Putting the DESIGN back in ID.

2 Dec 2005 - 1:36am
8 years ago
32 replies
673 reads
CD Evans
2004

Hello there, I'm trying my darndest to keep reading a design list which
focuses on business. Can we all take a cognitive test and admit that
design is an art form?

(It is.)

I'd like it if we could all send in some links on what they consider ID
to actually be. For example, here's a bunch of projects which are much
more interesting than your typical regurgitated form elements.

http://www.index2005.dk/

How about you? Do you have links to sites which put the Design word
back on this list?

Let's put the DESIGN back in ID!

Send in your links!!!

CD Evans

Comments

2 Dec 2005 - 8:05am
Dave Malouf
2005

So funny you should bring this up. Robert and I were talking about this
topic just last night.

Design is not a science. That statement I would totally agree with. Design
uses artform. I would agree with that statement. But design is the
application of creativity for solving problems. Once you take away problems
which have constraints in reality (someimes that reality is centered around
business) than you have art and have actually LOST the DESIGN in IxD.

So while I agree with you that especially on the software side there is
often too much about deliverables, evaluation, and research discussed on
this list, I do think that there is plenty of room to discuss the praxis of
divergent creative thinking in the context of practical design. This would
speak to the IDEO "deep dive" approach as well as many other design school
approaches to design of all forms, not just IxD.

That being said, unlike graphic artists and industrial designers, there is a
relationship to the engineers in our industry that makes it hard for us to
step outside. When I say this I mean to say that we are evolving this
relationship. There was a time in the industrial era when industrial
designers had similar problems with manufacturing, mechanical, and materials
engineers and I bit a few of them today would say they still have the same
problems. But those relationships have matured, and the relationship has a
new set of expectations from both the engineering and the manufacturing
side. However, many a product designer today would say they don’t have
enough time to do the level of quality they know they can do if they had
that time to be more creative.

There is always a balance, and when you put something new on a scale it
bounces like a pendullum as it moves to find its equillibrium. I think we
are still moving back and forth. (remember when web sites were all about
being pretty in the late 90's?)

So for our own sakes we are best off to keep looking at all the possible
influencers and directions so that we can work towards finding that balance.

As for my favorite examples of IxD ...
I'm so cliché ... But I haven't found anything better than my iPod and my
Treo at this point. Not what you were hoping for I'm sure, but these design
systems are amazing. I'd follow it up w/ the IKEA experience (so long as my
drill is charged) and then my IM client.

-- dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com
> [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On
> Behalf Of CD Evans
> Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 1:37 AM
> To: discuss at lists.interactiondesigners.com
> Subject: [IxDA Discuss] Putting the DESIGN back in ID.
>
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant
> quoted material.]
>
>
> Hello there, I'm trying my darndest to keep reading a design
> list which
> focuses on business. Can we all take a cognitive test and admit that
> design is an art form?
>
> (It is.)
>
> I'd like it if we could all send in some links on what they
> consider ID
> to actually be. For example, here's a bunch of projects which
> are much
> more interesting than your typical regurgitated form elements.
>
> http://www.index2005.dk/
>
> How about you? Do you have links to sites which put the Design word
> back on this list?
>
> Let's put the DESIGN back in ID!
>
> Send in your links!!!
>
> CD Evans
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>

2 Dec 2005 - 8:13am
niklasw
2005

I like this idea. If you don't mind I suggest this should form a new
category called "Design - Art and aesthetics in interaction design" or
something in the http://resources.ixda.org/ site.

A Swedish contribution is The Interactive Institute,
http://w3.tii.se/en/ which I think fall into this category. Among
other things they created "a game where you compete in relaxation. The
players' brainwaves control a ball on a table, and the more relaxed
scores a goal over the opponent." From their site:

"Interactive Institute is an experimental IT-research institute which
creates results through combining art, design and technology."

--Niklas

On 02/12/05, CD Evans <cd at infostyling.com> wrote:
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]
>
>
> Hello there, I'm trying my darndest to keep reading a design list which
> focuses on business. Can we all take a cognitive test and admit that
> design is an art form?
>
> (It is.)
>
> I'd like it if we couldall send in some links on what they consider ID
> to actually be. For example, here's a bunch of projects which are much
> more interesting than your typical regurgitated form elements.
>
> http://www.index2005.dk/
>
> How about you? Do you have links to sites which put the Design word
> back on this list?
>
> Let's put the DESIGN back in ID!
>
> Send in your links!!!
>
> CD Evans
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>

2 Dec 2005 - 8:17am
Dave Malouf
2005

I forgot one thought.

Pushing beyond constraints is necessary for evolving the discipline as a
form of practice. It must never stop happening. Exploration of these limits
is the only way to both understand the constraints imposed and discover that
these constraints are not really constraints at all.

But this is not the same as ignoring constraints.

-- dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com
> [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On
> Behalf Of David Heller
> Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 8:06 AM
> To: discuss at lists.interactiondesigners.com
> Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Putting the DESIGN back in ID.
>
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant
> quoted material.]
>
>

2 Dec 2005 - 3:25pm
CD Evans
2004

Dave,

You are a fundamentalist.

You completely ruined a perfectly good thread with evangelical
nonsense. I hoped to have good designs finally posted to this list,
without blagging and bollocks, but no, you had to cut in like a matador
at a wedding.

Personally, I don't want my country influenced any more by this type of
business driven design logic. I think we need a list without many
Americans. Period. My appologies, I hate to sound racist, but American
design is about money and not culture. Design is art, not business, and
I'm against this corrupt fundamentalist functionalism, and lack thereof
that it creates.

I'm not going to stand by silently and watch decent designs get
replaced by business bullocks designs anymore. We can all design better
remote controls without ROI or RIAs.

I'll be announcing a list for more interesting discussion soon. And it
won't be based in the states. And, how's this for a profit driven
model? Americans have to pay to be on it. After all, you get what you
pay for.

Kindly
CD Evans

On 2 Dec 2005, at 12:01, discuss-request at lists.interactiondesigners.com
wrote:

> Message: 14
> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 08:17:25 -0500
> From: "David Heller" <dave at ixda.org>
> Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Putting the DESIGN back in ID.
> To: <discuss at lists.interactiondesigners.com>
> Message-ID: <004201c5f742$bd69b1d0$6501a8c0 at DT>
>
> I forgot one thought.
>
> Pushing beyond constraints is necessary for evolving the discipline as
> a
> form of practice. It must never stop happening. Exploration of these
> limits
> is the only way to both understand the constraints imposed and
> discover that
> these constraints are not really constraints at all.
>
> But this is not the same as ignoring constraints.
>
> -- dave

2 Dec 2005 - 8:03pm
Andy Kirkwood, ...
2005

Hi CD,

> I hoped to have good designs finally posted to this list,

Maybe it would help to define your expectations of 'good' design?

In defense of David, I think his intent may have been to suggest a framework for identifying candidates for inclusion (rather than promoting design in the service of business over design that supports leisure, entertainment, education, etc.).

>but American
>design is about money and not culture. Design is art, not business

Design processes may be undertaken for a number of ends. Business/commerce is no more nor less a legitimate end. If the field is interaction design, then the response of a user is a significant consideration--a focus on how a person can use a 'thing'.

To make a broad generalisation, art is more often about the expression of a personal view. Although interaction may be used by an artist as a technique for engaging the viewer, more often art itself is not 'used' in the same sense.

In New Zealand we have tertiary-level art schools and design schools. Some aspects of the respective curricular overlap, for example papers that deal with technique or art and design history. On the whole though, the self-declared 'artist' is a very different beast to the self-declared 'designer'.

Given the recently slanging on the list, I'm thinking of starting a 'hug an American' campaign. Perhaps it should be kicked off in Idaho? ;)

Best regards,

--
Andy Kirkwood
Motive: net communication -- with intent
http://www.motive.co.nz

2 Dec 2005 - 9:04pm
penguinstorm
2005

On Dec-2-2005, at 5:03 PM, Andy Kirkwood, Motive wrote:

>> I hoped to have good designs finally posted to this list,
>
> Maybe it would help to define your expectations of 'good' design?

You also need to define "design."

To many, good design includes a broad array of considerations.
Product design, for example, includes massive functional
considerations. a recent Fast Company story talked about Oxo's
mistakes with respect to a bagel slicer. It's online.

Visual design is not necessarily the most important aspect of
software, web or interaction design. It's just one of a range of
factors. For some apps, it may be the most important (Nintendo
promotional site? Probably pretty important.) For others, it may be
much lower on the list (online banking, online brokerage? Usability
is going to be critical.)
--
Scott Nelson
skot (at) penguinstorm (dot) com
http://www.penguinstorm.com/

skype. skot.nelson

2 Dec 2005 - 10:35pm
Ryan Betts
2005

>I like this idea. If you don't mind I suggest this should form a new
>category called "Design - Art and aesthetics in interaction design" or
>something in the http://resources.ixda.org/ site.

I am fully in support of this idea. As an undergrad student, I first came
across the IxDA while searching for an Interaction Design community that
could help me better understand the role of the field. The program i'm
enrolled in at SFU in Vancouver is pretty new, and it was only in 3rd year
that the term "Interaction Design" began being tossed around to describe
what some of us are doing.

To be honest, I've been a bit discouraged by the predominant discussion
topics of LEDs and screen resolutions. I understand that there are
constraints and practical requirements that limit a designer's role if they
are wanting to make money in a company that has a traditional view of what
design is, but I think the honus is on us to build a demand for more
interesting, challenging, and 'artistic' work. How do we do that? I don't
really know, but things like Brainball aren't only appealing to the people I
go to school with. They appeal to something that gets people excited -
Brainball is the kind of thing that I bet nobody would have said they
needed, but that everybody will line up to play now that it's been made. I
think IxD is a field where there's a lot of potential for cool things like
this to happen, and for us to carve out a role as the 'go to' profession for
this kind of radical output.

I had the benefit of being able to listen to and interview some prolific
designers like Andrea Branzi and Isao Hosoe, and they won't shut up about
the 'poetic' or 'spiritual' aspects of design - which is great. Sure,
there's not going to always be a ton of money up for grabs when most
companies have the goal of short-term profits, but these qualities of design
are what can make or break the R&D output, and good R&D will give a company
long-term sustainability in a market. I've been following great discussions
over the past year on www.worldchanging.com, Doors of Perception, and at the
Massive Change conference that have a really sober approach to 'radical'
design. I think there is a lot of energy out there right now geared towards
realistic change and I'd like to see the word IxD coming up more in those
discussions.

And think about the children...
I've been letting a lot of the students (granted they aren't children - most
of them are smarter and older than me) in the 2nd year design class that I
TA know about the IxDA site and mailing list, and so a section on the more
radical side of the field, and more discussion about it in general, would be
a great opportunity to strengthen their interest in the field. They have an
awesome amount of energy and creativity, and I think that they could bring a
lot to the IxDA - they just need an avenue for contribution. The "Art and
Aesthetics in Interaction Design" section could be a good place to start.

Cheers.
-Ryan Betts

2 Dec 2005 - 9:19pm
LukeW
2004

“Design is hard to do. Design is not art. But design has some of the
requirements of art. The achievement of greatness in art or design
requires passionate virtuosity. Virtuosity means thorough mastery of
craft. Passion is required to focus human effort to a level that
transcends the norm.” -Bruce Sterling, 2005

This continues in his new book (or rather design manifesto) Shaping
Things, 2005 MIT Press
highly recommened reading :)

On Dec 1, 2005, at 10:36 PM, CD Evans wrote:
> Hello there, I'm trying my darndest to keep reading a design list
> which
> focuses on business. Can we all take a cognitive test and admit that
> design is an art form?
>
> (It is.)

::
:: Luke Wroblewski -[ www.lukew.com ]
:: Principal, LukeW Interface Designs
:: luke at lukew.com | 408.879.9826
::

3 Dec 2005 - 1:37pm
Dan Saffer
2003

On Dec 2, 2005, at 7:35 PM, Ryan Betts wrote:

> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted
> material.]
>
>> I like this idea. If you don't mind I suggest this should form a new
>> category called "Design - Art and aesthetics in interaction
>> design" or
>> something in the http://resources.ixda.org/ site.
>

We're currently in the process of re-thinking the resource library,
and we'll definitely consider adding this category in. (One of the re-
thinking thoughts is that as things like this come up, anyone will be
able to add a category, wiki-style.)

There's some really interesting work in this art/interaction design
area, especially coming out of MIT.

John Maeda
http://www.maedastudio.com/

Casey Raes
http://reas.com/

Ben Fry
http://acg.media.mit.edu/people/fry/

Golin Levin
http://www.flong.com/

Josh Nimoy
http://www.jtnimoy.com/

Dan Saffer
Sr. Interaction Designer, Adaptive Path
http://www.adaptivepath.com
http://www.odannyboy.com

3 Dec 2005 - 3:09pm
Andy Kirkwood, ...
2005

>Skot said:
>You also need to define "design."
>
>To many, good design includes a broad array of considerations.
>Product design, for example, includes massive functional
>considerations. a recent Fast Company story talked about Oxo's
>mistakes with respect to a bagel slicer. It's online.

I disagree using the notion of functional considerations as a means of differentiating between art and design. A more relevant approach is to consider of the intent of the creator; is the endpoint self-expression (art); or creativity on behalf of a client (design). Artist also have to consider 'broad functional considerations', particularly when moving away from 'oils on canvas' as the medium (kinetic sculpture is one form that comes to mind). The distinction between art and design is best made by a consideration of the intent of the creator and context for the creative act.

Likewise, the number of variables (the 'broad array of considerations') is a poor criteria for determining whether design is 'good'. A modernist perspective would equate 'good' with the fitting of form to function. Post modern theory would throw the perceived value or reading of the 'thing' (by the consumer/user) into the mix.

When it comes to interaction design I value elegance. A companion concept being the removal of barriers between the consumer/user and the object/experience.

--
Andy Kirkwood
Motive: net communication -- with intent
http://www.motive.co.nz

3 Dec 2005 - 3:42pm
penguinstorm
2005

On Dec-3-2005, at 12:09 PM, Andy Kirkwood, Motive wrote:

> Likewise, the number of variables (the 'broad array of
> considerations') is a poor criteria for determining whether design
> is 'good'.
>
> When it comes to interaction design I value elegance.

Ok. So do I.

But I'm hoping this isn't meant to suggest that we should judge all
design on the basis one criteria - "elegance."

What works for Nintendo isn't going to work for Chase-Manhattan, and
vice-versa. The needs and success of their interaction design
initiatives need to be measured in a context. 8 your old boys looking
to play Mario Kart probably don't have the same respect for elegance
that you do.
--
Scott Nelson
skot (at) penguinstorm (dot) com
http://www.penguinstorm.com/

skype. skot.nelson

3 Dec 2005 - 4:06pm
Marc Rettig
2004

CD's statement below was both provocative and a surprise. But then, "art" is
one of those words with slippery semantics, just like "design." I have no
problem that he believes this statement (Hi CD), but I don't want the
statement to pass without an explanation of why I/some/many believe doing
design is quite different than doing art.

I believe one could design a work of art. And some people certainly bring
artistic skill to the work of design, and create artful results. But I don't
believe we can rightfully look at someone tapping into some inner artistic
vision, popping out with a result, and say they designed that result. CD, I
have no idea whether this is what you intended by your statement.

Artistic skill or artistic results aren't what determines whether someone is
"designing" or "making art." As a parallel question, what determines whether
someone is "doing science?" In the scientific community, the answer can be:

if they are applying the Scientific Method, they are doing science. While
Design doesn't have a strong history of clearly articulating its core
process in the way Science has, there IS a Design Process, and to me it is
the heart of design, the power of design. (And by the way, this has nothing
to do with whether the effort is related to business or not.)

It's going to take me a few days to cook an explanation of this. I thought
if I posted my intent publicly, I'd be less likely to let this get lost in
the busy week to come. So stay tuned... I'm working on an elaboration of the
previous paragraph, and will post a link here soon.

Cheers,

Marc Rettig

On Dec 1, 2005, at 10:36 PM, CD Evans wrote:

> Hello there, I'm trying my darndest to keep reading a design list

> which focuses on business. Can we all take a cognitive test and admit

> that design is an art form?

>

> (It is.)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Marc Rettig
Fit Associates
412-215-0026 cell
<mailto:marc at fitassociates.com> marc at fitassociates.com

3 Dec 2005 - 2:59pm
Dwayne King
2005

On 12/2/05, CD Evans <cd at infostyling.com> wrote:
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]
>
>
> Dave,
>
> You are a fundamentalist.
>

So now, who's the fundamentalist again?

The piece of fundamentalism that is relevant to your charge, I'm
thinking is "...upholds belief in the strict and literal
interpretation..."

Help me out here, is the guy that says that there's a lot of elements
to weigh and a pendulum swing of attitudes to deal with, or the guy
that says that design is being changed by Americans and ruining it?

Suggestion: buy a dictionary and take a good hard look in the mirror
before accusing others of your weakness.

>You completely ruined a perfectly good thread with evangelical
>nonsense.
>

If a thread can be "completely ruined" by one person stating his
opinion, me thinks the thread wasn't all that good to start with.

> Personally, I don't want my country influenced any more by this type of
> business driven design logic. I think we need a list without many
> Americans. Period. My appologies, I hate to sound racist, but American
> design is about money and not culture.

So is it fair to say Canadian's are wimps and the Irish are a bunch of
drunks? As long as we're stereotyping, let's dig out all the slurs
that make this world such a pleasant place to live.

>
> I'll be announcing a list for more interesting discussion soon.

Don't bother to let me know.

3 Dec 2005 - 3:57pm
Christopher Demeter
2005

I rather think that "Americans" come in many races, so you needn't
worry about sounding "racist" per se. :) I do wholeheartedly agree
with you about American design concerning itself more withe reaping
profit than culture or cultural contribution (for the most part). May
I, a mere first generation American, join your discussion list free
of charge once it's established? :) Despite the generalizations, I
like what you have to say...

On Dec 2, 2005, at 12:25 PM, discuss-
request at lists.interactiondesigners.com wrote:

> From: CD Evans <cd at infostyling.com>
> Date: December 2, 2005 12:25:54 PM PST
> To: discuss at lists.interactiondesigners.com
> Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Putting the DESIGN back in ID.
>
>
>
> Dave,
>
> You are a fundamentalist.
>
> You completely ruined a perfectly good thread with evangelical
> nonsense. I hoped to have good designs finally posted to this list,
> without blagging and bollocks, but no, you had to cut in like a
> matador at a wedding.
>
> Personally, I don't want my country influenced any more by this
> type of business driven design logic. I think we need a list
> without many Americans. Period. My appologies, I hate to sound
> racist, but American design is about money and not culture. Design
> is art, not business, and I'm against this corrupt fundamentalist
> functionalism, and lack thereof that it creates.
>
> I'm not going to stand by silently and watch decent designs get
> replaced by business bullocks designs anymore. We can all design
> better remote controls without ROI or RIAs.
>
> I'll be announcing a list for more interesting discussion soon. And
> it won't be based in the states. And, how's this for a profit
> driven model? Americans have to pay to be on it. After all, you get
> what you pay for.
>
> Kindly
> CD Evans

3 Dec 2005 - 4:35pm
penguinstorm
2005

On Dec-3-2005, at 11:59 AM, Dwayne King wrote:

> So is it fair to say Canadian's are wimps

Hey - let's take this out on the ice in a good old hockey game and
see who the wimps are ;D
--
Scott Nelson
skot (at) penguinstorm (dot) com
http://www.penguinstorm.com/

skype. skot.nelson

3 Dec 2005 - 5:14pm
Andy Kirkwood, ...
2005

>Skot said:
>But I'm hoping this isn't meant to suggest that we should judge all design on the basis one criteria - "elegance."

No, each to their own favourite adjective. I find 'elegant' resonates more for me as aim/measure of the quality of interaction than 'good'. However (IMO) the concept of elegance in interaction design is transferrable

>Skot also said:
>What works for Nintendo isn't going to work for Chase-Manhattan, and vice-versa. The needs and success of their interaction design initiatives need to be measured in a context. 8 your old boys looking to play Mario Kart probably don't have the same respect for elegance that you do.

To pick up on the Mario Kart example, 'elegance' could mean that the motion of using a controller corresponds to an expected and meaningful change of the on-screen avatar. The less disconnect there is between the physical action and the on-screen response the more 'elegant' the interaction. This elegance will exist whether or not the user is conscious or 'respects' it.

I agree that is inappropriate to gauge the 'goodness' of interaction design without identifying context. This is one of the reasons why I view interactive media design awards with skepticism. (warning: sweeping generalisation ahead)Unless the judges are the target audience *and* in the appropriate context for use, they are invariably assessing how a 'thing' looks rather than how it 'works'.

I distinguish between form-follows-function and 'elegance' to make room for the idea of craft in interaction design. As an example, real world buttons come in all shapes and sizes, however some buttons are more 'fun' or 'satisfying' to push than others (inference to provocative discussion list postings not intended).

Perhaps it's useful to consider the dimensions of interaction design through the framework of craft (rather than art). Maybe even picking up on usability factors [1] to help identify what 'craft' in interaction design encompasses, e.g.
-Ease of learning
-Efficiency of use
-Memorability
-Error frequency and severity
-Subjective satisfaction [1]

[1] Usability factors < http://usability.gov/basics/index.html >
* I reference this source I find these factors easy to recall. Feel free to reference your own personal guru ;)

--
Andy Kirkwood
Motive: net communication -- with intent
http://www.motive.co.nz

3 Dec 2005 - 5:14pm
Anjali Arora, NYU
2004

The regional antagonisms apart, I do see what CD is saying (or at least that's how I'm interpreting it): that exposure to a variety of design experiences, be they in furniture or architecture or textile can be a huge spur to our creativity, even if our daily work will have no room for these. For example, I am intrigued by the subject of emotional & aesthetic design, but have found really very little inspiration in the web/ digital applications realm. And yet here are two links to works I admire:

a.. Technology & feeling: The work of Kenya Hara: http://www.idonline.com/features/feature.asp?id=1530
b.. Ephemere by Char Davies: Her site at http://www.immersence.com/ seems to be down at the moment but for a brief introduction to her work check this: http://stage.itp.nyu.edu/history/timeline/ephemere.html
And I'm not so sure the twain can't meet: art & design. In fact, during my recent meetings with folk from two major global companies, I understood that they needed more of the artist in their interaction & visual designers!
-Anjali
www.artbrush.net

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Kirkwood, Motive" <andy at motive.co.nz>
To: <discuss at lists.interactiondesigners.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 3:09 PM
Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Putting the DESIGN back in ID.

> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]
>
> >Skot said:
> >You also need to define "design."
> >
> >To many, good design includes a broad array of considerations.
> >Product design, for example, includes massive functional
> >considerations. a recent Fast Company story talked about Oxo's
> >mistakes with respect to a bagel slicer. It's online.
>
> I disagree using the notion of functional considerations as a means of differentiating between art and design. A more relevant approach is to consider of the intent of the creator; is the endpoint self-expression (art); or creativity on behalf of a client (design). Artist also have to consider 'broad functional considerations', particularly when moving away from 'oils on canvas' as the medium (kinetic sculpture is one form that comes to mind). The distinction between art and design is best made by a consideration of the intent of the creator and context for the creative act.
>
> Likewise, the number of variables (the 'broad array of considerations') is a poor criteria for determining whether design is 'good'. A modernist perspective would equate 'good' with the fitting of form to function. Post modern theory would throw the perceived value or reading of the 'thing' (by the consumer/user) into the mix.
>
> When it comes to interaction design I value elegance. A companion concept being the removal of barriers between the consumer/user and the object/experience.
>
> --
> Andy Kirkwood
> Motive: net communication -- with intent
> http://www.motive.co.nz
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org

3 Dec 2005 - 6:02pm
Andy Kirkwood, ...
2005

>Skot said:
>But you're still saying only one criteria matters, you're just using a different word? You're online disagreeing with the adjective of choice?

What I value I described loosely as ' elegance' (please note the use of personal pronouns). I find I can learn more from discussion when it is apparent the criteria people use when they say something is 'good'. e.g. Good how? Good why? Good when? Good for whom? The same applies for the term 'elegant', hence the introduction of the usability factors.

>Skot said:
>Sure. But that's not visual design, and it's not visual design as art as the thread started.

The original reference CD made for to 'art', and to me art is more than just the visual. I presumed that CD was seeking to acknowledge that measures of success for interaction design need not be limited to sales.

If your interest is in visual design (style, trends, etc.) may I suggest:
-Style Gala: < http://www.stylegala.com/ >
-CSS Zen Garden < http://www.csszengarden.com/ >

>Skot went on to say:
>So you're saying that "elegance" should be determined based on a broad array or criteria?

To make 'elegance' less subjective I've attempted to qualify it using the same factors that are used to assess the usability of a 'thing'. The usability factors include 'memorability' and 'subjective satisfaction'. Although the language is dry these factors do encompass aesthetics. Thought it might be useful. Not intended as dogma.

>I'm not sure I have a personal guru on this, or very many, topics. I know that it wouldn't be the American government on just about...anything really.

Anarchists unite! ;)

--
Andy Kirkwood | Creative Director

Motive | web.design.integrity
http://www.motive.co.nz
ph: (04) 3 800 800 fx: (04) 970 9693
mob: 021 369 693
93 Rintoul St, Newtown
PO Box 7150, Wellington South, New Zealand

3 Dec 2005 - 6:26pm
Larry Marine
2005

Sadly its this kind of flame war that drives folks away from unmoderated
discussion lists. Despite keeping a somewhat professional tone, I still find
this discussion rather petty and unprofessional. I belong to several, though
not many, lists and have found this one to be the least valuable. Couple
that with the occasional unprofessional diatribe and this list is no longer
worth much, to me, anyway.
Good bye.
Larry

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dwayne King" <pinpointlogic at gmail.com>
To: "CD Evans" <cd at infostyling.com>
Cc: <discuss at lists.interactiondesigners.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Putting the DESIGN back in ID.

> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted
> material.]
>
> On 12/2/05, CD Evans <cd at infostyling.com> wrote:
>> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted
>> material.]
>>
>>
>> Dave,
>>
>> You are a fundamentalist.
>>
>
> So now, who's the fundamentalist again?
>
> The piece of fundamentalism that is relevant to your charge, I'm
> thinking is "...upholds belief in the strict and literal
> interpretation..."
>
> Help me out here, is the guy that says that there's a lot of elements
> to weigh and a pendulum swing of attitudes to deal with, or the guy
> that says that design is being changed by Americans and ruining it?
>
> Suggestion: buy a dictionary and take a good hard look in the mirror
> before accusing others of your weakness.
>
>
>>You completely ruined a perfectly good thread with evangelical
>>nonsense.
>>
>
> If a thread can be "completely ruined" by one person stating his
> opinion, me thinks the thread wasn't all that good to start with.
>
>
>> Personally, I don't want my country influenced any more by this type of
>> business driven design logic. I think we need a list without many
>> Americans. Period. My appologies, I hate to sound racist, but American
>> design is about money and not culture.
>
> So is it fair to say Canadian's are wimps and the Irish are a bunch of
> drunks? As long as we're stereotyping, let's dig out all the slurs
> that make this world such a pleasant place to live.
>
>>
>> I'll be announcing a list for more interesting discussion soon.
>
> Don't bother to let me know.
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>

3 Dec 2005 - 7:10pm
dszuc
2005

"And I'm not so sure the twain can't meet: art & design." Yes I think they
can - "Leonardo da Vinci" - painter, designer, scientist, futurist and
thinker. Perhaps another discussion thread ... But what I find interesting
is where the balance of disciplines is working well and why? What product
teams support the best of all these disciplines & are making winning
products i.e. teams that (from the outside anyway) seem to have hit the
bulls eye. What are the factors?

Dan's Questions:

1. Is it luck?

2. Is it the hiring policy?

3. Is it embedded in corporate ethos? (a way of thinking) -
http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html (see number 1)

4. Is it process?

5. Is it a lack of competition for a while (first mover advantage)

6. Is it the genius of one (and everyone falls into line)

7. Others?

My guess is mix of above. If we can shed some light on this, we can help
other product teams that are looking to improve their products and process
(as we talk passionately about our own discipline).

Rgds,

Daniel Szuc
Principal Usability Consultant
Apogee Usability Asia Ltd
www.apogeehk.com
'Usability in Asia'

-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com
[mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Anjali
Arora
Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 6:15 AM
To: discuss at lists.interactiondesigners.com
Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Putting the DESIGN back in ID.

[Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted material.]

The regional antagonisms apart, I do see what CD is saying (or at least
that's how I'm interpreting it): that exposure to a variety of design
experiences, be they in furniture or architecture or textile can be a huge
spur to our creativity, even if our daily work will have no room for these.
For example, I am intrigued by the subject of emotional & aesthetic design,
but have found really very little inspiration in the web/ digital
applications realm. And yet here are two links to works I admire:

a.. Technology & feeling: The work of Kenya Hara:
http://www.idonline.com/features/feature.asp?id=1530
b.. Ephemere by Char Davies: Her site at http://www.immersence.com/ seems
to be down at the moment but for a brief introduction to her work check
this: http://stage.itp.nyu.edu/history/timeline/ephemere.html
And I'm not so sure the twain can't meet: art & design. In fact, during my
recent meetings with folk from two major global companies, I understood that
they needed more of the artist in their interaction & visual designers!
-Anjali www.artbrush.net

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Kirkwood, Motive" <andy at motive.co.nz>
To: <discuss at lists.interactiondesigners.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 3:09 PM
Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Putting the DESIGN back in ID.

> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted
> material.]
>
> >Skot said:
> >You also need to define "design."
> >
> >To many, good design includes a broad array of considerations.
> >Product design, for example, includes massive functional
> >considerations. a recent Fast Company story talked about Oxo's
> >mistakes with respect to a bagel slicer. It's online.
>
> I disagree using the notion of functional considerations as a means of
> differentiating between art and design. A more relevant approach is to
> consider of the intent of the creator; is the endpoint self-expression
> (art); or creativity on behalf of a client (design). Artist also have
> to consider 'broad functional considerations', particularly when
> moving away from 'oils on canvas' as the medium (kinetic sculpture is
> one form that comes to mind). The distinction between art and design
> is best made by a consideration of the intent of the creator and
> context for the creative act.
>
> Likewise, the number of variables (the 'broad array of
> considerations') is a poor criteria for determining whether design is
> 'good'. A modernist perspective would equate 'good' with the fitting
> of form to function. Post modern theory would throw the perceived
> value or reading of the 'thing' (by the consumer/user) into the mix.
>
> When it comes to interaction design I value elegance. A companion
> concept being the removal of barriers between the consumer/user and
> the object/experience.
>
> --
> Andy Kirkwood
> Motive: net communication -- with intent
> http://www.motive.co.nz
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
(Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org

3 Dec 2005 - 6:21pm
CD Evans
2004

No doubt.

There are plenty of good americans on this list, as I've heard from
since, Idaho would be a good solution.

I'd like to hear from the silent parties more, especially about how
american design seems to dominate design in every corner of the globe,
and what we can do to encourage local design.

I've seen one automobile in Canada designed here, the grizzly, I saw
one today in fact. It's the only one, and we only made a few hundred.
Why are we continually making products designed elsewhere?

We need American support in stopping this imperialism. I'm sure Idaho
could help.

CD Evans

On 2 Dec 2005, at 17:03, Andy Kirkwood, Motive wrote:

> Hi CD,
>
>> I hoped to have good designs finally posted to this list,
>
> Maybe it would help to define your expectations of 'good' design?
>
> In defense of David, I think his intent may have been to suggest a
> framework for identifying candidates for inclusion (rather than
> promoting design in the service of business over design that supports
> leisure, entertainment, education, etc.).
>
>> but American
>> design is about money and not culture. Design is art, not business
>
> Design processes may be undertaken for a number of ends.
> Business/commerce is no more nor less a legitimate end. If the field
> is interaction design, then the response of a user is a significant
> consideration--a focus on how a person can use a 'thing'.
>
> To make a broad generalisation, art is more often about the expression
> of a personal view. Although interaction may be used by an artist as a
> technique for engaging the viewer, more often art itself is not 'used'
> in the same sense.
>
> In New Zealand we have tertiary-level art schools and design schools.
> Some aspects of the respective curricular overlap, for example papers
> that deal with technique or art and design history. On the whole
> though, the self-declared 'artist' is a very different beast to the
> self-declared 'designer'.
>
> Given the recently slanging on the list, I'm thinking of starting a
> 'hug an American' campaign. Perhaps it should be kicked off in Idaho?
> ;)
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> Andy Kirkwood
> Motive: net communication -- with intent
> http://www.motive.co.nz
>

3 Dec 2005 - 6:28pm
CD Evans
2004

You drunk. How dare you fall for a weak shot like that? (funnny, eh?)

Listen, before anyone else gets offended by brash harsh canadian
slagging, can we realistically look at how many things have been
designed outside of the states?

Why are other countries buying and making u.s. products?

Please, try to have a bit of a sense of humour about the whole thing
eh, the rest of the world has to live with u.s. designs. I'd love to
export our stuff, anybody have a wholesaler that would want canadian
products?

CD Evans

On 3 Dec 2005, at 13:35, Skot Nelson wrote:

> On Dec-3-2005, at 11:59 AM, Dwayne King wrote:
>
>> So is it fair to say Canadian's are wimps
>
> Hey - let's take this out on the ice in a good old hockey game and see
> who the wimps are ;D
> --
> Scott Nelson
> skot (at) penguinstorm (dot) com
> http://www.penguinstorm.com/
>
> skype. skot.nelson
>
>

3 Dec 2005 - 7:53pm
Dave Malouf
2005

Hiya, For a quick start at a list of both US and non-US designs, I suggest
people take a look at the Business Week IDSA award set for 2005 called IDEA.

http://www.idsa.org/idea/idea2005/

I was at this event in August and I have to say I was really impressed by
the wealth and depth of global design. Sorry, CD, I don't remember any
Canadian, but Asian and European designs for me really set the bar. My
favorite design was this tractor farm machine ... Totally revolutionary and
very aesthetically pleasing. The work by Lenovo, Samsung, and others also
stood out.

Of course since this was BusinessWeek sponsored, I'm sure it could be said
that it was limited by a business perspective. But you asked for non-US
designs, and here are a mess-load of them here. Just an easy shot at it.

-- dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com
> [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On
> Behalf Of CD Evans
> Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 6:22 PM
> To: Andy Kirkwood, Motive
> Cc: discuss at lists.interactiondesigners.com
> Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Putting the DESIGN back in ID.
>
> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant
> quoted material.]
>
>
> No doubt.
>
> There are plenty of good americans on this list, as I've heard from
> since, Idaho would be a good solution.
>
> I'd like to hear from the silent parties more, especially about how
> american design seems to dominate design in every corner of
> the globe,
> and what we can do to encourage local design.
>
> I've seen one automobile in Canada designed here, the grizzly, I saw
> one today in fact. It's the only one, and we only made a few hundred.
> Why are we continually making products designed elsewhere?
>
> We need American support in stopping this imperialism. I'm sure Idaho
> could help.
>
> CD Evans
>
>
> On 2 Dec 2005, at 17:03, Andy Kirkwood, Motive wrote:
>
> > Hi CD,
> >
> >> I hoped to have good designs finally posted to this list,
> >
> > Maybe it would help to define your expectations of 'good' design?
> >
> > In defense of David, I think his intent may have been to suggest a
> > framework for identifying candidates for inclusion (rather than
> > promoting design in the service of business over design
> that supports
> > leisure, entertainment, education, etc.).
> >
> >> but American
> >> design is about money and not culture. Design is art, not business
> >
> > Design processes may be undertaken for a number of ends.
> > Business/commerce is no more nor less a legitimate end. If
> the field
> > is interaction design, then the response of a user is a significant
> > consideration--a focus on how a person can use a 'thing'.
> >
> > To make a broad generalisation, art is more often about the
> expression
> > of a personal view. Although interaction may be used by an
> artist as a
> > technique for engaging the viewer, more often art itself is
> not 'used'
> > in the same sense.
> >
> > In New Zealand we have tertiary-level art schools and
> design schools.
> > Some aspects of the respective curricular overlap, for
> example papers
> > that deal with technique or art and design history. On the whole
> > though, the self-declared 'artist' is a very different beast to the
> > self-declared 'designer'.
> >
> > Given the recently slanging on the list, I'm thinking of starting a
> > 'hug an American' campaign. Perhaps it should be kicked off
> in Idaho?
> > ;)
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > --
> > Andy Kirkwood
> > Motive: net communication -- with intent
> > http://www.motive.co.nz
> >
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>

3 Dec 2005 - 7:58pm
penguinstorm
2005

On Dec-3-2005, at 3:21 PM, CD Evans wrote:

> I'd like to hear from the silent parties more, especially about how
> american design seems to dominate design in every corner of the globe,

Ok. I'll bite. But only this last time, because this has just gotten
silly.

Huh?

Braun. Pininfarina. Japanese automobiles. German automobiles. Italian
racing bicycles. Giorgio Armani, Versace, Hugo Boss (designed those
snappy Nazi uniforms too). Japanese cameras. Dutch architecture.
Swiss fonts.

Does the list really need to go on? You need to back up your
assertion with examples. There are too many "corners of the globe"
where American design doesn't dominate.

Ikea, anyone?

> I've seen one automobile in Canada designed here, the grizzly, I saw
> one today in fact. It's the only one, and we only made a few hundred.
> Why are we continually making products designed elsewhere?

Bricklin.

> and what we can do to encourage local design.

Simple buy local. If you buy from local designers, you will encourage
local design.
--
Scott Nelson
skot (at) penguinstorm (dot) com
http://www.penguinstorm.com/

skype. skot.nelson

3 Dec 2005 - 8:08pm
Andy Kirkwood, ...
2005

>I'd like to hear from the silent parties more, especially about how american design seems to dominate design in every corner of the globe, and what we can do to encourage local design.

Often the strength of local design is connected to trade agreements and economic policy. Tariffs etc. that protect indigenous industries against cheaper imports mean that local industries can compete when labour and material costs are not comparable.

In New Zealand the government has invested in researching various industry sectors (screen, product design and information communication technology, etc.) with the aim of encouraging growth.
Task force reports: < http://www.nzte.govt.nz/section/13680.aspx >

Recommendations to encourage growth (meaning 'export') included appropriate training, setting and monitoring standards and industry-led member organisations (self-regulation). One outcome has been a government commitment to a "programmes to promote greater use of design by New Zealand businesses".
< http://gif.med.govt.nz/aboutgif/sectors.asp >

Part of this initiative is the Better by design website: < http://www.betterbydesign.org.nz/ >.

At the time that the research was carried out there was confusion within the New Zealand design industry (particularly with graphic design companies) as to what was meant by 'design' (and based on the mix of companies profiled on the website, this misunderstanding is still to be addressed, i.e. a design company provides design services rather than uses design). In the context of the research, design had more a focus on physical products than intangibles such as interface design. (Although everyone seems in agreement that 'brand' is incredibly important.)

>I've seen one automobile in Canada designed here, the grizzly, I saw one today in fact. It's the only one, and we only made a few hundred. Why are we continually making products designed elsewhere?

We had a (perhaps) comparable vehicle in the 1960s -- the Trekka. However, aside from fabrication of the vehicle shell, the chassis (engine, etc.) was imported from Czechoslovakia. Correctly differentiating between the local and the international/imported can be pretty difficult.

>We need American support in stopping this imperialism. I'm sure Idaho could help.

Unfortunately 'altruism' is not high on many government agendas...

Cheers,

--
Andy Kirkwood
Motive: net communication -- with intent
http://www.motive.co.nz

4 Dec 2005 - 12:02am
Andy
2005

> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com [mailto:discuss-
> bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of CD Evans
> Sent: Sunday, 4 December 2005 11:28 a.m.
> To: Skot Nelson
> Cc: discuss at lists.interactiondesigners.com
> Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Putting the DESIGN back in ID.
>
<snip>
>
> You drunk. How dare you fall for a weak shot like that? (funnny, eh?)
>
> Listen, before anyone else gets offended by brash harsh canadian
> slagging, can we realistically look at how many things have been
> designed outside of the states?
>
> Why are other countries buying and making u.s. products?

That’s a rather naïve statement. Consider that US exports are falling at
the moment $106bn down from $108bn and the US balance of payments is
negative (the US imports more by $60bn than it exports). I would say it’s a
rather ethnocentric statement at best. I would probably feel safer in
saying that at this point of time the US is being more heavily influenced by
foreign design that ever before.

Have a look at this site (http://www.census.gov/indicator/www/ustrade.html)
and see what the US actually imports to china for example. Aircraft I can
understand will have a lot of design influence, but cotton? I think not :)

For myself, apart from some books I brought off amazon.com, I don’t think I
have anything else in the house that is made in America and I would consider
that much of APAC would be the same.

How much does the US influence design - probably very little at best? Most
design is culture specific and the US only makes up only 4.6% of the worlds
population. Considering that the value of the world's currency is measured
in trillions of dollars, exporting only 100bn is pretty much next to
nothing. Which indicates that the US influence on designed products would
be fairly small as well?

The US often makes the mistake that the visible internet that they control
has the most impact on internet design, however, very few US companies
actually produce content for non-us sites (one always gets transferred to
the local instance), so many European, Asian and Russian demographics have
their own internet with its own cultural identity. From this I mean that if
you are a non-English speaking person, you often have as much chance of
being influenced by US internet design as a blind or deaf person has of
finding an accessible web site.

One could argue that the US has a heavy influence on the knowledge industry
which in itself may affect design, but even then, 3/4 of the planet don’t
have access to that information, so its unlikely they are going to make use
of it.

Just my thoughts on the subject :)

Andy

4 Dec 2005 - 2:28pm
CD Evans
2004

Skot,

That's an economic answer to a cultural problem.

Buy Local? That's like saying find a hardware shop, or a tailor, in the
age of walmart and home depot. There is no local anymore, it's all
imported. But it's designed in the states, a lot of it is.

I'm not going to play my harp forever on this one, but there is a
serious lack of normal understanding that major american business is a
problem.

Take the aids epidemic, they just want to 'design' more drugs, not to
find a cure. It's like like buying territories to sell crack in. And
this is design?

The computer is the same thing, there's not a single non-us operating
system. That's total madness. It's like selling garage doors in other
countries, they don't have garages!

There's a real lack of foresight on this list, and acceptance that the
rest of the world even exists.

CD Evans

On 3 Dec 2005, at 16:58, Skot Nelson wrote:

>
> On Dec-3-2005, at 3:21 PM, CD Evans wrote:
>
>> I'd like to hear from the silent parties more, especially about how
>> american design seems to dominate design in every corner of the globe,
>
> Ok. I'll bite. But only this last time, because this has just gotten
> silly.
>
> Huh?
>
> Braun. Pininfarina. Japanese automobiles. German automobiles. Italian
> racing bicycles. Giorgio Armani, Versace, Hugo Boss (designed those
> snappy Nazi uniforms too). Japanese cameras. Dutch architecture. Swiss
> fonts.
>
> Does the list really need to go on? You need to back up your assertion
> with examples. There are too many "corners of the globe" where
> American design doesn't dominate.
>
> Ikea, anyone?
>
>> I've seen one automobile in Canada designed here, the grizzly, I saw
>> one today in fact. It's the only one, and we only made a few hundred.
>> Why are we continually making products designed elsewhere?
>
> Bricklin.
>
>> and what we can do to encourage local design.
>
> Simple buy local. If you buy from local designers, you will encourage
> local design.
> --
> Scott Nelson
> skot (at) penguinstorm (dot) com
> http://www.penguinstorm.com/
>
> skype. skot.nelson
>
>

4 Dec 2005 - 2:37pm
Dave Malouf
2005

> The computer is the same thing, there's not a single non-us operating
> system. That's total madness. It's like selling garage doors in other
> countries, they don't have garages!

I didn't realize that Linux was American?
Yes, Unix is an invention from Bell Labs in the 70's I think, but the
inventor of Linux is Finnish, and Linux being open source is as Global a
project as they come.

I wonder if the issue is not "american" or "not american" but rather as you
put it "economic" vs. "cultural". B/c "american" values towards design are
probably being assimilated into other countries as well. I mean is Nokia's
design any different from Motorola's? Of course they are different on many
levels, but aren't the results so closely matched b/c of the economics of it
all? I mean what really differentiates their designs? Some great manifesto
of a European design school? And! In a world where manifestos x-boundaries
so quickly is it really localized anyway?

But back to the economic distinction ... Since economics is a HUGE
contributing factor to any cultural institution I'm not sure the distinction
is easy to make.

There are areas where economic boundaries or concerns are surpassed,
ignored, or outright challenged.

Something that came to mind is what Lou Rosenfeld recently blogged about. He
refernces this British project to design living in the UK. It is a re-design
of cultural institutions and infrastructure from the ground up (so I have
interpretted). The UK is pouring $50million into this project. Here is Lou's
blog entry: http://louisrosenfeld.com/home/bloug_archive/000407.html

-- dave

David Heller
http://synapticburn.com/
http://ixdg.org/
Dave (at) ixdg (dot) org
Dave (at) synapticburn (dot) com
AIM: bolinhanyc || Y!: dave_ux || MSN: hippiefunk at hotmail.com

4 Dec 2005 - 3:55pm
mojofat
2004

Maybe american design is simply better then? =)

Flame bait aside, I think I've been missing your point. Is your point
that no one country/culture should be a leader in any design, or is it
that "american" design is bad. Although, there could be a point made
that since america is an immigrant nation, its design is really a
cross-cultural world design.

-al

On Dec 4, 2005, at 11:28 AM, CD Evans wrote:

> [Please voluntarily trim replies to include only relevant quoted
> material.]
>
>
> Skot,
>
> That's an economic answer to a cultural problem.
>
> Buy Local? That's like saying find a hardware shop, or a tailor, in the
> age of walmart and home depot. There is no local anymore, it's all
> imported. But it's designed in the states, a lot of it is.
>
> I'm not going to play my harp forever on this one, but there is a
> serious lack of normal understanding that major american business is a
> problem.
>
> Take the aids epidemic, they just want to 'design' more drugs, not to
> find a cure. It's like like buying territories to sell crack in. And
> this is design?
>
> The computer is the same thing, there's not a single non-us operating
> system. That's total madness. It's like selling garage doors in other
> countries, they don't have garages!
>
> There's a real lack of foresight on this list, and acceptance that the
> rest of the world even exists.
>
> CD Evans
>
>
>
>
> On 3 Dec 2005, at 16:58, Skot Nelson wrote:
>
>>
>> On Dec-3-2005, at 3:21 PM, CD Evans wrote:
>>
>>> I'd like to hear from the silent parties more, especially about how
>>> american design seems to dominate design in every corner of the
>>> globe,
>>
>> Ok. I'll bite. But only this last time, because this has just gotten
>> silly.
>>
>> Huh?
>>
>> Braun. Pininfarina. Japanese automobiles. German automobiles. Italian
>> racing bicycles. Giorgio Armani, Versace, Hugo Boss (designed those
>> snappy Nazi uniforms too). Japanese cameras. Dutch architecture. Swiss
>> fonts.
>>
>> Does the list really need to go on? You need to back up your assertion
>> with examples. There are too many "corners of the globe" where
>> American design doesn't dominate.
>>
>> Ikea, anyone?
>>
>>> I've seen one automobile in Canada designed here, the grizzly, I saw
>>> one today in fact. It's the only one, and we only made a few hundred.
>>> Why are we continually making products designed elsewhere?
>>
>> Bricklin.
>>
>>> and what we can do to encourage local design.
>>
>> Simple buy local. If you buy from local designers, you will encourage
>> local design.
>> --
>> Scott Nelson
>> skot (at) penguinstorm (dot) com
>> http://www.penguinstorm.com/
>>
>> skype. skot.nelson
>>
>>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>
>

4 Dec 2005 - 4:31pm
natekendrick
2005

I can't believe I just read this incredibly ignorant statement below.

If IxDA members allow such blatant ignorance like this, then how can
any comments by any of the members be considered valuable?

Its a shame (no matter how flippant the comment is) to this list and
anyone that doesn't agree.

-Nathan Kendrick

On Dec 4, 2005, at 11:28 AM, CD Evans wrote:

> Take the aids epidemic, they just want to 'design' more drugs, not to
> find a cure. It's like like buying territories to sell crack in. And
> this is design?

4 Dec 2005 - 4:45pm
natekendrick
2005

I agree. And yet only Larry had the integrity to say even just his
simple statement. For, 20+ messages only about 4 of you made a brief
reference to CD's antagonistic language (at most, references to just
"get past it"), and some of you even carried on the racial slurs,
stereotypes, gross generalizations, and passive aggressive school
playground antics.

CD - you cannot simply state "Please, try to have a bit of a sense of
humour (...)" Anything to do with racial undertones or stereotypes is
not a laughing matter, it never is in any situation.

-Nathan Kendrick

On Dec 3, 2005, at 3:26 PM, Larry Marine wrote:

> Sadly its this kind of flame war that drives folks away from
> unmoderated
> discussion lists. Despite keeping a somewhat professional tone, I
> still find
> this discussion rather petty and unprofessional. I belong to
> several, though
> not many, lists and have found this one to be the least valuable.
> Couple
> that with the occasional unprofessional diatribe and this list is
> no longer
> worth much, to me, anyway.
> Good bye.
> Larry

4 Dec 2005 - 5:06pm
ldebett
2004

Are you kidding me?

Comments like these and others that have been racist, nationalist and
otherwise disrespectful should absolutely not be tolerated in this forum.
Please, have some respect for your audience.

~Lisa

> Take the aids epidemic, they just want to 'design' more drugs, not to
> find a cure. It's like like buying territories to sell crack in. And
> this is design?
>
>
>

Syndicate content Get the feed