UIQ or Windows smartphone??

11 Aug 2005 - 12:40am
439 reads


Can anyone help me with information on usage of UIQ & Windows based mobile
phone. Which of the two is widely used. Any stats to support your views???


----- Original Message -----
From: "Reimann, Robert" <Robert_Reimann at bose.com>
To: <discuss at ixdg.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 2:28 AM
Subject: RE: [ID Discuss] Good commentary on physical vs virtual interface

> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted
> I completely agree with the author's basic arguments, but not
> his semantics, which I believe seriously confuse several issues.
> He seems to be equating "logical and economical" with "behaves
> like a typical desktop computer UI". But most desktop interfaces,
> with their hierarchical menus, filesystems, and tree-navigation of
> functional objects, data objects, and decisions, are anything
> but "elegant, economical, or simple" by any definition of those
> terms I would care to use, especially in the context of CE products.
> The argument that people don't want or appreciate "elegance" is
> completely inside out. The problem is that many designers/developers
> of CE gadgets don't understand the meaning of elegance, simplicity,
> or logic when it comes to user experience, which is this: providing
> a strong mapping to customer mental models, common behaviors, and
> goals. The author (without coming out and saying so) calls
> this "intuition", but he is falsely opposing this concept with
> what he is calling "elegance" and "logic".
> I believe that what the author is attempting to say is that
> user mental models and behaviors need to define CE interfaces,
> not an externally imposed logical structure that makes for
> easy implementation or is some designer/developer's uninformed
> (by user research) opinion of what he thinks makes sense. In
> other words, products need to be designed around the *user's*
> logic, not the developer's.
> One final point seems to have eluded the author: that
> most people don't use all the features of CE devices because
> they are in fact not useful features for the target customer, and
> have been added as a result of feature creep and checklist
> parity. Time and again it has been demonstrated that a product
> with fewer but well-targeted features that support user behaviors
> and goals are perceived as better, more intuitive, and even
> more powerful products than products which provide a large feature
> set within a poorly targeted design.
> Robert.
> ---
> Robert Reimann
> Manager, User Interface Design and Research
> Bose Corporation
> The Mountain
> Framingham, MA 01701
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> discuss-interactiondesigners.com-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com
> [mailto:discuss-interactiondesigners.com-bounces at lists.interactiondesign
> ers.com] On Behalf Of Coryndon Luxmoore
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 8:32 AM
> To: discuss at ixdg.org
> Subject: [ID Discuss] Good commentary on physical vs virtual interface
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted
> material.]
> http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/digital-cameras/guest-commentary-the-
> fallacy-of-logical-design-116448.php
> _______________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Group!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixdg.org
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://discuss.ixdg.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixdg.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixdg.org
> Home ....................... http://ixdg.org/

Syndicate content Get the feed