The Design Cycle and Brainstorming

From CS 160 Fall 2010

Jump to: navigation, search

Lecture on Sept 1st, 2010

[ slides ]

Readings

submit response

Discussion Questions

  • How does the Lewis & Rieman design cycle compare to the three stage (design, prototype, evaluate) cycle described in class?
  • Find the most unusual/creative Android or iPhone app that you can, and include a link. Did the authors describe their ideation process at all? If so, summarize it.

Student Responses

Contents

Frank Chew - 8/31/2010 8:23:29

Design 1.4 Rough Out the Design Prototype 1.6 Create a Mock-Up or Prototype/1.9 Build the Design Evaluate 1.5 Think About It/1.7 Test the Design With Users/1.10 Track the Design

The Task-Centered Design Process describes about 3 cycles of the Design/Prototype/Evaluate system, allowing for a rough design in the firct cycle, a mock-up out of paper in the second cycle, and a Prototype from an object oriented programming environment the third cycle.

I found as a most creative app, the Free Solitaire iApp (http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/solitaire/id284791396?mt=8). It includes advertising in the beginning that allows the free app to still be profitable.


Richard Laroue - 8/31/2010 16:09:02

First of all, I was unable to read the second article in this weeks readings due to an authentication error (not sure what that's about).

There were two important points from the first article that stuck out to me: 1. If you rush to build your interface, you end up forcing many ideas in your system early on. 2. Sometimes there is a time limit to how many times you can iterate. I did some user interface design this summer for an internship and these are two points which (in retrospect), I now understand, are very important. I was in a rush to begin coding up my application for users that I ended up forcing myself to keep certain features, even though at later stages in the design I realized they weren't necessary. Also, it seems like you can always continue to improve your system by requesting feedback from users and making changes, but since I had a time limit for my application, I knew my job was to get the system to a working state and submit it. This put a limit on how many times I could test with users and make changes. All in all, I think this process of interface design and implementation captures all the important steps to building a successful interface for users.


Sui Kun Guan - 8/31/2010 17:52:15

1. The first stage design can be viewed as three steps, "figure out who's going to use the system to do what," "choose representative tasks for task-centered design," and "plagiarize." The second stage prototype can be viewed as three steps, "rough out a design," "think about it," and "create a mock-up or prototype." The last stage evaluate can be viewed as "test it with users." After this one cycle, it should be repeated many times to find out the problems of the design and improve the design. After many iterations, the designer can start to build it. But after build it, the designer has to track it and update it as users improve their skill.


2.The iphone application Speedtest is very creative. The website: http://www.appolicious.com/tech/apps/61310-speedtest-xtreme-labs-inc/developer_notes ; The authors has described some ideation process on the web. The authors mention that there are many users want to have a program to test the internet speed under the same measurement all over the world, and this application has many updates after it shows up on the market.


Sui Kun Guan - 8/31/2010 18:02:45

3. The article "The Perfect Brainstorm" points out that brainstorm is very useful. I feel that brainstorm is necessary before every group project. For example, I am really like the strategy about writing every down. This can help me to come back to the old ideas when I thinking about the new ideas.


Karl He - 8/31/2010 18:42:23

The design cycle by Lewis and Rieman has the same basic concepts as the design/prototype/iterate model. Roughly the first 5 steps correspond to the design step, with perhaps a bit of overlap into the design step. The sixth step corresponds to the prototype step, and the rest of the steps correspond to the iterate step. What it does seem to have is more emphasis on iteration. There is internal iteration in the 5 design steps and the 5 iterate steps.

A cool Android app I found is AwesomeDrop (http://labs.dashwire.com/drop). It basically allows you to drag-and-drop files to your phone via a web browser. It isn't immediately useful, since there are many ways to transfer files to your phone, however it doesn't require a physical connection. It also brings new ideas to the table, and could lead to more intuitive ways to transfer files to your phone in the future. The author did not describe the ideation process.


Aaron Loessberg-Zahl - 8/31/2010 19:05:49

The Lewis & Rieman design cycle feels similar to our three-stage cycle, just a bit more spelled out. 1-5 fall under design, 6 is prototyping, and 7 is evaluation. The rest of the article basically elaborates on post-release maintenance, which is certainly not unimportant.

One app that I find amazingly cool (as well as incredibly nerdy) is the Tricoder app by Moonblink (http://code.google.com/p/moonblink/wiki/Tricorder). It manages to do seemingly everything while still having a usable interface.

I also enjoyed the brainstorming article. It has a lot of good ideas for effective brainstorming, and I'm looking forward to trying them out in our project groups.


Jonathan Look - 8/31/2010 19:07:08

The development cycle shown in class is a more generalized version of the cycle proposed by Lewis and Reiman. The design cycle they suggest also employs the iterative development of the UI even after it has been deployed.

I couldn’t really find a discussion on the design process the developers took on this app, but the Local app looks pretty cool :http://www.twofortyfouram.com/


Chao Liu - 8/31/2010 19:11:32

1. the L&R's cycle is more detail compare to the three stage cycle. And more important, L&R's cycle involves the real users of the interface. Maybe for course study, it may not a major issue, but for future design and in career, let the users involve in the UI design process is one key element for develop a good UI.

2.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xaokPG-ZfZY 

 This is a amazing demo that showes a new way of typing message. the auther doesn't give a ideation process,but from the video we know that the creative part is that for traditional typing method, we need to click the "letter" but not "word", and arrange these letter into word is a relatively easy task. So, the author just let the machine do it. The user just need to provide letters.
 Because the combination of certain letter always goes to the same word, such as "h t e" goes to"the" and "s i" goes to "is". No matter what order the user input, the application will recognize the right word. 
 In traditional way, we need two steps:1.select the word 2. compose them into word. the new way of type save the second step and save a lot of time of typing. Personally, I like the app.


Don Arboleda - 8/31/2010 20:00:32

Not sure how many responses we needed exactly, but:

As I read Lewis & Rieman's work, I started thinking about how I would design an application for touch-based devices, especially small ones like smartphones. I start to question my first decision to label menu items, thus saving screen real estate--but to be successful as such, my app would have to have icons with very clear designations. And what of drop-down lists? There are so many things to keep track of that could make or break an app.

Appropriately enough, Kelley's words on brainstorming was very thought provoking. It's unfortunate that brainstorming sessions as he described are not practices as often as they should because they seem both thoroughly enjoyable and extremely productive (hopefully). I realize now why there are times it seems creativity is stifled--hard limitations can deter far-reaching ideas.

1) L&R's design cycle and the one described in lecture are very similar procedures--essentially, our design cycle merely groups L&R's steps into broader groups that still describe the process. 'Design' consists of 1.1 to 1.5, 'Prototype' is 1.6, and 'Evaluate' goes from 1.7 on. Both are ideal for rapid designing, but our design cycle's fewer number of steps help us focused on the bigger picture.

2) Easy Metal Detector Lite seemed pretty interesting. While not exactly the most unusual or creative (because people can have utterly ridiculous ideas), this app for the Android uses the phone's magnetometer to detect the presence of metal. Supposedly, it's to be used to find poor, stray, unwanted coins; unfortunately, the magnet is nowhere near as strong as it needs to be to detect them except from very close distances. Nonetheless, it's amazing that someone was able to utilize the hardware like that.


Andy Lin - 8/31/2010 20:17:01

Lewis & Rieman design cycle is more detailed compared to the three stage cycle. One main point that I believe is really important, which is not specified in the three stage cycle, is try to understand the users and tasks before starting the design. It is like we should read through the problem or the requirement carefully before we try to solve a problem. One point I would like to point out from the second article is that brainstorming is really a good ice breaker for the first meeting. One thing that I believe is the hardest thing in brainstorming is to create a good title to brainstrom, perhaps it is the thing I should really work on. One really convenient Android application I found is called "Compare everywhere" Link: http://scan.jsharkey.org/ The author believes that it would be very convenient for everyone have the functionality on his or her phone like an employee in a store who is able to check the stock by scanning the bar code. For my personal experience, it is really an awsome design.


Seng Heng - 8/31/2010 20:47:10

The Lewis and Rieman chapter on task oriented design seemed to emphasize evolutionary development - in particular, the section on simply giving users a UI they're used to. This wasn't as heavily emphasized in the design paradigm given in class, and seems to preclude major innovations in design (punchcard to mouse/board, mouse/board to touchscreen, touchscreen to hand gestures or facial movements). http://www.layar.com/ is an augmented reality application for Android, which seems to be simply a 'for-fun' application for people to create what are basically doodles. Extending this to provide meaningful contextual information (high crime areas given a red tinge, or good restaurants given a 5 star flag in the augmented reality camera) may be something to look into.


Richard Nguyen - 8/31/2010 20:56:26

I never thought of plagiarism as a part of the design process. Usually when I try to come up with ideas for project I try to avoid seeing the ideas of other people just so that I don't end up copying anything. But after reading this I realize that there are a lot of generally similar ideas sometimes and it's all a matter of how the problem is handled and executed. Just because the idea has been tried doesn't mean that it's the only way or the best way to address the problem. I also really like the idea of prototyping interfaces on paper first since you can organize layouts and views quickly easily without the hassle of coding and debugging. I'm not sure how I feel about how involved the post-it idea is but I've yet to try it so maybe I'll find it very useful.

I feel like I've experience my fair share of failed brainstorming sessions. We've ran into problems where we criticized the possible solutions too early just because we wanted to get to a good idea first but often times it was one of those first solutions that we ended up running with. So it's definitely a good idea to be open minded about all ideas first and the pick at them after there's a nice pool of ideas cause at first glace something that seems ridiculous might end up being the most viable. I definitely look forward to more effective brainstorming sessions in our group projects this semester.


Vincent Rodriguez - 8/31/2010 21:40:44

How does the Lewis & Rieman design cycle compare to the three stage (design, prototype, evaluate) cycle described in class? 

  - Lewis & Rieman's design cycle look a lot more detailed than the one we talked about in class, but at it's core, there is no difference between it and the one discussed in class. Steps 1.1 - 1.5 can be thought as the Design stage, step 1.6 is the Prototype stage and the rest are part of the Evaluate stage. If anything, the Lewis & Rieman design cycle can be thought of as a more detailed version of the cycle we talked about in class.

Find the most unusual/creative Android or iPhone app that you can, and include a link. Did the authors describe their ideation process at all? If so, summarize it. 

  - http://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/touch-mouse/id338237450?mt=8#
    It's an app that allows your iPhone to act as a mouse/keyboard. I thought that was pretty creative.


Sean Tai - 8/31/2010 21:48:38

- The Lewis & Rieman design cycle is similar in its overall flow (design, prototype, evaluate/test), but rather than being user-centered, the cycle is task-centered: tasks that the system being designed should accomplish are explicitly stated before the prototyping and testing begin. The Lewis & Rieman cycle also includes describing the design in words before the prototyping and testing begins.

- gStrings: http://cohortor.org/gstrings . No ideation process described.


Steven Kisely - 8/31/2010 22:02:24

I found the Brain Storming article to be very interesting. I think the writer is correct where he discusses having the proper question. If the question is to narrow it does not allow for exploration, and if the question is to broad the participants have no constraints to help them think. In cs169 my group made an iPhone application for a Comic business. We spoke with our client and found that his customers were usually 30-50 year old males. Knowing this, we had to take into consideration a fair number of the customers may not be the most “tech savvy” individuals. My group met with potential customers on several occasions to get feed back on our UI. Our goal was to make the UI simple enough that customers would feel comfortable using it.


Chris Song - 8/31/2010 23:25:30

Lewis and Rieman design cycle seems like it was a more specific version of 3 design stages covered in class. My question is where does beta testing fit in? does it belong to testing it with actually users? Or is it considered part of actual release of the app? Since beta testing usually doesn't pay the beta testers I would assume it's different from focus groups and such.

This is an Android app I found that I think is very interest. It basically steams up one's phone screen. Then you use the touch function to "wipe" it clean. Apparently, you can also add more steam by blowing into the mic which makes more steam. The reason I find it interesting is that I cannot think of a single good reason why one would wish to do that!!! Yet it seems very popular. Maybe someone can tell me. http://swisscodemonkeys.appspot.com/app/steam/android-steamy-window-get-your-phone-steamy.html


James Yu - 8/31/2010 23:31:59

1) Unlike the three stage cycle described in class, Lewis & Rieman design cycle is more tasked centered (focus on getting a set of tasks accomplished) rather than user centered. Also in the iteration step, it is not always necessary to re-examine tasks. Another difference is the suggestion to get inspiration from existing designs. However, the two design cycles were similar, with the main steps and ideas also very similar.

2) The most creative Android app I found was Layar (the link is at the end). The creators call it an augmented reality browser. What it does is overlay information on top of the video feed from your phone camera, as if there were virtual information bulletins everywhere. Although the authors didn't describe their ideation process, in the blog they did have a entry that gathered ideas from users by making a screenshot and mockup. This is similar to the prototyping and brainstorming discussed in the readings. http://site.layar.com/company/blog/2009/07/


Jeremy Sasson - 8/31/2010 23:43:17

A pretty creative iPhone app that I found was called iTriage. Information on it can be found at http://healthagen.com/about/what-is-itriage/. Two doctors saw a growing need for patients to have medical information more readily available, and thus decided to create the app to meet that need.


Mark Wei - 8/31/2010 23:46:59

I find it very interesting that one of the points in design is Plagiarize. Steve Jobs of Apple famously said "Good artists copy, great artists steal" in a video interview years ago. Now, we see "clones" of popular sites and services everywhere. Although I believe that patents are often used to stifle innovation (just look at Paul Allen's recent lawsuit against everybody), I am also surprised by new products that serve the exact same purpose and look exactly he same as a former product (like all the Groupon clones, especially in other countries). The reading talked about plagiarism in terms of taking old and established paradigms, but I hope we can talk about how to avoid outright plagiarism in the forms that would get us in trouble.


Theron Ji - 9/1/2010 0:29:25

I thought the article was very similar to the design cycle described in class. Some key similarities I noticed were that in both cases, the developer would be closely involved straight from the beginning of the design process, when the user needs are being analyzed. Then, instead of writing an aloof spec, both methods use real user-scenarios to drive the specification ("task-centered" design). Lastly, both use rapid prototyping to get skeleton versions to the user, who is then viewed and analyzed using the prototype and this feedback allows for quick changes, continuing the cycle.

One fun app I found was the "Fake-call" app (http://www.fakecallapp.com/), which would simulate an incoming call to your phone. The idea is that it can be useful in both a fun way, but also can be used to get out of situations - literally being saved by the bell idea.


Brian Maissy - 9/1/2010 0:35:36

The task-centered design process is a special case of the three-stage cycle described in class, in which the 'design' stage is based specifically on user and task analysis. Lewis and Rieman suggest that the 'prototype' and 'evaluate' stages should start with very rough designs and simple analysis and progress towards more elaborate prototypes and systematic testing with real users.

A crazy app I found is called "Email 'n Walk". It allows the user to compose an email while seeing their iphone camera's input as a background, so one can write an email while walking without colliding into things. The designers don't mention their design process, but the interface is very simple and easy to use because it utilizes the standard iphone keyboard to which everyone is already used to, and cleverly uses the camera as a passive input device, while giving both outputs (the text of the email and the image) simultaneously by superimposing the email on the image background. The result is a seamlessly clear and intuitive interface. http://itunes.apple.com/app/email-n-walk-as-seen-on-the-bbc/id313095174


Yue Chang Hu - 9/1/2010 0:38:23

Clayton's article is very helpful on teaching me what user interface designing is. It is more than just some buttons and graphic because the designer must have a good knowledge of who is using it, what to include in the design, building a prototype, and keep trying to test and improve. I totally agree with Linus Pauling saying that good user interface designing require a group of good brainstormer. However, I am not totally convinced that a good brainstormer should always do some project related work because it will help them more in coming up with ideas. I think this is different for everyone. Some people can come up with more creative ideas by being totally in silence while others can come up with brilliant ideas by working with a noisy group.


Alexander Wong - 9/1/2010 0:44:25

Task-Centered Design Process:

I've heard of mocking up user-interfaces in paper numerous times now, but still find it hard to believe that paper is a good enough simulation. I don't mean to discredit what a good paper simulation can offer, but in my previous experiences with presenting UI to users even Photoshopped images are often inadequate. I'm eager to learn what paper simulations can offer and to learn the best way to create paper simulations. Hopefully my opinion will then change.

The design process outlined the reading is intuitive and certainly makes sense. One nugget of truth is the need for iteration. Once a system is used by multiple users and real data is being managed, you often run into UI snags that you simply couldn't have predicted when you originally built the application.

Brainstorming:

I thought the approach to brainstorming outlined in this reading was very interesting. I've certainly done brainstorming in the past in limited capacities. We've been goofy or brought in off the wall ideas, but I never thought about how to actually facilitate brainstorming activities. I always took the idea generation process for granted and assumed that if you lock individuals in a room to discuss a particular topic that eventually a good idea would come about. I'll be giving some of the techniques outlined in the reading a try.



Tsung Han Tsai - 9/1/2010 0:44:48

These articles make people think before they start coding. A lot of times people will think of an end goal and start coding to produce the results they want. They don't really think about the process of getting to that goal and expanding beyond that goal into the future.


Arthur Huang - 9/1/2010 0:58:59

1. The Lewis & Rieman design cycle is very similar to the design, prototype, evaluate cycle described in class, but includes more steps and describes them in more detail. Both stress finding the target audience, doing research to look for similar practices (plagarizing), and iterating through the testing and refinement cycle many, many times. Testing the product is another key point that is central to both types of development cycles, as they both find it necessary to test the product in multiple iterations with users, whether it be a paper mock-up or the near-complete prototype. Testing without users is an equally important part, early in the cycle, as this kind of low-cost evaluation could save a lot of money and time in the long run.

2. While not particularly unusual, I find the Google Mobile App to be very creative and well designed. What impressed me most is their voice search function that is surprisingly good at deciphering the input, even when there is background noise. The voice search alone I found to be a creative, new way to search the web, taking advantage of the phone's speaker and making the job easier for the user, as a smartphone's keyboard is always harder to use than a regular, full-size keyboard. This app was initially a tool from Google Labs where after the user called the number, they can say the keywords for the search. It was later moved to mobile apps, and became the Gogle Mobile App. Link: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/google-mobile-app/id284815942?mt=8


Melissa Lim - 9/1/2010 1:02:19

In "The Perfect Brainstorm" article, I thought the "Six Ways to Kill a Brainstormer" section was particularly interesting. Including someone from an entirely different background (i.e. sci-fi readers) can yield crazy, innovative ideas that the "experts" would never have considered themselves. However, I'm not convinced by the suggestion of excluding the boss out of the brainstorming process in order to eliminate boundaries. The boss is part of the team and should therefore be included in major meetings that involve possible new directions for the group. That being said, the boss should understand that his/her behavior is different during a brainstorming session than during a regular team meeting.


Daniel Yoo - 9/1/2010 2:11:27

•How does the Lewis & Rieman design cycle compare to the three stage (design, prototype, evaluate) cycle described in class? The Lewis & Rieman design goes through more thinking process and more testing strategy. The more people gather ideas from different place and more people do testing would have a better result in programming, because we have a better chance of understanding the customers’ needs.

•Find the most unusual/creative Android or iPhone app that you can, and include a link. Did the authors describe their ideation process at all? If so, summarize it. I think the BioWallet (which is in Android app) is pretty interesting. The information I got from is in this link: http://gizmodo.com/5053280/androids-10-most-exciting-apps. It uses our phone’s camera as an iris scanner to secure personal information. It is amazing that phone can do such an incredible stuff.


Anthony Puccinelli - 9/1/2010 2:43:22

Concerning the reading, the task-based approach to design seems similar to the approach discussed in the first lecture in that it involves iterative cycles of improvement (even after the first official release of the product). The biggest difference I noticed was that in lecture, a lot of focus was put on using feedback from a sampling of typical users during the initial development and in the article, more focus was put on being very clear about what practical things your project will be able to do before beginning work on it.

Concerning uniquely mobile applications, the following is a link to info about the "Save Our Socks" iPhone app:

http://www.itmakesense.co.uk/sos/default.html

The app has an unfortunately misleading name (It's supposed to be a "back-ronym" for SOS), but an intriguing premise. If you're "in trouble" (which I assume means are being mugged/kidnapped/have-fallen-and-can't-get-up :-) but have your phone handy you can quickly launch the app and it will send e-mails to your contacts with your gps location and a simple SOS message. This app takes advantage of the fact that mobile devices are most always on the user's person and are equipped with GPS capabilities.


Adam Vogt - 9/1/2010 3:12:48

The Lewis & Rieman design cycle was very similar to the one discussed in class. The thing that really struck me about their process was the recommendation to plagiarize. I find it especially interesting that even if you have come up with a novel, more efficient way of doing something, you may still be better off staying with a commonly used convention. It doesn't seem right, but when you look at the world, that's how things work. Take the QWERTY keyboard for instance. It isn't the most efficient keyboard layout, but other more efficient layouts such as the Dvorak layout will likely never become mainstream because people are too familiar to with the common QWERTY layout. I think this will be a good point to remember going forward.


Samantha Paras - 9/1/2010 9:06:11

"The Perfect Brainstorm" by Kelley is about the art and benefits of brainstorming. I never realized brainstorming was so important. I like how Kelley encourages wild ideas in order to spark creativity. I know during brainstorms I've been to, I was afraid of giving crazy ideas because this rule wasn't established and I was afraid my team members would look down on it These tips given by Kelley are something I would like to try in the future.


Christine Lu - 9/1/2010 9:26:48

I thought section 1.3 Plagiarize had a great relevance to our world, especially the battle between Blackberry, Android, and iPhone. I thought it was interesting that, although Blackberry originally had a menu which featured icons for each application, when Apple came out with their iPhones which featured a square shaped icon for apps, Blackberry eventually changed their original design to become more like Apple's. This is an interesting example of "plagiarism" since BB altered the design that they had for many years because of the popularity of the iPhone. Conversely, one key feature of the Android phones is the pull-down notifications menu, which neither the iPhone or Blackberry devices have. In this case, not plagiarizing was better for the Android and helped set itself apart from its competitors. Although plagiarism's benefits are that users don't have to relearn how to use something, I believe Android's key change was successful because of the ease of use of their pull-down notifications bar, so even though this feature wasn't widely used beforehand, users were quick to catch on.


Frank Chew - 9/1/2010 11:02:33

The Lewis & Rieman defines steps that iterate over the class cycle of Design, Prototype, and Evaluate several times: 

 Design:    1.4 Rough out the Design
 Evaluate:  1.5 Think about it
 Prototype: 1.6 Create a Mock-up or Prototype
 Evaluate:  1.7 Test the design with users
 Design/Prototype: 1.8 Build the Design
 Evaluate:  1.10 Track the Design
 Design/Prototype: 1.11 Change the Design

There is a most creative iApp called Solitaire (http://www.appteria.com/site/app/284791396/solitaire), because although it is free, it still makes profits via advertising.


Derrick Tao - 9/1/2010 11:04:15

After doing the reading, I realized the importance of planning a proper software application. The goal is to keep the focus on the user and what the tasks that the user wants to complete. Keeping this in mind, planning of the product should come more naturally. Another thing I realized is that designs that would appear to work in my head might not always be the best for other users.


Robert Connick - 9/1/2010 11:13:24

"The Task-Centered Design Process" seemed to make good sense at first, but after reading about brainstorming, the two readings felt almost like they go completely against each other: where "brainstormers" encourage new ideas no matter how far-fetched, task-centered design emphasizes existing solutions while discouraging features that "don't support any of the tasks." Perhaps task-centered design assumes that you have already done all your brainstorming in the "brainstormers."


Evan Rosky - 9/1/2010 11:45:19

The Lewis & Rieman cycle is a much more verbose version of the three stage cycle covered in class. The initial design process focuses on what the user does/needs (representative tasks) to reduce overdevelopment. Lewis and Rieman basically pose the process as some initial design phase, then iteration, then maintaining up-to-date ui principles. This corresponds to a large first run through the design-prototype-evaluate cycle, several tight iterations, then some spaced out runs later.

I found the gStrings app for android fairly nice. It has a very clean interface and is functionally very well implemented. The site given by the app (cohortor.org/gstrings) seems to be down right now.


Bichen Wang - 9/1/2010 11:49:36

1. The Lewis & Rieman design cycle isn't that much different from the 3-cycle one. They just decided to be more specific. First they figure out what's going on, design, then they essentially prototype, being a bit more specific as to what or how to prototype, and then they evaluate, or "think about it." Then they repeat the cycle, more or less. The whole process doesn't seem all that different. It's as if someone decided step three of the Lewis & Rieman process was important.

2. http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/egging/id336182243?mt=8 egging! There's this really cool thing that seems to waste time very effectively. It is an egg balancing app! I don't know, but I like to balance things, but I also don't like things actually breaking. I certainly don't want to clean up a broken egg, nor do I actually want to waste an egg. But hey! This app seems like something I'd like to be good at if I had an iPhone/iPad when I'd be really bored. Tabling on sproul when no one's here would probably be more interesting when there's some guy trying to balance some egg on something as crazy as a knife. Or walking to class. With an egg. Balanced on a fork. Or running to class... and dropping said egg. Reading the notes just had some bug fixes for v1.1, so there doesn't seem to be much of a developer notes section. Hey they actually advice against doing this in real life! And I like sentence fragments.


Robin Liu - 9/1/2010 12:02:12

Lewis and Rieman describes the design process using 11 steps that further specifies the 3 stage cycle. Selecting a user base, choosing a task, plagiarize, roughing out the design, and thinking about it all loosely correspond the design portion of the cycle. Creating a mock-up corresponds to the prototype section of the cycle Testing the design with users, iterate, and building, tracking, and changing the design fall under the evaluation section.

Using the interface of flashcards for a language learning app is fairly inventive. It uses an existing metaphor the interface. http://www.androlib.com/android.application.com-tinyclassroom-jBnmi.aspx


Asa Zernik - 9/1/2010 12:05:45

First off, like a couple of other people, I couldn't read the second reading (it's behind a password barrier).

As to the reading, there were a few points I found interesting. Most noticeable was the emphasis placed on working within the framework of a contracting/budgeting process - for example, the conflict between listening to managers/specifiers and listening to users. Also, a lot seemed familiar, such as the suggestion to plagiarize, whose justification seemed to basically be the "principle of least surprise" that I've heard so much about (choose the behavior that will surprise the user the least).

Lastly, I found a link between the mock-up stage and the iteration stage; if your mock-up is modular enough to allow a script or a developer to stand in for the backend, then my intuition is that it would probably also be modular enough to allow easy changes to the interface in response to user testing.


Avery Gee - 9/1/2010 12:16:15 

   *  How does the Lewis & Rieman design cycle compare to the three stage (design, prototype, evaluate) cycle described in class?

I think that it is basically the same design cycle but with some more specific intermediate steps. Most notably, it breaks down the design part to show a fast, efficient way of designing. When they say to plagiarize, that seems to follow the idea of not reinventing something that already exists. I think this is useful because it saves time, but allows you to create something that will end up being different and hopefully better.

Both design cycles both stress planning things out on paper, thinking carefully, and consulting/testing with users before actually writing the code. I think this is good because you don't want to spend a lot of time coding only to have to throw it all away and change it.

I think the hardest part of the design cycles would be setting aside your own aesthetic when it clashes with what you think the user would want/need (unless you are the target user). 

   * Find the most unusual/creative Android or iPhone app that you can, and include a link. Did the authors describe their ideation process at all? If so, summarize it.

http://pocketchirp.com/cricketsong

The site doesn't mention their ideation process, but they have two other apps- audible ink which displays the frequencies picked up by the microphone as colors and spectrogram which shows you the frequencies in a graph. So it seems that they were inspired by the input of sound to the microphone on the iphone and developed apps from there. The fact that they came up with three different apps all basically using the same input idea shows that they thought about all the uses of frequency or they were trying to develop apps using the same idea for different groups of users.


testing - 9/1/2010 12:23:18

testing


Albert Tseng - 9/1/2010 12:25:31

The design process of Lewis and Rieman and the one described in lecture are very similar in their approaches. Lewis and Rieman's, however, is more elaborate and describes distinctive steps that should be followed. One thing I found particularly interesting is their view that designs should be biased toward what the expected users are used to -- in other words, that one should favor existing interaction paradigms, even at the cost of usage efficiency. I personally disagree with this view, and believe that whatever allows the simplest use of the system is what should be implemented, as long as the learning curve is not too high.

I found the brainstorming article to be very informative. It shows how brainstorming sessions can be improved qualitatively, which I had not considered before.

A very cool Android app I found is the Barcode Scanner, which allows you to scan barcodes and search up useful information regarding the item that's scanned: http://www.androlib.com/android.application.com-google-zxing-client-android-xzA.aspx. I found no ideation description.


Simran Chaudhry - 9/1/2010 12:36:28

1. Compare Lewis and Rieman to the 3-stage cycle in class. In class we learned a high-level design paradigm: identify a user, design on paper, make a prototype, evaluate the prototype, repeat. Lewis & Rieman pretty much use this same pattern, and also add more specific steps to the process. They tell us that one way to design an interface is to copy existing paradigms that the user might be comfortable interacting with, and also that a design should take into technical and engineering considerations.

2. The most unusual/creative Android or iPhone app. Cant say this is the most unusual, but it’s a creative, visual RSS feed that’s incredibly popular. http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/26/pulse-android/ It was created by two Stanford grads at Stanford’s Institute of Design (d.school). The class runs students through structured iterations of the design process.


Edmundo Martinez - 9/1/2010 12:36:55

While reading the "Task-Centered User Interface Design" I found it very interesting that they encouraged plagiarizing. Their reasoning however, makes perfect sense, especially if you consider the power of expectation. People have expectations of EVERYTHING either consciously or subconsciously. Working with these expectations facilitates the user's experience greatly, by making an interface intuitive to them. This makes "plagiarizing" almost necessary, not because it cuts time or work, but because it helps the project fit user expectations.


Courtney Wang - 9/1/2010 12:37:06

The Task-Centered Design process of Lewis & Rieman provides a more detailed structure to the three stage cycle described in class. The two are very similar and closely related. We can link the design stage covered in class with the first fiveparts of the Lewis cycle. In these steps the focus is on planning and designing the product to suit users' needs. The sixth and seventh parts of the Lewis & Rieman design cycle cover the prototyping section of the three stage cycle. Here the product is created in its simplest form, often as a mock-up at first before translating to an actual useable application (which may not have most of its functionality). Then the last few sections of the Lewis & Rieman design cover the evaluation process. Testing and iterating all have to do with evaluating your product, and the important thing Lewis & Rieman point out is that evaluation must continue even after a completed product has been released. The idea is that even though a product may be completed, it should never be a final product.

The excerpt from "The Perfect Brainstorm" gives many useful tips and ideas that I plan on using in this class and future projects. The stress on quantity of ideas is really important and one that I will focus on. Overall, the article focuses on how brainstorming is about quantity: quantity of space, visual drawings, ideas, people and their opinions/expertise. The further out your brainstorm net extends, the better your session will be.


One of the most interesting apps out in the market today and probably one of the ones more relevant to our generation is the Epic Win app for the iPhone. It can be found at http://www.epicwinapp.com/ . The premise of the app is that it transforms a To-do list into an RPG (role-playing game). You create items on your to-do list in real life that gets translated to "quests" in the RPG game. You gain experience when you accomplish tasks and level up accordingly. Furthermore your character gains riches and skills. It's a fun take on a normally boring and tedious task. This is a good example of an app that took something already done (making organizational to-do lists on a mobile phone) and tweaking it to be more user friendly and fun. The website says "By getting points for your chores it's easier to actually get things done" which I believe sums up the idea and execution very well.


Danica Shei - 9/1/2010 12:47:38

The Lewis and Rieman design is similar in structure to the design/prototype/iterare cycle. The design step is described by the first couple steps of the lewis/rieman design, and then the sixth step describes the prototype, and remaining ones describe the iterating step. The L/R design however devotes more time to user input and habits than the three stage model. The coolest android app i found was iNap, which allows you to nap on public transportation until you arrive at your destination because the gps was alert you when you are relatively close to the destination. I thought this was pretty awesome because the task itself is not very complex to do, but it is still very useful for peole who constantly need to use public transportation.

The coole


Calvin Wang - 9/1/2010 12:49:24

What are the most common forms of user testing? I know user studies are conducted regularly at big companies, but they are very expensive. Having the program automatically collect usage data is cheap, but there are often privacy issues. Is there a middle ground between the two?

How does brainstorming fit into the design cycle? It is obviously most useful on the first iteration since the design doesn't exist yet, but after that, to what extent is it still useful? A related question is, how much is brainstorming actually used in industry?


Sara LaVigna - 9/1/2010 13:04:16

How does the Lewis & Rieman design cycle compare to the three stage (design, prototype, evaluate) cycle described in class? 

 Instead of doing the design for everyone at once, this design style is to work on each part of the design. So instead of one cycle, you would think of it as an overlapping sequence of smaller cycles. Each part is thought of individually. This is probably the intent of what we discussed in class but it described it a little more in detail here. The steps are : find audience, choose specific tasks the user will need, plagiarize aka find out who did it well and use that idea, make a rough design, think about it, create mock up, test with users, make changes, actually make it, and then track your design once it's made.

Find the most unusual/creative Android or iPhone app that you can, and include a link. Did the authors describe their ideation process at all? If so, summarize it. ShopSavvy application. http://www.biggu.com/ I think this app is cool because ti scans barcodes and lets you find the cheapest prices of that item in your location


Benjamin Carpenter - 9/1/2010 13:07:00

The process in the reading is much like the process described in class, except with more detail and more prescriptive of an approach. The description in class is more declarative, and thus somewhat more vague when it comes to implementing a design plan.

I like a game for the iPhone called Gun Range by ngmoco. It implements tilt based control and they have added a reset button to recalibrate the sensor in case you current position/incline has changed


Terrance Ng - 9/1/2010 13:20:29

Something interesting from the Lewis and Rieman reading was that there are already interfaces out there that have elements of what you need, so it's ok to use those design ideas. Their insistence on the cycle - that is, going back to design after the evaluation - really emphasizes the need to change your design to what the user needs, not necessarily what you first conceived.


Bernard Wong - 9/1/2010 13:22:50

I think that in the most sense, task driven design, much like that taught in software engineering is useful in most cases. However, in some cases, it limits the possibilities of creation, where the engineers can have the true freedom in creating their vision instead of creating something as a response of a targeted group. I think oftentimes, users don't actually know what they need or what the platform is truly capable of. On plagiarism, sometimes the mainstream ui designs has taught users to accustom to a certain way of interaction, and having something that is truly unique and new might surprises users. Also, it might be time consuming for users to learn a new interface. So I argue that instead of plagiarism in terms of layout and color usage, it might just as well as a framework. But I think engineers should think about innovation at all times, like Facebook's recently plagiarize the 'pull-to-update' interface from a twitter application is a good example of that.


Terrance Ng - 9/1/2010 13:25:02

A cool application is the Foodspotting application: http://www.foodspotting.com/iphone

It is very simple, and does exactly what the social network needs it to do: Take photos of food and geotag them. It also allows you to see what other people are eating around you: the social networking aspect of Foodspotting.

Retrieved from "http://bid.berkeley.edu/cs160-fall10/index.php/The_Design_Cycle_and_Brainstorming"
Personal tools