is neither the plane nor its design. Our country Cartesian and very focused on the humanities loves these approaches because it put the art in rule and explanation. (Ps: some of our objects are at the expo paris design change to super Electropolis Museum in Mulhouse)
Mael
2 months ago
This is a new opportunity to go to the museum:)
Benedict Drouillat
1 month ago
I share your ideas quite well on the report ergonomics / design. The core problem is that in France particularly the design is not the responsibility of the designer but the ergonomist or project manager. But if there is a step that falls within the design is the design of wireframes, storyboards etc.. Suddenly, the designer is in the best case a house painter or a stylist ... Second concern is that the professional ergonomist is an ambiguity because he defines the purpose and which both the values (it is judge and party). However, the definition of use is the land of the designer. I also think that the observation (ethnographic) of users is in itself rather a good principle, but that where the rub is in the interpretation. I find it ridiculous to make me explain how a project I'm supposed to make the choice of design. For me, the profession of information architect or designer or whatever you want - in the context of the web - must disappear and blend with the designer. It seems to me that the profession is in bad faith in claiming to design while separating these dimensions. It is the development of specialized practices that allowed this. And I agree when you say that the design of a site, this is not the purely utilitarian but also the desire it arouses.