-Scott
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 6:57 AM, Thorsten Wilms
<t_w_@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 2010-05-14 at 11:37 +0200, Jan-Christoph Borchardt wrote:
> That is exactly why interaction needs to be intuitive and not require learning.
This is totally unrealistic. Humans can't even walk or talk without
learning.
Some say the nipple would be the only intuitive interface. I've been
told that not even breast feeding just works on first try ...
Also see:
http://www.uie.com/articles/design_intuitive/
The thing that makes people think something would be "intuitive" is
actually familiarity. It might be useful to think of familiarity coming
from 3 sources:
* Physical, real world experience that can be leveraged with metaphors
and pseudo-physical interface elements (or perhaps custom interface
hardware).
* Experience with existing software.
* Concepts/thought-models from specific fields.
I think the term "intuitive" should be avoided, banned even, from
further discussion. It's a symptom of a lack of understanding in this
field.
--
Thorsten Wilms
thorwil's design for free software:
http://thorwil.wordpress.com/
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
Post to : ayatana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
--
Scott Armitage,
B.A.Sc.,
M.A.Sc. candidate
Space Flight Laboratory
University of Toronto Institute for Aerospace Studies
4925 Dufferin Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M3H 5T6