On 8/3/2015 7:46 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Interaction design = design that implements features that facilitate
> useful user interaction, rather than features that are focused on "we
> implemented this feature, and here's an interface to use it".
>
> For example, if you have an application that protects web resources, the
> interface needs to facilitate protecting web resources - it should not
> focus on configuring individual objects that are used to protect those
> resources, and leave it to the user to figure out how they are related to
> each other.
>
> Tie idea is that there needs to be some elegance and simplicity in the
> design.*Most*  software "design" is done during development, rather than
> preceding it, and so the form follows the interface rather than designing
> how the interface workflow should work, and then using that as
> scaffolding for the underlying code that takes care of the details.


I think I disagree with that concept.
For me, education is King or Queen. (I am an equal opportunity know it all.)
When you start simplifying complex software to the extent you think the 
man on the Clapham omnibus can operate it without any training. You are 
doing no one any favours. I learnt a word recently. It is nerfed. And 
that is the Micro$oft way.
Form should follow function, not the other way around.
IMO

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message