Thoughtful Interaction Design (Response) / Week 3

Part 1: Link

Part 2: With reference to CH 1 from Jonas Löwgren and Erik Stolterman, Thoughtful Interaction Design.

Both Löwgren and Stolterman adopted a realistic approach towards the theory of critical design, and recognise the limitation that all designs will always be imperfect, due to the complexity of the design situation. However, through the prediction of social systems and technical components, the product is able to achieve success, or a systemic whole. Hence, they propose that good design is still possible, dependent on the designer.

Later, the authors mentioned that writing acts as the medium to create, but instead the ultimate created product depends on the designer. As his role as the final steward in the production process, the thoughtful designer depends on the theoretics of knowing and predicting in attempting to determine the usefulness of the product for consumers, as part of what they term ‘design as knowledge construction’. The writing tends to edge towards the more practical aspects of a product; if applied to art, it fails to account for the consumer desire for art which cannot be quantified using a theoretical formula.

On a similar scale, they also term digital products ‘Digitial Artefacts’ – namely, designed things built around a core of information technology. The products thus ‘impact on everyday lives’, be it individually or socially, and subsequently the environment and therefore the nature in which we live in. As an extension to this theory, the products are not restricted to simply being a catalyst in helping us function our everyday lives, but also, to perhaps, shape and alter it in hopefully beneficial ways. The way we now live in this constructed world can be purposefully and deliberately changed by us.

In particular, smart home technology, fosters this alteration in an ambitious attempt to further streamline our way of living. In my personal opinion, one of the reasons why such technology has not achieved widespread success is that of it being hard to alter our habits of living (cultural aspect), and also that it might be too intrusive into our everyday lives. Nevertheless, it remains a breakthrough in which interactive design strives to break out beyond being simply contained to a singular body, to affecting the wider environment.

 

Example projects of thoughtfully designed interactive experience:

(1)

Impulse, installation (2015) Montreal, Canada, for Place Des Festivals Image Credit from dezeen.com
Impulse, installation (2015) Montreal, Canada, for Place Des Festivals Image Credit from dezeen.com

Impulse: dezeen.com

Impulse is a digital installation fruited from a collaborative effort by Canadian designers and artists, consisting of 30 illuminated see-saws. Each see-saw was fitted with LEDs and speakers, and when played with, changes its light intensity and sound. Together, the 30 see-saws produce a melody.

The installation successfully incorporates play, an inherent humanistic feature, into a musical artwork, to engage the users in both auditory and kinaesthetic functions. Granted, the see saws will attract users on its own, but the added dimension of music and attractive lighting enhances the playing experience.

(2)

Apple Elastic Scrolling once user reaches bottom of the page
Apple Elastic Scrolling once user reaches bottom of the page

Gif Credit: interaction-design.org

Part of the Apple iOS, the elastic scrolling is activated at the bottom of a webpage on a web browser. It gives user a cohesive and organic realisation of himself reaching the end of the page, rather than an abrupt ending.

(3)

Spectacles by Snapchat, 2015
Spectacles by Snapchat, 2015

Image Credit: Spectacles by Snap

Spectacles by Snapchat is a recording device that syncs with the Snapchat application on your phone. It’s sole function is to record videos, by pressing the button at the side of the Spectacles. Relatively simple, it functions solely for its only purpose.

Designing for the Digital Age (Response) / Week 2

Part 2:
Read CH 1 from Kim Goodwin, Designing for the Digital Age

Write a response to the reading and post 2 questions to the reading.

 

Two questions:

  1. Can there ever be a designed good that would suit the needs of all the projected personas of users?
  2. Would serving the human need guarantee long-term success for the product? Assuming that other factors such as project management and marketing are considered successful.

Designing for the Digital Age by Kim Goodwin, offers readers a detailed breakdown of the design process. While I do agree with her points, the first chapter could be better studied under certain cases which I would address in this response. With respect to today’s current digital age, there is an increasingly crucial need to adapt as user types and means of affordance are constantly changing. Not only does the visual styles of society change, the availability of multiple design companies on the market saturates the market with generally similar goods. Traditional methodology of creating goods to suit the tested and tried human need will no longer be a design breakthrough in today’s world, rather, I believe that recognising the unrealised human need and thus cater to it would help to distinct one’s design from the others.

It would be interesting to explore the definition of ‘human need’ itself (Goodwin defines design as, ‘the craft of visualising concrete solutions that serve human needs and goals within certain constrains’ (Goodwin, 3)). With respect to different personas, their needs would vary – a socialite would need a luxury bag to be compatible with her social status, while a worker with a labour intensive job would need just a durable work bag to store his equipment. As such, the goals of these two cases would differ, despite both items holding the same purpose for storage, and accordingly, the principles, process and practices.

Let us explore the concept of bespoke gifts. The situation has now been transformed, of designing an individualised product for a particular group of customers. In my opinion, the goal of the design no longer simply seeks to simply satisfy the human need, but rather to fulfil the want. Should the deadline be tightened if it is a last minute job, the project length will have to be shortened, potentially sacrificing some design aspects with speed. As mentioned in the text, design has to be within certain constrains: be it time-wise or resource availability. As such, I have come to realise that there will always be an inherent limitation in design, that designers will constantly try to overcome.