Derek Schutz Blog #7

I am not an I300 loser.

Nick Swan (Blog 7)

I am not an I300 loser.

Chambers - Week 7

I am not an I300 loser.

L. Smith - Blog 7

I am not an I300 loser.

Kevin Noone Blog 7

I am not an I300 loser.

Josh Roberson Blog 7

I am not an I300 loser.

Nathan Potts's Blog Post #7

I am not an I300 Loser. Rawr

Horstman Blog 7

I am not an I300 loser.

Week 07 Blog Assignment

This is a very easy assignment.

I want you to take a look at the way points are distributed for this course. See pages 8-9 of the syllabus. Look at your grades in the Oncourse gradebook and enter them into the Personal I300 Gradebook (it's an Excel file that you can download from Oncourse resources; it's at the bottom of the resource list of files).

If you think you’re in trouble, please make an appointment to see me. I will help you recover through the “Professor Siegel’s Academic Recovery Stimulus Package!” Note, however, that the stimulus package will not be available throughout the semester. This is a mid-semester correction. So take action now if your grades in this class need a bail-out.

If you’ve calculated your personal grade and decided if you need to make an appointment with me or not, then all you need to do to get 15 points on this blog assignment is to write a post simply with the words “I am not an I300 loser.” Feel free to say more, but this assignment only requires you to do this. That’s it!  

Cory Worland - Blog 6

For project number four, my partner and I designed a new and "improved" refrigerator. The technique I think would be a good thing to use on our design would be to use Up-to-Speed aids. We put a touch screen on our fridge and with that we can install a "Getting Started" guide for new users, as well as video tour to show the user all of the features and some simple processes that the everyday user should pick up on quite quickly.

Kevin Noone Blog #6

The technique that I would go back and use for project 4 is the Choose Good defaults, specifically the integrate preferences technique. The use of a refrigerator is going to vary from user to user, by designing good defaults and allowing the user to integrate their own personal preferences into the design, it creates a design that is easily understood from the beginning of use, but also creates a design that is flexible enough to adapt to each different user.

Also the book is great. It is an easy read and gives great examples to help us further understand his theories. Great choice!

Elaine Fath Blog #6

The technique that jumped out at me immediately is the "use up-to-speed aids." This is for a variety of reasons--our project, which involved the fridge, is primarily a single touch-screen built into the fridge door, and most of the interaction is visually based. Additionally, I'm a very visual learner--once I see something done once on a screen, I can usually remember it better than someone telling me about it or reading about it. I could see an "I'm new" button where the fridge took you through some of its basic features as well as how to access them in a kind of "get acquainted" session with extra hints that can be turned off at will.

Nathan Potts's Blog Post #6

For our project 4, we designed a key fob that held keys and popped them out upon a user's request when he or she cycled through a list of locations and then pushed a button that extended the key. Thus solving the problem of people fumbling and trying each and every key as they try to unlock the door.

While reading Chapter 5, I thought the best technique that was to give tips on how to use the device. These tips would be listed on the box or as scrolling text across the LED screen when you first start the device.

Blog 6 Austin Frink

For the "ChillBox," our refrigerator from project 4, it may be useful to use the "give instructive hints" technique to help beginner users quickly become intermediate level users. To control the built-in sound system, it is necessary to manipulate the freezer touchscreen menu. It may be helpful if a prompt such as "Select your track" was displayed above the list of tracks to guide the user to touch the desired track.

Nick Swan (Blog 6)

For project 4, on of the techniques that I think could be applied would be the "offer tips" option. Our keys are already an item that are very interactive while also offering useful options, but these options may be things that the user doesn't know about or effectively know how to use. A good way to implement this would be for the keys to periodically ask the user if they want to hear about an option they have never used. If they reply back saying saying, "yes" the keys will tell them this feature and how to use it. This could also be disabled as well for the more experience user by telling the keys they do not want to be notified about tips any more.

Daniel Lee Blog 6

As I was paying my credit bills online on chase.com, I thought the design by Chase used some of the techniques described in chapter five of our textbook. First is that the website provides instructive design. On the first step page of the credit card payment page, the user is only required to fill out or choose 3 fields. These fields include pay from, payment amount, and payment date. Pay from section is default to your chase bank account so the users really do not have to worry about. Payment amount has four different options to choose from and each option has instructive text on the right side of the option that teaches the users how to fill in that field. Payment date automatically default as the current date but user can change easily. By having the default current day, the user can see what format of the date is required to fill in.

Chase also provides help documents for the users to fully understand. Next to every required field, there is a picture of a question mark in a green box. Once the user clicks this box, help center on a new window pops up and the users are able to read more in detail about the field user have questions about.

Derek Schutz Blog #6

In chapter 5 of Designing the Obvious, Robert Hoekman talks about getting users up to speed with applications in a way called "up to speed" aids. For project 4, we designed a fridge that could interact with its users. For a beginner or a first time user, the way the fridge works, and how the fridge is working and interacting could be very confusing. Users are going to want to know what the fridge is capable of, how to maneuver around it, and what it is actually doing. A good way to update and inform the users of this information it to use the "up to speed" aid. Simply installing a short video guide that is initiated as soon as the fridge is first used, and is accessible at anytime, would benefit the user immensely. The video could show the user how the device operates, along with how to get started, and what its capabilities are.

Tarana Patel (Blog 6)

Designing the obvious book is very interesting. I am learning lots from the book that will help me in future. This book is very easy to read, useful information and very well organized by step by step with lots of examples this will help reader to follow easily.

After reading chapter 5 in Designing the Obvious, for our refrigerator the techniques I would apply to our project 4 the category of using an Up-to-speed aid. Users might face problem like how to start, how it’s work, what to do and so on and on because they don’t know how to use it. Use Up-to-speed Aids can provide a video tour that shows users a quick overview of the how product work and product’s main feature and also will provide a getting starting point to users and tell how they can log in and log out and all other important information.

--- Tarana Patel

Chambers - Blog 6

Because our refrigerator in project 4 does mostly everything automatically and without user commands, it doesn't leave a lot of room for helping the user out. Though if I had to choose, I would pick the "fill the blank slate with something useful" or "provide helpful tips." Perhaps by pressing a button on the side of the refrigerator, the refrigerator could state its functions and suggest activities to the user such as "try opening the refrigerator when you don't know what to eat!" This seems to be the only way to give the user something to start with given the lack of interface.

L. Smith - Blog 6

For Project 4, our set of keys offered some security settings that may frustrate some users if they were unsure how to modify or properly use them. Our device was operated by a touchscreen. After reading Chapter 5, I believe offering tips in the form of a question mark icon would be the best solution. This would make it clear and simple for a user to touch the icon which would bring up tips and hints. These would be concise but very helpful in explaining how the device operates.

By the way, this book isn't too bad. I usually find myself reading for this class before I do my others because it is easier to follow along and stay awake.

Week 06 Blog Assignment

This has been a busy week with a major project due and the first exam. But we need to keep moving forward in our book, Designing the Obvious. I hope you’re enjoying it and that you agree it’s better than reading most textbooks. Please let me know!

For this week, we turn to Chapter 5, “Turn Beginners Into Intermediates, Immediately.” It’s an interesting topic with a number of challenges. A user can be naive about a new application but an expert in something else. Or a user can be naive in general about technology.

For this assignment, select one of the techniques in Chapter 5 and show how it might be applied to your Project #4. OR… if you’re tired with Project #4 (!), find an online application (tell us what it is and provide a link) and explain how one or more of the techniques are used effectively in that site. (Do not choose one of the examples in the chapter.)

Nick Swan (Blog 5)

The mental model is how the user perceives the object based on his or her experiences. This is something that does not have to be true but is thought by the user to be. A great example of this and one which we talked about in class is the trash can and thermostat examples where the user thinks that the trash can actually deletes the item and that turning the thermostat up higher actually increases how fast the room warms up. This contrasts with the implementation model because the programmer designs the product for the programmers benefit and not the users.

Austin Frink Blog #5

What is the user’s mental model with respect to an object's personality and surrounding interactions?

The user's mental model of an object is essentially the user's intuitive descriptive understanding of and relationship to an object's personality and interactions. The user may not truly understand the nuts and bolts of the software, but they may be extremely skilled at using the software. A good example would be the pallete feature in Photoshop. You select a color from a vibrant transitioning gradient of all the colors of the rainbow, but what is actually happening is RGB values between 0-255 are being altered to add or subtract from the red,green, and blue color values (or hex values, or HSB).

How might this mental model contrast with the implementation model of the programmers?

As in the above, the color pallete of Photoshop is an easy intuitive color selection system for artists and users, but it is far from what is actually going on digitally deep inside the computer. Ones and zeros, trues and falses are all that exist when at the bottom of what makes these apps tick.

Daniel Lee Blog #5

The user’s mental model is what they believe to be true.  According to our book, it is generally based on the user’s experiences, and how they assimilate new things into their existing knowledge.  Although the users believe to be true, their perception is not necessarily the truth.  Their perception is only based on their feelings and their experience.  The users tend to think whatever works and fulfills their goal whether it is true or not. 

 

This mental model strongly contrast with the implementation model of the programmers because the programmers are thinking about how the actual programming works.  They are thinking about how to program so they know how it exactly works.  The programmers do not know about individual user’s mental model and the uses do not know how the actual programming works.  They only focus on what it is important to them.  

Josh Roberson Week 5 Blog

As you begin to think about project #4, what is the user’s mental model with respect to an object's personality and surrounding interactions?

A user's mental model of an object's personality will most likely mirror that of how they view people's personalities because it makes it easy to understand instead of understanding it is a complex series of preset responses. Like in the book when they talked about how people view deleting files of a computer they think of it as throwing something away not removing data from a hard drive to be written over later.

How might this mental model contrast with the implementation model of the programmers?

They programmers implementation model is just the opposite, they view the object's personality for what it really is, whats under the hood. Just a program set to respond in certain ways in given situations.

Derek Schutz Blog #5

A mental model is what we the user believes is true about the way something works, rather than how it actually works in the technology world. Hoekman helps describes what a mental model is by explaining how in real life we throw things away in trash cans, and how on computers we have a picture of a trash can that would drag files into to get rid of them. In most peoples heads, all we are doing is simply throwing files in the trash can to get rid of them, but that is not how it actually works. We are actually just moving those files into another folder labeled as something else that we decide is not important. A mental model is what we believe to be true about how somethings works, regardless of whether that is right or wrong. Our mental model just helps us to understand how to use a computer, rather than learning what is really going on behind the scenes. This mental model contrasts with the implementation model of the programmers in that the programmers model would be much more specific and much more detailed dealing with what is actually happening inside the computer or with the object. The programmers would have to know exactly how something works.

Elaine Fath Blog #5

The primary thing to take away from this chapter about user mental models is that people are wired to look at familiar experiences and relate them to unfamiliar or more complicated experiences that seem “similar”, even if in reality the two have very little in common on the level of execution. For example, I just used the term “wired” to describe how people think, even though human thought, evolution and experience have almost nothing in common with the literal wiring of a machine or device. But the wiring of a machine is easier to grasp, so the term has come to mean both. Even the term “mental model” falls under its own mental model—mental modelling doesn’t really have anything in common with literally “modeling,” aka sculpting. But the two seem similar to us.
The way this contrasts with programmer mental models is, because the design will be more familiar to the programmers, they are more likely to think of the design in literal terms and less likely to come up with a mental model to represent it.

Tarana Patel (Blog 5)

As you begin to think about project #4, what is the user’s mental model with respect to an object's personality and surrounding interactions?
User’s mental model is user’s individual thinking and understanding that something they think is right because of their personal experiences but in reality it does not right always or all the time they think is true as an example we discuses in class “Recycle Bin” trash can. Users are not always right this is what we learned in chapter 3 but as a designer you have to keep in mind users needs and suggestion because if you created an object that is eye catching but if your user’s have hard time with the object it’s going to waste time and money because at the end users need to understand what they are doing so they can use object easily without facing any trouble or problem.
How might this mental model contrast with the implementation model of the programmers? (Don’t get too involved with this one.)
Designer needs to keep in mind that users don’t know nothing about object they are first step of learning about object so should keep it simple so it’s easy to use and explain how the object works in simple words because users is not the designer.
--- Tarana Patel

Chambers - Blog 5

As you begin to think about project #4, what is the user’s mental model with respect to an object's personality and surrounding interactions?

A user's mental model is how they perceive an object or program to work. Someone whose knowledge of computer programs is limited will have a vastly different mental model of how things are done from how they really work.

How might this mental model contrast with the implementation model of the programmers? (Don’t get too involved with this one.)

The mental model of a user contrasts from the implementation model of programmers because the programmer knows the ins and outs of the program and exactly how the functions get done. The user, on the other hand, does not see the backend of the program and usually only gets a GUI so they don't see the detail of what's going on.

Andy McColgin Blog #5

When a user sees an object with "personality" they legitimately think that object has personality. However, as the creators of the objects, we realize that all that the personality actually is ends up being nothing more than programming. We have not created the capacity for actual artificial intelligence yet, just a resemblance of the idea. So, it is possible for the user to do something outside of the pre-programmed stimuli. This means that it is possible to frustrate a user because the product would not be able to be fully interactive and intuitive. Ideally, the creators would be able to produce a product that would be capable of interacting with all of the relevant questions, and even a good chunk of just social questions which would allow the product to emanate a human aspect.

Nathan Potts's Blog Post #5

The user's mental model with an a object can influence how the user perceives its personality and interacts with object in many ways. Take for instance a child and a stove. A child's mental model of a stove may be incomplete, and when he or she fails to understand how a stove heats a pot of water, the child places his or her hand on the burner he or she quickly realizes that the stove is hot and heats the pot. However, if the child puts his or her hand on the stove while it's cold. He or she will think nothing of it and may think that it heats a pot via magic or something else. These two interactions are just two simple examples on how a user's mental model can be differ from the interactions of that piece of technology.

Taking my previous example, a designer of a stove may be focused too hard on what is the most efficient way to heat a pot of water to boiling and may forget that children may try to grab at the stove, thus forgetting to put indicators that the stove is on. This causes a problem with a child's realization that a stove gets hot and burns if it is touched.

Kevin Noone Blog 5

What is the user’s mental model with respect to an object's personality and surrounding interactions?
The users mental model is the users own understanding of what they are actually doing when they perform a certain action on an object. It is not always wrong and it is not always right, but it helps the user understand what exactly they are doing.

In relation to project 4, that users mental model could be completely changed if the object they are acting on, responds with information concerning their current action, which would allow the user to always know exactly what they are doing.

How might this mental model contrast with the implementation model of the programmers?
The users mental model would contrast with the programmers because the programmer knows exactly what is happening. The user uses this mental model to help them, in their words, understand the process of what they are doing. The programmers mental model is the process, it is exactly what is happening.

Blog #5

A user's mental model refers to the internal reference point that he or she uses to understand the function of an application's process. For example, it is the metaphor of using a trash can to delete files on a computer. It is not essential for the user to know how the computer goes about eliminating a file from it's memory, just that putting a file in the trash gets rid of it, just as putting trash in the trash can at home gets rid of it.

A user's mental model with respect to an object's personality and surrounding interactions will be based upon that person's perceptions of similar constructs in reality. For example, if it is a refrigerator, they may expect a similar experience to what they would receive when interacting with a convenience store clerk.

This mental model may contrast with the designer's implementation model, which would be task and hierarchy focused, creating elements of the personality based upon the basic tasks the refrigerator would perform as opposed to some of the conversational elements that a user might expect from a convenience store clerk (or maybe not. Often, clerks aren't all that conversational.)

CMWORLAN BLOG 5

What is the user’s mental model with respect to an object’s personality and surrounding interactions?
The users mental model would be to look at the object in question and to think of how they assume it works with having no prior experience. In other words, it is what they believe to be true about the object and how they intend to accomplish a certain task with that object.
How might this mental model contrast with the implementation model of the programmers?
The user’s mental model, I believe, would have very little in common with the implementation model of the programmers. The programmers implementation model would go into great detail about what the object does, what the object can do, and how they anticipate the user to achieve certain goals while using the object. I don’t think this would match up with the type of things that the user thinks they would do certain things.

Tom Davidson blog #5

What is the user’s mental model with respect to an object's personality and surrounding interactions?
The user's mental model is how the user thinks something works. As with the trash can example, this model can differ substantially from how the object actually works. An example other than the trash can used in the book, was one we used in class. A thermostat. People think that they can turn the dial down further and it will get cold faster, but in reality that's not how a thermostat works.

How might this mental model contrast with the implementation model of the programmers? (Don’t get too involved with this one.)
Programmers have to know exactly how something works, from the most basic level to the most advanced. If they didn't, the object wouldn't exist. The model of the user will almost always differ from the programmers' unless the user is a programmer.

L. Smith - Blog #5

As you begin to think about project #4, what is the user’s mental model with respect to an object's personality and surrounding interactions?

- The user's mental model is what the user believes they are doing as they accomplish a task. This task may not always be carried out exactly as it was intended (i.e. the infamous trash can example), but if the user is satisfied and accomplishes their tasks to their liking, there is nothing to argue.

How might this mental model contrast with the implementation model of the programmers?

- The two models contrast because the implementation model is constructed in the mind of the programmer which may lead to confusing features or foreign error messages that may throw an average user off. The mental model may differ from person to person because each user may perceive a feature or program differently. In each case, the programmer and the user will have different understandings and uses for a product which somehow always leads to confusion.

Horstman Blog 5

What is the user’s mental model with respect to an object's personality and surrounding interactions?

The user's mental model of an object, the object's personality and how it works actually differs compared to what that object really is, does, and it's personality. In the book, the author uses the trash can model of a desktop of a computer. The user believes that this "trash can" can "completely delete" any item tossed in it, but the user's idea of this object is far from true. In a better representative model for the "trash can" would be more like a recycling bin given the fact that the object just holds what you throw away but won't forever go away but sit until the user again does something with that bin/folder of unwanted files, which is why some systems offer the image of a recycling bin instead of a trash can icon.

How might this mental model contrast with the implementation model of the programmers? (Don’t get too involved with this one.)

Like I stated before, the user mental model differs in the actual interactions of object to where it maybe completely off like the trash can on computers. The implementation model is the actual process in which a programmed object actually does with user inputs and interactions with the application/computer.

CMWORLAN Week 04

The user is not always right. The designer should take into consideration what the users suggest, but it should be just that, a suggestion. On project 2, I would eliminate clutter as much as possible. Even on our redesigned sketch, we still had a lot of clutter on the panel which can be very confusing to the average user who just wants to turn it on and start walking. The original design had many more buttons than our redesign, but the redesign was still quite cluttered.

Week 05 Blog Assignment

First, let me say that most of you responded with insight to Week 04’s blog assignment. I appreciate that you took the assignment seriously! Well done!

For this week, we turn to Chapter 4, “Support the User’s Mental Model.”

As you begin to think about project #4, what is the user’s mental model with respect to an object's personality and surrounding interactions? 

How might this mental model contrast with the implementation model of the programmers? (Don’t get too involved with this one.) 

A short answer (a few sentences) for each question should suffice. (Obviously you can read the answers of other people and paraphrase what they wrote, but that doesn't help your understanding very much. TRY to answer these questions before looking at the responses of your peers.

Andy Mc Blog #3

Is the user always correct?

No, clearly as we saw in class on Monday, people know what they want, but they don't know what they need. When I say they know what they want, I mean that sometimes they have good ideas. However, so many things influence what they say, like what they think we want them to say. Because of that, we don't get honest answers and we must try to listen to what they are not saying.

Should the designer always provide new features because one or more users ask for them?

The purpose of a designer is to create an object that provides for the given needs. If the designer gets caught up doing smaller features, he can easily lose track of the bigger picture and end up with crowded software that has too many features and fails to provide for the needs of the

Is there a larger “user-centered” focus that Hoekman advocates?

Hoekman advocates for a "user-centered" focus that comprises a few different things. The designer must listen to the user and their ideas and let them know they are being listened to. The designer needs to keep the original design for the needs in mind. They can't get carried away with smaller features that distract from the big picture.


Project 2 Eliminations

In project number 2 with the treadmill we found lots of extra stuff. It seemed the creators of this treadmill got so carried away that the HUD was overcrowded to the point of being distracting. I would have eliminated all of the double buttons, the extra start buttons, and all of the random drawings. The two panel screen needs to be narrowed down to one with all of the eliminations. It just needed to be simpler and not confuse people to the point of them not being able to walk.

Tom Davidson Blog 4

Is the user always correct?
No. The user is not always correct. The user can be on the right track and can be an excellent indicator of what needs to be changed, but more often than not, they don't really know exactly what they want. If the user knew exactly what they wanted, we wouldn't be designers. We'd just be a medium for the users to communicate to engineers.

Should the designer always provide more features just because user(s) asked for them?
The adding of new features should be well thought out before doing so. Sometimes users might think they want more features, but once they're made available, will just complain about clutter or find the feature useless. It is very important to listen to the users and take their suggestions seriously. If one user suggests something and others don't, it might be a good idea to mention the idea and see what other users think about it. If more than one user mentions the idea or the majority mentions it, it might be a good idea to add it to your application.

Is there a larger "user-centered" focus that Hoekman advocates?
I believe that Hoekman is saying to listen to the user in order to understand what they need. Consider their answers yet look through them at the same time. Look for a deeper meaning in what they're saying. Like I mentioned earlier, if what the users suggested was always right, they wouldn't need designers.

Project 2 eliminations
As was mentioned in an earlier post, I would take out some of the preset workouts. I've spent the majority of the past few years in one gym or another and even when I was first starting, I never used the preset workouts. Those workouts aren't customizable enough and typically aren't even appropriately labeled. This specific machine requires the user to begin working out in order to activate it in an attempt to save energy, yet it doesn't indicate anywhere that it requires motion to start. It would be a good idea to say somewhere on the machine that it must be used to activate.

Blog #4 Daniel Lee

I think it’s very obvious that user is not always correct. Of course the user might help the designer to design the best overall design of a product. However, designer should not listen to everything the user says. Each individual user may have their own unique needs and they only emphasize from their own personal perspective. Designer must see everything in bigger picture and design the best design for everybody. The designer should not always provide new features because one or more users ask for them and this is the same reason as why user is not always correct. Instead of one person’s individual view, the designer must see as a whole.

For our second project, I would eliminate more buttons and take away some of the unnecessary things that just create clutter. First thing that I would remove is the number pads 0 -9 as we found that it is not necessary and takes up too much space. Although the RPM is nice information, it is not necessary, and could be taken away. Similarly, mets, watts, and cal/hour could be taken away, and the other three could be simplified into a larger display so that you would not have to constantly rotate through the display to get the desired information. All of the display could be enlarged and displayed prominently so that a quick glance would get you the desired information.

Austin Frink Blog #4

When asked for an outright opinion, no, the user is not always right. However, since we design for the users, their latent preferences are always the ultimate determining factor in whether an app. or specific feature of an app. will be a flop or a hit. The user may say, "I would really like this feature and would use it all the time." or "I would never use that feature, not ever ever ever," and when presented with the features they had so adamantly advocated or abhored, their actions, governed by their latent tendencies, prove that they own the contrary opinion. So, the user is always right , even when they are wrong.

A treadmill is a treadmill is a treadmill. As a user, this is my honest opinion. But just the other day when I was working out in the HPER, I found myself running on the exact treadmill that Jay and I had redesigned in Project 2. Toward the end of my mile, I wanted to sprint to the end. The only way to do this was to hold my finger down on the + sign for what I felt to be an eternity to go faster. I did this while winded and bouncing up and down due to my running, which is what a treadmill is all about. Our redesign included a voice command recognition system for speed control. This is exactly what I needed.

This being said, we did not eliminate the button controls for speed control in our redesign. This is what I would eliminate. Yes, I know I am designing based on my own preferences and this is warned against, but I believe that many people would prefer this new "futuristic, I-robotish" feature not only for it's technological superiority, but also for it's practicality of use.

Derek Schutz (Blog #4)

No, the user is not always correct. There is a big difference between what the user wants, and what the user needs. If a user were to ask for a new feature on a website, it is not always necessary for the designer of the website to add it. Too many features can cause frustration, cluster, and confusion. For every additional feature, there is more to learn, read about in the help section, and it opens up more room for error or for something to go wrong. There is a larger "user-centered" focus that Hoekman talks about. It is a variety of different things. This is allowing the users to have there voice heard, but not let it be heard to loud. You always must remember the applications main purpose even when users are wanting more features. These featues might not be necessary, especially because no application can be directed at every user. You always should keep it simple and understand when there might be too much going on.

Project 2 eliminations.
I would eliminate several of the preset buttons that seem to be very unnecessary and extraordinarily similar such as the "cardio," "hill training," and "heartrate," options. The bike machine my partner and I redesigned is a perfect example of how too many features can cause frustration and clutter. All of the features that I would take out could be simulated by increasing the resistance and pedal speed. This would make users be capable of getting started faster without being confused, along with being influenced to make a more customizable workout that would suit any given individuals needs.

Nick Swan (Blog 4)

Is the user always correct?

In my opinion, I do not think the user is always correct. They should instead be used as a guideline for whatever is being created. As we talked about in class today, the user does not always know what they need so it is our job to take their ideas in and create it for them. This also goes for providing new features for a product. New features can both be good and bad that is why it is our job to find the perfect balance of them and determine whether the user actually needs it or not. I think that a larger user-centered focus the Hoekman advocates would be that less is more. In doing this you can determine what is most important to the application and if you stick to building 20 percent of the features you will take care of 80 percent of users needs.

On our work out machine sketch, I think that one of the things that could be eliminated is the detailed list of the buttons. We spent a lot of time redesigning that part of our machine and did not focus as much on the rest of it. What may have been more important was creating a more simplistic display panel and instructions to then under the machine rather than making the display panel look good but not be entirely effective.

Tarana Patel (Blog 4)

Is the user always correct?
I think is both sometime users are correct and sometime not it’s depend. In class we discussed that users choose something that understandably but it’s not reasonable. If you are designing a social website then you have to think about users need.

Should the designer always provide new features because one or more users ask for them?
It’s always good to have more than one feature, but if you organized well and easy to understandable for users, but most of time it’s depend on website like what kind of application are you trying to make it. But some more features are more frustration for users because every extra feature there are more thing to learn, more too understandable it about more that can go wrong etc. less is more.

Is there a larger “user-centered” focus that Hoekman advocates?
Yes, there is a lager “user-centered” he discussed that we should think first what the purpose is then should keep it simple so users can interact easily and find useful by this it more user-centered.

Project two
My partner and I focused on Woodway Desmo HP Treadmill. I wouldn’t eliminate anything to our new sketch, but I can switch the buttons around because the things are on our new sketch designs all the features/buttons are very important, but by switching around it would be more organized and easy to find and readable to users. Incline display, up, down, enter, clear, pause, etc all are very important features, so I can try to put all this features/buttons in center so it’s easy to reachable for users while using this machine.

Thank you
Tarana Patel

L. Smith - Blog 4

The user is not always correct. While online forums are not the only form of user suggestions, one could quickly conclude that users will never be completely satisfied. One feature that works for someone may be confusing or useless to someone else because one user is not a good way to represent a whole. The problem is deciding which features are user friendly and which should go out the door. The designer should not, and cannot, provide every new feature that users ask for because the list would be endless. I feel that Hoekman wants us to keep the user's ideas in mind, but not let them dictate how we conduct our work.

For project #2, my partner and I removed the buttons around the display screen which gave us the opportunity to enlarge the screen so that all user input is done on the interactive panel just below the screen. We could possibly conduct research methods to find out which of the exercise options were being used more than the others. These results could help us eliminate some of the less-frequently used options which would in turn free up more space and make the machine less complex.

Blog Assignment #4

Is the user always correct?

No the user is not always correct. Its similar to when we talked about the designer of an application, designing for himself. Sometimes a user might have a feature in mind that could be added to the application which would help them out with whatever they are doing, but that feature might only be helping that single user out. There will rarely be a time in which the feature being asked for, is a feature that is used by 100% of the applications users.

It is important to keep in mind that the answer to this question is No they are not always correct, but there will be many times in which the user is absolutely correct. Which is why the users should always have a voice, even if they are not going to be right all of the time.

Should the designer always provide new features because one or more users ask for them?

The designer must keep the main purpose of its application in mind at all times. The answer to the question is maybe. Maybe a new feature asked for by multiple users improves the applications main purpose and should be implemented, or maybe it is just a "nice to have" feature that should be ignored. It depends on the specific situation and the applications main purpose.

Is there a larger “user-centered” focus that Hoekman advocates?

Yes. The larger "user-centered" focus is a variety of different things. Its allowing the user to speak his voice and taking in their ideas. Its never forgetting the applications main purpose even when users are calling for "nice to have features". The designer must keep in mind why he is providing this application for the user and even when the user is asking for more, the designer must recognize when more is too much.

Project 2 Eliminations

When looking at a treadmill, the designer must understand that it has one main purpose and that is to allow a user to run in a controlled environment. In my opinion, the way in which treadmills are designed lose track of this. They offer many "nice to have" features like pre-sets and heart rate monitors. These "nice to have" features though do not belong in the trash bin, they offer a way in which the user can personalize their run.

I believe that the way they are layed out is very difficult to understand and much too cluttered. There is not much you can do in terms of changing the heart rate monitor, it is an important feature that can not be moved any where else.
The presets though can easily be moved behind the scenes. I believe that the many different preset buttons should be eliminated and one single preset button should be created. Taking advantage of the digital screen in the middle of the interface, the presets should be displayed clearly on that while allowing the user to cycle through them and eventually choosing one.
Users who want to use presets will still be able to easily seek them out and the users who do not use such features will feel less cluttered at the beginning of their run, allowing for an easier set up.

Blog #4

The user is not always correct. What the user wants, or thinks they want, may not be what they actually need. More features do not necessarily mean better features, and can often reduce the usability of the product in question. Additionally, it is impossible to design with every user in mind; the only way to remotely come close to this would be to have a 100% customizable product, which is unrealistic and would likely be difficult to use.

What I believe Hoekman is arguing is to design with the user in mind, not design exactly what the user asks. It is essential to test the product with the user, and ask their opinion about the product, but not to let them dictate the outcome of the product.

It is difficult to perform interface surgery on my redesign, as I stripped the machine to pretty basic levels as it is. However, I think the speed display could be integrated into the level display through a toggle key to eliminate a screen. Depending on the intended usage--educational or home--I also think the Fitness Test function could be eliminated. I don't see much use for a Fitness Test for a home user. Finally, the calorie/pulse window could be removed as I'm not sure how many people actually use that function, however, I think that some data would need to be collected on that particular feature since I'm just kind of guessing about that.

Elaine Fath Blog #4

Although Ch. 3 of Designing the Obvious may appear to be contradicting itself, in reality these two concepts go hand-in-hand. Although polling users, studying them, etc is very helpful to your end product, these results can't be the end-all decision maker. That's your job. The reason for this is that although it is oftentimes helpful to see what users say they need, this is not always in line with what they really need. The examples we talked about in class had to do with the fact that people have a tendency to say what they believe to be the "right" answer, whether it be complimenting your design or asking for a healthier menu, when in reality it bares little resemblance to what they would actually use. For this same reason, one user's comment usually shouldn't overhaul the whole design process.

As far as project 2 goes--I'd bet that, when polling people about what their new workout machine should have, a lot of users said "more workout settings." Unfortunately, what this led to was a whole bunch of unintelligible buttons with names like "glute blaster" and "x-mode" that make zero sense without the manual, which doesn't do you much good if you're at a public gym. Although we reorganized and renamed a lot of these buttons in our redesign, if I had to go back I would probably take out even more. Possibly in exchange for buttons that would make the elliptical harder/easier on your arms or legs, as opposed to the five or six pre-programmed workouts, some of which were difficult to understand, especially regarding what distinguished one workout from another.

Chambers - Blog 4

The user is not always correct. In class we discussed how users would “choose the healthy burger” because they think that they would choose logically, but in practice, users are not logical.

The designer should not always provide new features because some of the users ask for them. The power users that want more features will probably be outspoken in what they want, but they are typically the minority. The normal users who only use 20% of the features will just get lost if you add more features. More features add clutter and get in the way of the main features that most people use.

Hoekman mentions forums as a way for users to talk amongst themselves as well as fix each others’ problems. It takes less resources to manage and allows a centralized place for suggestions, complaints, and positive feedback.

As far as project 2, I would eliminate essentially everything but the workout and iPod tabs. Even the main screen isn’t necessary. Buttons on the workout screen would allow you to choose the type of workout. Chapter 3 says to take out all of the bells and whistles, but since the machine is “nike + ipod” it would be wrong to take the ipod away. This way, the user is presented with one simple screen to control exercise functions and one simple screen for ipod functions. Also on the workout screen, the image that is to show the level of the incline and difficulty is fairly redundant, so it can be removed to make room for other workout option buttons.

Horstman Blog 4

Is the user always correct?
The users could be correct depending on the purpose of your web site/application if you are trying to sell something or make money by how many users use your site via hits or advertisements or if you are creating something easy for users to use to make something themselves(like Blogger). Otherwise, you might not care what the user says about your site if it has no user interaction that is important for your site/application in the first place.

Should the designer always provide new features because one or more users ask for them?
Some times it might be a good idea to add new features if the users ask for it because depending on your application/web site(especially if you are trying to sell something), it would be a good idea for you to pay attention to your users and their ideas for new features (especially if your site isn't doing so hot).

Is there a larger "user-centered" focus that Hoekman advocates?

Hoekman talks about the "mental model" to where the user perceives that they know the truth about something (like being able to reach the developers and express their feelings about something particular) but yet, may not really reach the developers themselves, but other users on forums or FAQs.

The Eliminations
I would eliminate the some of the PreSet Workouts such as the 'cardio challenge', 'sports training', 'speed intervals', and 'speed ramp-up' because they just seem a little over the top for the average user or even beginning user because anyone who takes the time to learn the machine will easily know what to do and have a specific way they would want to work out. With all the buttons in place this machine will look imitating and confusing to the beginner and possibly even an average/novice user. Getting rid of the buttons would give this tredmill a more cleaner and easier interface to where you don't have a million buttons to push as a beginning user.

Week 04 Blog Assignment

Chapter 3 of Designing the Obvious may appear to be contradicting what we’ve been saying about users and paying attention to user needs. Is the user always correct? Should the designer always provide new features because one or more users ask for them? Is there a larger “user-centered” focus that Hoekman advocates? Address these questions in your own words. There are many good ways to address these questions.

Then think about Project #2 (the project where you needed to redesign the work-out machine). Perform “interface surgery” on that device. What might you eliminate and why? Do not re-sketch the device, just provide a small list of what you might eliminate and justify your list in light of the guidelines presented in chapter 3, where “less is more.”

[Addition: Focus on your redesign vs. the original design. That is, say what you would eliminate from your redesign.]

Blog #3

The system I would use would be: contextual inquiry

Avers Pizza

I looked over the Avers website and I have to say I am honestly impressed. It is beautifully designed with a non complex layout. Although, like everything else, there is still some room for improvement. I would advise sitting and experiencing a college student while they used your website. The reason why I chose this type of learning is because it is economic and feasible to do. Try not to ask too many questions, and do not tell them what to do if they struggle with anything. The struggles that they have are most likely not limited to just them but are shared by many users across your consumers. Take notes and listen to them while they use the sight. Remember, it is not necessarily about what they say, because I say that I am planning on starting an exercise plan tomorrow, but I have been saying that for two years now. Instead, watch what they do. That will be the most revealing insight into how to improve your website. Look for times when they struggle with trying to order food or locate prices. It is by observation that you will see what is really going on. Then you take the insight that you find and you make mock-ups to show customers, and from that feedback you can press on and fix the sight.