Reading Fonology Ch1 Lets’s make things engaging

People all have sences and a body with which we can respond to what our environment affords.(Gibson, 1986)

人擁有感官與身體, 應該多使用這些技能來設計

*designer should use bodily skill more often

人是有感情的, 所以何不設計 more fun and beautiful experience的互動

*product should be reinstated to restore engagement.

*focuses on the neglected aspects of human-product interaction.

USD通常都是自稱這樣, 但卻沒有應用, USD可以顯示出對人的重視

與產品的互動可以分成三個levels: cognitive skills, perceptual-motor skills and emotional skills. In other words: knowing, doing, feeling, the wholly trinity of interaction(Overbeeke et al, 2002)

*Users are not interested in products; they are in search of challenging experiences. ==>所以設計師應該設計一個經驗而不是一個產品, 使用者可能會挑選一個困難的工具, 但可能是因為此工具充滿挑戰, 誘人, 但是卻可以創造出enjoyment的經驗。

*Bringing together “context for experience” and “aesthetics of interaction”

*the emphasis should shift from a beautiful appearance to beautiful interaction, to engaging interaction.

*design is not about the smile on the product, it is about the smile in the user’s heart.

*Hummels(2000)makes a strong case for engagement as a means to augment fun and beauty. She believe that five aspects are essential. to evoke this sense of beauty.

1.Functional possibilities and performance of the product .

2.The user’s desires, needs, interests and skills,(the user’s character, skills, needs determine the value of the interaction for an individual)

3.General context,(this context can influence the experiences of the user when interacting with product)

4.Richness with respect to all the senses,(aesthetic interaction requires richness that covers all the senses – auditory, olfactory, flavoury, tactile and kinaesthetic aspects during interaction, are at least as important to achieve a beautiful interaction and an engaging experience, designers need to exploit the range and diversity of design solutions to evoke or intensify the range of feelings)

5.Possibility to create one’s own story and ritual,(a product should be an open system, which is not an open book, rather a tempting means for exploration and interaction)

*10 rules to augment fun and beauty in interaction design(Djajadingrat, Overbeeke & Wensveen, 2000)

1.Don’t think products, think experiences.(creating a context for experience rather than just an experience, 因為不能採用經驗套用在使用者身上, a design should offer the user the freedom for building his or her experience.)

2.Don’t think beauty in appearance, think beauty in interaction

3.Don’t think ease of use, think enjoyment of the experience.

4.Don’t think buttons, think rich actions.

5.Don’t think labels, think expressiveness and identity.(現今有許多產品都有相當高的相似性, 通常都很難以區別, the “formgiving”should express what purpose a product or control serves.)

6.Metaphor sucks.(the usefulness of metaphor is overrated.)

7.Don’t hide, don’t represent. Show.

8.Don’t think affordances, think irrestibles.

9.Hit me, touch me, and I know how you feel.(design products, which invite rich actions, we can get an idea about the user’s emotions by looking at these actions(Wensveen et al, 2002), 像是咬筆, 甩門等等動作可以看出心情)

10.Don’t think thinking, just do doing.

**Conclusions

in order to design enjoyable products we must design for engagement on every level and the physicality of products must br resored. Product design must address the user’s action potential and capacity to appreciate sensory richness. Products must elicit rich interaction from the user. Rich  physical  interaction  offers even more possibilities. Products might ‘read’ the user’s emotions and react to it in different  ways.