All posts from
February 2006

Design and Usability for Emerging Telephony

Added on 3 February 2006 Peter Bogaards
“Designing a product for the future is not a simple question of making two-way technology go faster, last longer, weigh less, or do more. It’s about understanding how devices tap into people’s lives, about how, when, and why we use technology in the ways we do. Design is a tool that helps to envisage our desires as consumers, our expectations as users, and our impulses as human beings. These deep emotional enablers are the ones that tell us how to bring together chips, screens, and microprocessors.” (B.J. Fogg et al. – O’Reilly Emerging Telephony Conference)

LIFT06 Blog

Added on 2 February 2006 Peter Bogaards
Audio/Video Presentations included – “About teaming talented observers, explorers, and builders with people whose work depends on understanding current challenges and creative solutions presented by emerging technologies. Attendees will face cutting edge business models, bold predictions, radical thinking — ideas to inject into their own part of the planet. LIFT has a simple goal: connect people who are passionate about new applications of technology and propel their conversations into the broader world to improve life and work.” (LIFT06)

Fundamental Forms of Information

Added on 1 February 2006 Peter Bogaards
“Fundamental forms of information, as well as the term ‘information’ itself, are defined and developed for the purposes of information science/studies. Concepts of natural and represented information (taking an unconventional sense of representation), encoded and embodied information, as well as experienced, enacted, expressed, embedded, recorded, and trace information are elaborated. The utility of these terms for the discipline is illustrated with examples from the study of information seeking behavior and of information genres. Distinctions between the information and curatorial sciences with respect to their social (and informational) objects of study are briefly outlined.” (Marcia J. Bates)

Rules for labelling buttons

Added on 1 February 2006 Peter Bogaards
“The consequence of the two rules may be that you end up with buttons with labels that are longer than a single word. I think that’s much better than striving for single words that are either confusing (as they might be in our example) or infuriating (as in the many dialog boxes that inform me that some program has done something truly ghastly to my computer, and then expect me to click ‘OK’ as if I’m happy about it).” (Caroline Jarrett – Usability News)