Bill Moggridge talk at Ideo tonight

2 Nov 2006 - 1:02am
8 years ago
18 replies
669 reads
Greg Petroff
2004

Hi All,

I saw a nice talk by Bill Moggridge at Ideo in Palo Alto this evening where
he presented some parts of his new book, "Designing Interactions". There is
a nice web companion to the book at:

http://www.designinginteractions.com/
The video interviews are great. Check out his interview with Bill Verplank.
I did not know that Moggridge and Verplank were the originators of the name
"interaction design" for what we do.

--Greg

--
Gregory Petroff
greg.petroff(at)gmail.com

Comments

2 Nov 2006 - 7:07am
Joel Eden
2006

Greg,

I got the book about a week ago, and it's funny that I didn't even know that
there was a DVD in the back until I read about it on the web page (from the
link you sent). I was so into looking at the pictures and the info is so
great in the book that I just hadn't looked at the inside of the back. Great
"hidden" feature.

Joel

On 11/2/06, Gregory Petroff <greg.petroff at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted
> material.]
>
> Hi All,
>
> I saw a nice talk by Bill Moggridge at Ideo in Palo Alto this evening
> where
> he presented some parts of his new book, "Designing Interactions". There
> is
> a nice web companion to the book at:
>
> http://www.designinginteractions.com/
> The video interviews are great. Check out his interview with Bill
> Verplank.
> I did not know that Moggridge and Verplank were the originators of the
> name
> "interaction design" for what we do.
>
> --Greg
>

2 Nov 2006 - 6:07pm
Christopher Fahey
2005

What I love about Bill Moggridge's new book is that there's not a single
mention of anybody from the current 'IA scene'.

I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with the 'IA scene' -- it's just
interesting to be reminded that the world of interaction design, like most
other fields of study and practice, is disparate, diverse, and loosely
connected.

-Cf

Christopher Fahey
____________________________
Behavior
http://www.behaviordesign.com
me: http://www.graphpaper.com

2 Nov 2006 - 9:10pm
Cwodtke
2004

I find that a depressing reminder of how silo'd we are despite having overlapping concerns. Why does everyone think they are the only owner of solutions? We're a profession not a religeon.

-----Original Message-----

From: "Christopher Fahey" <chris.fahey at behaviordesign.com>
Subj: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Bill Moggridge talk at Ideo tonight
Date: Thu Nov 2, 2006 4:07 pm
Size: 1K
To: "'Gregory Petroff'" <greg.petroff at gmail.com>,"'ixda'" <discuss at ixda.org>

[Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]

What I love about Bill Moggridge's new book is that there's not a single
mention of anybody from the current 'IA scene'.

I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with the 'IA scene' -- it's just
interesting to be reminded that the world of interaction design, like most
other fields of study and practice, is disparate, diverse, and loosely
connected.

-Cf

Christopher Fahey
____________________________
Behavior
http://www.behaviordesign.com
me: http://www.graphpaper.com

________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
(Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org

--- message truncated ---

2 Nov 2006 - 9:49pm
Dave Malouf
2005

Hiya,

Christine, i didn't take chris' comment to be a siloing, but in fact the
exact opposite. He was trying to break the siloing that the IA community
has done by ignoring the broader design roots that pre-existed its creation.

It is rare in the UX community to really look deeper into its pre-Web
past for a more solid grounding in design theory and UCD practice. This
has been (my interpretation and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone) something
that the IA community in particular has faced.

While most of us (according to a poll IxDA did about 18 months ago) work
in web related areas, there has been quite a bit of revisionist history
within the IA community specifically and the UX community more generally
to think that it all begins and ends with our advent.

As someone who is soon to be moving away from the Web world and into the
device world, we need to be cognizant that the Ideo's, Smart, Design
Continuum's, Ziba's, and Frog's of the world are barely connected to the
UX community as IDSA has no real connection to this world, but all of
these organizations have been and continue to do vibrant and relevant UX
work that has very little to do with the web but everything to do with
good IxD.

Peter Merholz's recent organizing venture of the IDEA conference should
be commended as an attempt by an IA leader to get the IA community to
see beyond itself and gain insight into others who are working to solve
information space (virtual or physical) problems.

What I hear from Chris is really just describing it how it is, was, and
seems to be headed within the IA community and an appreciation of the
longer roots within IxD as a discipline. I don't see silos there, just
analysis.

-- dave

-- dave

cwodtke at eleganthack.com wrote:
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]
>
> I find that a depressing reminder of how silo'd we are despite having overlapping concerns. Why does everyone think they are the only owner of solutions? We're a profession not a religeon.
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: "Christopher Fahey" <chris.fahey at behaviordesign.com>
> Subj: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Bill Moggridge talk at Ideo tonight
> Date: Thu Nov 2, 2006 4:07 pm
> Size: 1K
> To: "'Gregory Petroff'" <greg.petroff at gmail.com>,"'ixda'" <discuss at ixda.org>
>
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]
>
> What I love about Bill Moggridge's new book is that there's not a single
> mention of anybody from the current 'IA scene'.
>
> I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with the 'IA scene' -- it's just
> interesting to be reminded that the world of interaction design, like most
> other fields of study and practice, is disparate, diverse, and loosely
> connected.
>
> -Cf
>
> Christopher Fahey
> ____________________________
> Behavior
> http://www.behaviordesign.com
> me: http://www.graphpaper.com
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>
> --- message truncated ---
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>

2 Nov 2006 - 10:37pm
Bill DeRouchey
2010

> Hiya,
>
> It is rare in the UX community to really look deeper into its pre-Web
> past for a more solid grounding in design theory and UCD practice. This
> has been (my interpretation and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone) something
> that the IA community in particular has faced.
>
> ...
>
> As someone who is soon to be moving away from the Web world and into the
> device world, we need to be cognizant that the Ideo's, Smart, Design
> Continuum's, Ziba's, and Frog's of the world are barely connected to the
> UX community as IDSA has no real connection to this world, but all of
> these organizations have been and continue to do vibrant and relevant UX
> work that has very little to do with the web but everything to do with
> good IxD.

As someone from ZIBA, I feel like I should chime in here. I can't speak
for the other fine companies, but it's true, ZIBA as a whole isn't
formally tied to the UX community. Until just a handful of years ago, the
UX community was mostly concerned with the onscreen world and the product
design companies with the offscreen world. But only recently have these
two worlds begun to overlap. Recognizing this overlap, they've been
gracious to send me to the last two IA Summits and I'll be there again
next year. This time, I will hopefully be co-running a workshop,
representing a ZIBA angle on experience architecture.

So while the formal, corporate-level allegiance isn't there, we're
connecting to the UX community through our IxD group. But I do actually
doubt that you will see a grand allegiance with the UX community (although
I shouldn't speak for the company as a whole here) because we're also
trying to see beyond the silos. We use IxD when appropriate, IA when
appropriate, industrial design when appropriate, environmental design when
appropriate. The only real goal is to create the right design,
cross-pollinating whatever tools that make the most sense to use for
tackling the challenge at hand.

And on a side note, back to your note about the UX community rarely
looking into its pre-Web past, that's exactly why I've been researching
the history of the (push)button. Interaction design and information
architecture are practices far older than the terms themselves. Looking at
how we tackled analogous problems of 20, 50, 80 years ago helps us to
understand where we are now. We can't avoid just the silos of fields and
practices, we have to also avoid the silos of time.

> Peter Merholz's recent organizing venture of the IDEA conference should
> be commended as an attempt by an IA leader to get the IA community to
> see beyond itself and gain insight into others who are working to solve
> information space (virtual or physical) problems.

I really wish I could've attended this and I look forward to the audios.

Bill
ZIBA Design, IxD Group
History of the Button

3 Nov 2006 - 8:57am
Cwodtke
2004

I agree 100% that Chris's comment was positive. But I find it depressing
that IDEO and others often act as if IA had never happened.

> It is rare in the UX community to really look deeper into its pre-Web
> past for a more solid grounding in design theory and UCD practice. This
> has been (my interpretation and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone) something
> that the IA community in particular has faced.
>
Oh please. IA is insanely rooted in library science, one of the oldest
professions. Pretty much all IA's have read Winograd, Lakoff, Cooper,
Hackos/Redish, Tufte, Constantine, and have built their practice on the
shoulders of IxD giants, as well as information retrieval giants. (I may
also point out that most modern IxD's are similarly well educated, as
far as I can tell.) The past is easy to learn from because the
classics have emerged.

While the past is critical to our education, I wonder how often IA, IxD,
and all UX people are ignoring progress in their neighbor fields? Too
often (and I go to a LOT of presentations locally in Silicon Valley) I
see individuals from some of those great firms you mentioning holding
forth on topics where their has been a ton of advancement in related
fields yet they seem to be utterly unaware, and they are expounding on
outdated and misleading information.

What we are seeing right now is a terrifying convergence... terrifying
because sleep may be a luxury we'll have to give up... IxD's are going
to have to learn about good information retrieval practices, IA's will
have to understand device design&form factors and product designers will
have to take up more and more good interaction practices. And all of
these professions have been hurtling forward at breakneck speeds in
their areas of specialization. And new ones are popping up every day.

I think Chris saw the water half-full, and I saw it half-empty. But I
haven't been sleeping much lately....

4 Nov 2006 - 7:58am
Ted Booth
2004

To be a devil's advocate (can't resist) ...

Christina, why should they care? What is it that the 'IA scene' actually, tangibly brings to product design and development? How does IA help design teams create more innovative hardware/software products? If IA is rooted in library science does the contribution boil down to taxonomy and classification? If so, how does that help you create a cell phone that will best the RAZR or an MP3 player to beat the iPod?

As somone who has worked on web sites, web applications, device-side application UI and hardware UI, I don't see the obvious and unique 'eureka' insights that IA brings. There are shared techniques, parallel concepts and interesting notions, but you get that from a lot of other practices/professions. Perhaps this is obvious to you, please share.

Ted

On Friday, November 03, 2006, at 07:01AM, "Christina Wodtke" <cwodtke at eleganthack.com> wrote:
>[Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]
>
>I agree 100% that Chris's comment was positive. But I find it depressing
>that IDEO and others often act as if IA had never happened.

4 Nov 2006 - 9:14am
morville
2010

The iPod is a nice example. Faceted classification, which provides access by
format, song, artist, and album (plus shuffle) is a key part of the user
experience at the device level. In addition, the iPod is wedded to iTunes, a
large, complex information system that relies on organization, labeling,
search, navigation, personalization, and recommendation systems. It would
strike me as unfair to argue that information architecture has nothing
unique or significant to contribute to the design and improvement of similar
transmedia experiences.

I've included (way below) a relevant post by Peter Merholz and (just below)
a couple more relevant resources.

http://www.greenonions.com/portfolio/dbrown_ia2005_musiclibraryarchitectures
.pdf

http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/0201/0323.html

Cheers!

Peter Morville
President, Semantic Studios
http://semanticstudios.com/
http://findability.org/

-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com
[mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Edwin
Booth
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 8:58 AM
To: Christina Wodtke
Cc: 'ixda'
Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Bill Moggridge talk at Ideo tonight

[Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]

To be a devil's advocate (can't resist) ...

Christina, why should they care? What is it that the 'IA scene' actually,
tangibly brings to product design and development? How does IA help design
teams create more innovative hardware/software products? If IA is rooted in
library science does the contribution boil down to taxonomy and
classification? If so, how does that help you create a cell phone that will
best the RAZR or an MP3 player to beat the iPod?

As somone who has worked on web sites, web applications, device-side
application UI and hardware UI, I don't see the obvious and unique 'eureka'
insights that IA brings. There are shared techniques, parallel concepts and
interesting notions, but you get that from a lot of other
practices/professions. Perhaps this is obvious to you, please share.

Ted

---

[iai-members] Apple pays $100MM for ipod information architecture

From: Peter Merholz <peterme at peterme.com>
To: iai-members at iainstitute.org
Date: Aug 24 2006 - 10:14am

Apple to pay $100 million in iPod patent disputes
http://tinyurl.com/g86qj
"Creative, developer of the Zen digital media player, had sued the
Cupertino technology company this year, charging that the iPod took
its patent-protected technology to sort and organize thousands of
songs."

If you look at the patent:
http://tinyurl.com/fvu8n

You realize that this was a patent on information architecture for a
portable music player.
"1. A method of selecting at least one track from a plurality of
tracks stored in a computer-readable medium of a portable media
player configured to present sequentially a first, second, and third
display screen on the display of the media player, the plurality of
tracks accessed according to a hierarchy, the hierarchy having a
plurality of categories, subcategories, and items respectively in a
first, second, and third level of the hierarchy, the method
comprising: selecting a category in the first display screen of the
portable media player; displaying the subcategories belonging to the
selected category in a listing presented in the second display
screen; selecting a subcategory in the second display screen;
displaying the items belonging to the selected subcategory in a
listing presented in the third display screen; and accessing at least
one track based on a selection made in one of the display screens."

There's also a description of faceted classification without using
either of those words:
"One aspect of the invention includes an overlapping hierarchy of
categories. Categories include items that can also be included in
other categories so that the categories "overlap" with each other.
Thus, a song title can be accessed in multiple different ways by
starting with different categories. For example, a preferred
embodiment of the invention uses the top-level categories "Albums",
"Artists", "Genres" (or styles), and "Play Lists". Within the Albums
category are names of different albums of songs stored in the device.
Within each album are the album tracks, or songs, associated with
that album. Similarly, the Artists category includes names of artists
which are, in turn, associated with their albums and songs. The Genre
category includes types of categories of music such as "Rock", "Hip
Hop", "Rap", "Easy Listening", etc. Within these sub-categories are
found associated songs. Finally, the "Play Lists" category includes
collections of albums and/or songs which are typically defined by the
user."

--peter

_______________________________________________
IA Institute members mailing list
Post to this list: iai-members at lists.iainstitute.org
List information (including archives and unsubscribing:
http://lists.iainstitute.org/listinfo.cgi/iai-members-iainstitute.org

4 Nov 2006 - 9:30am
Cwodtke
2004

Well, considering that the devices you mention are for information
retrieval and use, and those devices (especially the phones) are
notoriously crappy for finding anything, maybe the argument makes itself.

As a former IA on this list, I can tell you 99% of what is discussed
here is what we've already figured out in IA, and one could make a
pretty good argument that Interaction Design has nothing to offer IA
based on that. But the reality is, we both know that's not true. It is
true that emerging practices in search, in device design, in social
network analysis are all things that could make, say my Treo, a lot more
useful and usable. I saw a senior (way senior) individual from Ideo on a
panel recently and honestly I was shocked about how little he knew or
understood about human behavior in information spaces. I wonder if he'd
ever consider reading Morville's book to address it, or if he felt his
rich background in IxD history gave him all he needed to make (wrong)
judgments about the space.

To dismiss an entire profession, no matter what profession, as having
nothing useful to teach is the height of hubris.

Edwin Booth wrote:
> To be a devil's advocate (can't resist) ...
>
> Christina, why should they care? What is it that the 'IA scene' actually, tangibly brings to product design and development? How does IA help design teams create more innovative hardware/software products? If IA is rooted in library science does the contribution boil down to taxonomy and classification? If so, how does that help you create a cell phone that will best the RAZR or an MP3 player to beat the iPod?
>
> As somone who has worked on web sites, web applications, device-side application UI and hardware UI, I don't see the obvious and unique 'eureka' insights that IA brings. There are shared techniques, parallel concepts and interesting notions, but you get that from a lot of other practices/professions. Perhaps this is obvious to you, please share.
>
> Ted
>
> On Friday, November 03, 2006, at 07:01AM, "Christina Wodtke" <cwodtke at eleganthack.com> wrote:
>
>> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]
>>
>> I agree 100% that Chris's comment was positive. But I find it depressing
>> that IDEO and others often act as if IA had never happened.
>>

--
Christina Wodtke
Principal Instigator

Magazine :: http://www.boxesandarrows.com
Business :: http://www.publicsquarehq.com
Personal :: http://www.eleganthack.com
Book :: http://www.blueprintsfortheweb.com

cwodtke at eleganthack.com

4 Nov 2006 - 10:20am
Dan Saffer
2003

On Nov 4, 2006, at 7:30 AM, Christina Wodtke wrote:

> As a former IA on this list, I can tell you 99% of what is discussed
> here is what we've already figured out in IA, and one could make a
> pretty good argument that Interaction Design has nothing to offer IA
> based on that.

This reminds me of my favorite Lou Rosenfeld quote:

"...we often see interaction design and IA compared. Let’s
acknowledge once and for all that information architecture is the
more difficult of the two. Interaction design addresses a finite
realm of problems. Huge, but finite..."

http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/
the_indie_life_talking_with_louis_rosenfeld

Apparently denigrating professions works both ways. :)

(This is from 2002 and his reasoning is so very Web-centric. I wonder
if Lou still believes this?)

Dan

4 Nov 2006 - 10:37am
Dave Malouf
2005

> Well, considering that the devices you mention are for information
> retrieval and use, and those devices (especially the phones) are
> notoriously crappy for finding anything, maybe the argument
> makes itself.

I totally agree with Christina that IA is relevant in these cases, but I
would stress not all.

I also think that not all "navigation" is IA driven, but rather behaviorally
driven. Using a CD player (not an MP3 player) which has navigation I would
not call an information space b/c while there is "information in play", it
is more about information design. The navigation is about programming which
is more about behavior of the system and the user accessing that behavior.

A simple bar code scanner that has a single button and a laser light is an
device that requires behavior and captures information, but I wouldn't call
it an information space.

On the other hand, I cannot think of a single IA problem that does not have
a behavioral (IxD problem to it).

To Christina's point though about some IxDs not knowing enough about IA, I
totally agree and visa versa. I have heard luminaries of IA speak about
their problem sets which they claim they have thought deeply about to miss
the contextual behavioral use problems associated with them.

There is much to learn from all sides and if this is indeed a venn diagram
then there are places where our specialities probably offer so much focus
that the other speciality gets a bit blinded. Maybe we should start thinking
of all this as the Korean Yin/Yang equivalent with 3 pieces (right?).
Structure, Behavior, Presentation. The point of any Yin/Yang representation
is that you can never remove one of the components because there is always a
nugget in the center right when you think you don't have it any more.

Hmmm?

Of course we could bring in the old axiom is that it is all just "Design",
but I don't believe in that either. There is too much information around the
different disciplines and I believe (thus my work here) is that each needs
its own focus and then to present that focused education to others both
inside that space and outside that space. I mean where are we without
Business & Technology, right?

Maybe there is a fractal here that zooms in and out along these various
triumphurates (sp?) ... The next one up is Business, Design, Technology.

Anyway, I'm rambling ... It just seems everyone is right, but might be
stating a too focused view of the problem, or pieces that make the others
feel that their view is not being considered.

-- dave

4 Nov 2006 - 11:02am
Jared M. Spool
2003

At 11:20 AM 11/4/2006, Dan Saffer wrote:
>On Nov 4, 2006, at 7:30 AM, Christina Wodtke wrote:
>
> > As a former IA on this list, I can tell you 99% of what is discussed
> > here is what we've already figured out in IA, and one could make a
> > pretty good argument that Interaction Design has nothing to offer IA
> > based on that.
>
>This reminds me of my favorite Lou Rosenfeld quote:
>
>"...we often see interaction design and IA compared. Let's
>acknowledge once and for all that information architecture is the
>more difficult of the two. Interaction design addresses a finite
>realm of problems. Huge, but finite..."
>
>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/
>the_indie_life_talking_with_louis_rosenfeld
>
>Apparently denigrating professions works both ways. :)
>
>(This is from 2002 and his reasoning is so very Web-centric. I wonder
>if Lou still believes this?)

First, I'm excited to read the Moggridge book and want to thank Gregory for
posting it. I'm disappointed that this thread has turned in this direction
when it should be about celebrating what could be another seminal book in
our work. I would love to see us continue to talk about the contributions
this book can make and how we might use it. (I'm already considering using
it in my Experience Design Management course at Tufts.)

Second, I'm not surprised about the "Our discipline is better than your
discipline" nature of this conversation. It's not unique to the UX world.
Just a little while ago, I was listening to some of the world's best
Cardiologists argue with some of the world's premier Pulmonologists using
the exact same discourse, sans the discpline names. Apparently, everything
done in Cardiology today was discovered my Pulmonology years ago, and vice
versa.

This tells me that this type of discipline-bashing is a symptomatic
response of a more systemic problem: we don't have good tools to share what
we know. We can learn a lot by diving deep into a discipline (say, IA, IxD,
or e-commerce), but that makes our learning myopic. We can try to cover
multiple disciplines, but the demand is way too hard. (In the field of
biology alone, there are more than 10,000 new research papers published
every year. How can any biologist keep up on what is "known"?)

Interestingly, at UIE, we regularly communicate with more than 20,000
people interested in UX related fields. And most of these have no
allegiance to one discipline or another. Most don't refer to themselves as
an interaction designer or an information architect. They just think of
themselves as the people responsible for making a system as good as it
could be. How do we serve those people, by getting them the information
they need to do their jobs as well as possible?

Can we get a good night's rest, snap out of this bickering about whose
personal name tag has better foundations, and focus on how we get our
entire community to know what they need to know to create winning designs?
That's the question I'm most interested in.

Jared

Jared M. Spool, Founding Principal, User Interface Engineering
510 Turnpike Street, Suite 102, North Andover, MA 01845
978 327-5561 jspool at uie.com http://www.uie.com
Blog: http://www.uie.com/brainsparks

4 Nov 2006 - 11:23am
Dan Saffer
2003

On Nov 4, 2006, at 9:02 AM, Jared M. Spool wrote:

> First, I'm excited to read the Moggridge book and want to thank
> Gregory for posting it. I'm disappointed that this thread has
> turned in this direction when it should be about celebrating what
> could be another seminal book in our work. I would love to see us
> continue to talk about the contributions this book can make and how
> we might use it. (I'm already considering using it in my Experience
> Design Management course at Tufts.)

You're absolutely right Jared. And I can't wait to read Bill's book
myself...when it arrives in JANUARY (which is the latest estimate
according to Amazon). What gives? Small print run??

Dan

4 Nov 2006 - 11:57am
russwilson
2005

Dan - I actually received mine this past week from Amazon.

________________________________

From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com on behalf of Dan Saffer
Sent: Sat 11/4/2006 11:23 AM
To: ixda
Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Bill Moggridge talk at Ideo tonight

[Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]

On Nov 4, 2006, at 9:02 AM, Jared M. Spool wrote:

> First, I'm excited to read the Moggridge book and want to thank
> Gregory for posting it. I'm disappointed that this thread has
> turned in this direction when it should be about celebrating what
> could be another seminal book in our work. I would love to see us
> continue to talk about the contributions this book can make and how
> we might use it. (I'm already considering using it in my Experience
> Design Management course at Tufts.)

You're absolutely right Jared. And I can't wait to read Bill's book
myself...when it arrives in JANUARY (which is the latest estimate
according to Amazon). What gives? Small print run??

Dan

________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
(Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org <http://resources.ixda.org/>

4 Nov 2006 - 1:29pm
Cwodtke
2004

Rereading this sentence, I realized that I hadn't made my point clear,
and that I would catch it for doing so (me and john kerry,
misunderstood! ;-)

99% of what is said on IA lists is stuff interaction design has already
figured it. and 99% of what is said on both lists is what web designers
have figured it. That's the fault of lists, not the professions... and
it's okay. Lists tend to recycle information, and people new to the
profession, either by being in another profession or just getting out of
college, need to ask the questions, and the old folks need to discuss
and refine the answers.

If i had read inmates instead of the polar book in 1998, I would have
called myself an interaction designer and maybe made a few different
friends, but actually done almost nothing different in my job. A job is
not equal to a profession. Informations architecture has many things to
teach IxD, and IxD has many things to teach IA. But guess what, so does
information design, product design, cognitive psychology.... and all of
these fields are moving forward at a rapid pace.

You can't tell me you haven't been at a conference listing to a talking
head thinking, "That ossified old fart, they haven't learned a darn
thing since 2001." The past can teach us, but the present is teaching us
also. And IA and IxD are more alike than ever before because of the
blend of information spaces in which you can interact, refining,
recreating, remixing that information. Neither can afford to ignore the
other.

Dan Saffer wrote:
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]
>
>
> On Nov 4, 2006, at 7:30 AM, Christina Wodtke wrote:
>
>
>> As a former IA on this list, I can tell you 99% of what is discussed
>> here is what we've already figured out in IA, and one could make a
>> pretty good argument that Interaction Design has nothing to offer IA
>> based on that.
>>
>
> This reminds me of my favorite Lou Rosenfeld quote:
>
> "...we often see interaction design and IA compared. Let’s
> acknowledge once and for all that information architecture is the
> more difficult of the two. Interaction design addresses a finite
> realm of problems. Huge, but finite..."
>
> http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/
> the_indie_life_talking_with_louis_rosenfeld
>
> Apparently denigrating professions works both ways. :)
>
> (This is from 2002 and his reasoning is so very Web-centric. I wonder
> if Lou still believes this?)
>
>
> Dan
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>

--
Christina Wodtke
Principal Instigator

Magazine :: http://www.boxesandarrows.com
Business :: http://www.publicsquarehq.com
Personal :: http://www.eleganthack.com
Book :: http://www.blueprintsfortheweb.com

cwodtke at eleganthack.com

7 Nov 2006 - 1:52am
Matt Davies
2004

On 4 Nov 2006, at 17:23, Dan Saffer wrote:

> You're absolutely right Jared. And I can't wait to read Bill's book
> myself...when it arrives in JANUARY (which is the latest estimate
> according to Amazon). What gives? Small print run??

Dan - I just got my copy through from Amazon in the UK today.....

7 Nov 2006 - 8:37am
Dan Saffer
2003

On Nov 6, 2006, at 11:52 PM, Matt Davies wrote:

> On 4 Nov 2006, at 17:23, Dan Saffer wrote:
>
>> You're absolutely right Jared. And I can't wait to read Bill's book
>> myself...when it arrives in JANUARY (which is the latest estimate
>> according to Amazon). What gives? Small print run??
>
> Dan - I just got my copy through from Amazon in the UK today.....

Yeah, Amazon just changed their tune. I just got notice mine should
arrive this week. Weird.

7 Nov 2006 - 10:34am
ldebett
2004

Hey Dan... cool thing... Amazon (according to my view) is selling this book
together with yours under their "Better Together" selling section! =)

~Lisa de

On 11/7/06, Dan Saffer <dan at odannyboy.com> wrote:
>
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted
> material.]
>
>
> On Nov 6, 2006, at 11:52 PM, Matt Davies wrote:
>
> > On 4 Nov 2006, at 17:23, Dan Saffer wrote:
> >
> >> You're absolutely right Jared. And I can't wait to read Bill's book
> >> myself...when it arrives in JANUARY (which is the latest estimate
> >> according to Amazon). What gives? Small print run??
> >
> > Dan - I just got my copy through from Amazon in the UK today.....
>
> Yeah, Amazon just changed their tune. I just got notice mine should
> arrive this week. Weird.
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>

Syndicate content Get the feed