Skip to main content

Two Hex and a User

I wanted to post two related hex graphs that give us some good mind food to munch on while we work. The first is more general and tells us seven points of User Experience Design. Take a step back and ask yourself:
  • Useful - Is the software even useful?
  • Usable - What it does is useful, but is it usable?
  • Findable - Can the user find what they need to use?
  • Accessible - Can all the users access it?
  • Desirable - Do the users want your 1 software?
  • Valuable - Is your software valuable enough for the user to retain?
  • Credible - Does the software look fake or are you trusted?

Up second, adapted from the original for social software purposes. We're beginning to see more and more social software, and the seven elements given here fit nicely into all the services I use.
  • Twitter - Presence and sharing (of presence) and conversations (about presence).
  • Blogger - Conversations, reputation (comment count), sharing (ideas), groups and relationships (informal; by linking).
  • MySpace - I hate MySpace, but I use it anyway. Relationships and groups are obviously the focus.
I take this in and consider how we break up these elements into different services, and the focus of each service on one or a few elements benefits us. Twitter does great at what it does, etc. But the separation also harms us. The little widgets we can put on different places to connect the services together only go so far. I have too many feeds, but obviously I can't send all my "tweets" through this feed, as is. So we're getting good at breaking things up, but I'm really waiting for how we'll bring it all back together.



1: Two separate emphasis given.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why I Switched From Git to Microsoft OneDrive

I made the unexpected move with a string of recent projects to drop Git to sync between my different computers in favor of OneDrive, the file sync offering from Microsoft. Its like Dropbox, but "enterprise."

Feeling a little ashamed at what I previously would have scoffed at should I hear of it from another developer, I felt a little write up of the why and the experience could be a good idea. Now, I should emphasize that I'm not dropping Git for all my projects, just specific kinds of projects. I've been making this change in habit for projects that are just for me, not shared with anyone else. It has been especially helpful in projects I work on sporadically. More on why a little later.

So, what drove me away from Git, exactly?

On the smallest projects, like game jam hacks, I just wanted to code. I didn't want to think about revisions and commit messages. I didn't need branching or merges. I didn't even need to rollback to another version, ever. I just …

Respect and Code Reviews

Code Reviews in a development team only function best, or possible at all, when everyone approaches them with respect. That’s something I’ve usually taken for granted because I’ve had the opportunity to work with amazing developers who shine not just in their technical skills but in their interpersonal skills on a team. That isn’t always the case, so I’m going to put into words something that often exists just in assumptions.
You have to respect your code. This is first only because the nature and intent of code reviews are to safeguard the quality of your code, so even having code reviews demonstrates a baseline of respect for that code. But, maybe not everyone on the team has the same level of respect or entered a team with existing review traditions that they aren’t acquainted with.
There can be culture shock when you enter a team that’s really heavy on code reviews, but also if you enter a team or interact with a colleague who doesn’t share that level of respect for the process or…

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this.


CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer. 
One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC?

It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on. The only re…