descenterace on 1/4/2006 at 19:14
Is this thread for real, or another April Fool? It's so hard to tell sometimes on this forum...
shadows on 2/4/2006 at 03:19
This is an assignment i was set where i had to design a product for a particular area or users. Using a process called User Centred Design. So i examined the problem, looked at user needs, did questionnaires. Then i drew up prototypes taking all that into account. The last stage is to get feedback on the product from the target user group, on the good and bad points of the product. The thing i need to show is that i have gone through the process, whether the product really succeeds is not important.
If the description isn't clear, i'd be happy to examine a bit more. I didn't bother going into too much depth and gave the basic functionality of it.
Quote Posted by Vigil
Sure there are, we're just not interested.
Then tell me why this product does or does not appeal to you, that's what i want to know!
Quote Posted by Vigil
Professionals already own perfectly good off-the-shelf computers, scanners, art tablets and software to do all the things the desk does. And, these can be moved around, taken home, replaced with better models, and so on. And, they don't involve fundamental changes to how professionals are accustomed to interacting with equipment they use every day.
OK, so basically you're saying that this is not a significant improvement over the tools you use now, which does not justify a potentially big change in working methods and equipment. That's basically what i wanted to know.
Quote Posted by aguywhoplaysthief
Holographic displays are great, I guess, although probably useless for most people, except for presentations for clients. Sounds like a novelty to me.
But sometimes with new technology we do not see the benefits they can offer and what they could be used for. When the computer was first invented, everyone was scratching their heads thinking what use is this to us anyway.
Another problem with new technology is that people are used to doing things the way they are already doing them now, even though there may be a better way. Sure they may not be complaining and the tools they use currently get the job done, but that doesn't mean their aren't improvements to be made.
A good example is the Dyson vacuum cleaner - the one without a bag. The inventor found it difficult to market the concept, because investors probably thought as Vigil did, that the product doesn't really offer any significant improvements as such, sure it sucked a bit better but people could get the job done with vacuums that sucked worse anyway.
The point is i am not trying to start a technological revolution, i just want your opinions on a hypothetical product! :cheeky:
Vigil on 2/4/2006 at 15:54
Quote:
But sometimes with new technology we do not see the benefits they can offer and what they could be used for. When the computer was first invented, everyone was scratching their heads thinking what use is this to us anyway.
Another problem with new technology is that people are used to doing things the way they are already doing them now, even though there may be a better way. Sure they may not be complaining and the tools they use currently get the job done, but that doesn't mean their aren't improvements to be made.
Those are fair points, but you haven't yet articulated
how your concept will work better than what's already available. It's all very well to say that users may not be able to see the benefits of a new idea at first, but if this is the case then
you need to be able to identify and articulate what the benefits are in order to convince people to fund it and try it.
So as I said before: what's the problem, and how does the desk solve it? How is it actually going to make our lives easier?
Then, how do you address the valid concerns of increased purchase cost and training time, and how do address the flexibility and replaceability of individual components that we already have? The design needs to compete against these points as well as against customer inertia.
piln on 2/4/2006 at 23:40
Quote Posted by shadows
This is an assignment i was set where i had to design a product for a particular area or users. Using a process called User Centred Design. So i examined the problem, looked at user needs, did questionnaires. Then i drew up prototypes taking all that into account. The last stage is to get feedback on the product from the target user group, on the good and bad points of the product. The thing i need to show is that i have gone through the process, whether the product really succeeds is not important.
OK, so you're saying the success/failure potential of the item is irrelevent as long as you've done your research thoroughly and correctly. Hope you've understood your brief properly, because most of what I have to add is criticism. ;)
Seems to me there is one useful aspect of your product: the drawing-directly-on-screen thing is a genuine benefit for artists (maybe not so great a change for engineers, architects, etc), but this solution is already available (Cintiq). The 3D holo-vision would be an amazingly expensive show-off toy; the only useful application I can think of is that you'd be able to render a max-detail model or scene, beyond a machine's power to render in realtime and then view it from multiple angles without having to re-render. A possible time saver, depending on the rendering power of the machine. I'm being optimistic there, and that's still a very flimsy reason for the expense. The pyramid mouse idea I don't like at all - won't its bulky base obscure too much of my work? Won't it be far less precise than a pen, or even my fingertip? Won't the swishing and rotating movements conflict with the way I normally move the mouse around the screen, while buttons and hotkeys don't? I would love the gimmick value of the built-in scanner, but again it's just a toy - it is, at most, a
tiny bit more convenient than having a flatbed scanner right next to the screen and suffers all the problems Vigil has pointed out.
I'm curious to know what the problems were, as you identified them, that this design sets out to solve? Also, to isolate the draw-on-screen element: I believe this is the sole significantly beneficial aspect of the design (and even then, only beneficial to a fraction of the target market) - how will your product compete with similar solutions that are already out there? I imagine this question will (should) form part of your assessment, so you should have a realistic answer.
Hope this helps. When's your deadline?
Aja on 2/4/2006 at 23:53
I, for one, would love to be rid of a keyboard and mouse. You'd still need a monitor, but I think that a touch-screen interface, done properly, could be very intuitive and useful. Even after using the Nintendo DS for a few months, I would never want to play a handheld system without a touch screen.
However, no one wants to look down at their desk all the time. Perhaps a duplicate, upright screen? Virtual keyboard, no need for a mouse... maybe a small area on the touchscreen wherein stylus movement would be exaggerated to simulate mouse movement. That way, you wouldn't have to be reaching all over the screen. Keeping that in mind, you should still be able to manipulate objects on the touch screen directly if you want to.
Holographic generator sounds gimmicky and not too useful.
jay pettitt on 3/4/2006 at 00:24
I don't know about a digital desk, but I've got one or two opinions about computer desks. I reckon there's definitely room in the world for a computer desk that isn't really crap.
