Alan Cooper访谈 2

huoji 2004-06-11 12:52:42

II Accepting there is a problem

AC uidesign.net audience is probably what I would call, "Programmers who realize that programming alone doesn't solve the problem". That realization is the necessary first step to solving the problem. There are programmers who believe that the solution is a programming technique that they haven't been able to learn yet.

That's a problem. It's focusing on the technology alone that has gotten us into this mess and focusing on technology just isn't going to get us out of it.

It's like treating someone with a dependent relationship, the first step in curing someone is that they must admit that they have a problem.


DJA I liked the focus in your book on an industry in denial. I could empathize with that. A lot of stuff that gets written makes me think, "Yeah, these guys are still in denial"


AC Yeah. And in the web world, it's just as prevalent, if not more so. In the PC world there was a lot of money. You could be in denial and still be having a financial success. In the web world, you can be in utter denial and be having a huge financial success because of all the distorted valuations. It's very easy to hide a bad user experience.


DJA Yes, I'm sure. Investors won't see an advantage in improving a site that is worth 9 billion dollars already?


AC Yep. Very true.




III Talking the Programmers' Language

DJA So tell me, how important was it to be in California in order to make an Interaction Design Consultancy work?


AC Well that's a good question. I like to think that it wasn't that important but the Silicon Valley Juju goes a long way. There are a lot of people, particularly in the web world who view Silicon Valley as the place where you go to get the answers. California was certainly a contributor [to the success].

The landscape is different today but in 1992 when I began doing Interaction Design Consulting, what really made the difference was that I had firmly established credentials as a software developer. Had I not had those credentials, I could not be doing what I'm doing today.

Designers as a whole tend to come from the world of visual or typographic design, or they come from the academic world of Human Computer Interaction, Usability Professionals, Ergonomics, Human Factors, where basically they are using quantitative methods to document human behavior.

Programmers know how hard they work and they know how difficult their job is. I'm not sure that those visual designers or those usability designers are aware of that. But I'm aware of that. I know that, as I say in the book, you need to have "skin in the game". You have to be committed. Not just prepared to stand on the sidelines and toss their advice in to the guys hitting hard - the programmers.

One of the significant secrets of Cooper Interaction is our willingness to have skin in the game. To get in there and do Interaction Design with the same level of rigor and the same amount of detail that programmers put in to their work. I don't think that Usability Professionals or Visual Designers do that. Simply because they don't have that code cutting background. They don't know what it's like.



DJA So are you saying that Cooper Interaction is capable of specifying requirements for the User Interface to programmers in a way that the programmers really appreciate and it makes their job a lot easier?


AC Yes. I am saying that but the main thrust is a little more nebulous than that. Programmers are not interested in making change for the sake of it. That means they have to do hard work on those changes. Programmers work very hard but they are very practical, logical people and they hate to make pointless changes.

Something we learned a long time ago is that HCI Professionals tend to guess at things and Visual Designers tend to guess at things. They say, "Well I think this looks pretty". HCI Professionals might look at it and say, "Well people are having trouble with this interaction. So I guess we should move this over here."


DJA Yes. I know what you mean. The programmers get jerked around producing 5 or 6 alternatives, so that the bosses or customer can make a choice. There is resentment to this because the programmers feel that the design should have been done properly the first time.


AC Right!

Designers and traditional HCI Professionals, because they have never written code, they just don't know that. And they don't have a sensitivity for it.

I think that's a much bigger deal.

If you can say, "Here's the right idea", and somehow through a track record you can show that you know it's the right idea, then programmers will bend over backwards to make it happen for you. It's not about the ability to specify the design in programmers language, although that's a nice thing, it's a valuable thing, its an appreciated thing. The more precisely you can specify something, the better it will be rendered by the programmers.

The most important thing is that I am saying, "People who haven't coded, jerk the chain of programmer's". People who understand the programming process and come at it from a developer's point of view, don't do that.

We walk into a client and we say, "We're going to make a presentation and we're going to lay out our design". And we're usually doing this in front of management, marketing people and programmers. Programmers will say, "Why do you do it like that? Why do you not do it like this?" They never ask stupid questions. A programmer will always ask a good piercing important question. You can't look at the guy and say, "well we thought it would be a good idea", or "well we guessed it should be like this", or "we had 10 people try it and 7 of them liked it that way". Programmers know that is bogus!

We look at programmers and we say, "Because of this truth", "Because of this fact, we know this is better".

We tell our design team, that when they go into a meeting with a client, they should know at least 2 reasons why they made any one design decision. If you don't have at least 2 good reasons, then don't try to defend that design. It's not about preferences.


DJA So it's not enough for a designer to turn around to a programmer and say "It's cool!"


AC Right! Cool is not a good design reason.

...全文
93 回复 打赏 收藏 转发到动态 举报
写回复
用AI写文章
回复
切换为时间正序
请发表友善的回复…
发表回复
《非程序员》――和《程序员》同年(2001)诞生,却一直保持自己的独特风格,为众多高阶软件人员所青睐。每月发行一期,杂志将长久保持免费下载的电子形式。

了解UMLChina
软件以用为本。不能为客户提供所需价值的软件是可悲的。以前,开发人员以“专家”自居,客户心存敬畏,认为自己“不懂”,不敢提需求,不敢评判。最终的结果是产生了许多“鸡肋”软件――软件做出来了,也能运行,却不提供想要的价值!现在,客户的胆子大了!软件只不过是帮助我完成业务、提高效率、赚取利润的工具而已!我要的软件要能够为我的业务提供价值,运行架构还要符合我的实际情况,还要有足够的可靠性、灵活性、可用性…。软件组织的“好日子”不再有,不得不关心这些问题:如何捕获有价值的用户需求,如何组织需求,如何获得良好的软件结构,如何获得稳定的性能,如何提高软件的可用性…。
软件(技术)以用为本。不能为软件组织实际使用的技术是可悲的。为了提升软件质量,许多软件组织都在谋求技术的改进:需求的技术、分析设计的技术、增量迭代的技术、构件组装的技术……我们搜索,我们买书,我们看书,我们讨论,我们试用...但学到的技术如果不能最终用于自己的项目之中,将是极大的浪费。而这最后一段路最是艰难。
《非程序员》――和《程序员》同年(2001)诞生,却一直保持自己的独特风格,为众多高阶软件人员所青睐。每月发行一期,杂志将长久保持免费下载的电子形式。

了解UMLChina
软件以用为本。不能为客户提供所需价值的软件是可悲的。以前,开发人员以“专家”自居,客户心存敬畏,认为自己“不懂”,不敢提需求,不敢评判。最终的结果是产生了许多“鸡肋”软件――软件做出来了,也能运行,却不提供想要的价值!现在,客户的胆子大了!软件只不过是帮助我完成业务、提高效率、赚取利润的工具而已!我要的软件要能够为我的业务提供价值,运行架构还要符合我的实际情况,还要有足够的可靠性、灵活性、可用性…。软件组织的“好日子”不再有,不得不关心这些问题:如何捕获有价值的用户需求,如何组织需求,如何获得良好的软件结构,如何获得稳定的性能,如何提高软件的可用性…。
软件(技术)以用为本。不能为软件组织实际使用的技术是可悲的。为了提升软件质量,许多软件组织都在谋求技术的改进:需求的技术、分析设计的技术、增量迭代的技术、构件组装的技术……我们搜索,我们买书,我们看书,我们讨论,我们试用...但学到的技术如果不能最终用于自己的项目之中,将是极大的浪费。而这最后一段路最是艰难。

682

社区成员

发帖
与我相关
我的任务
社区描述
提出问题
其他 技术论坛(原bbs)
社区管理员
  • community_281
加入社区
  • 近7日
  • 近30日
  • 至今
社区公告
暂无公告

试试用AI创作助手写篇文章吧