The oft cited Steve Jobs autobiography described his desire to revolutionise learning and on the 19 Jan 2012 apple made their first move.

There Apple released the iTunesU and iBooks 2.0 apps, which  have been re-imagined for assisting classroom learning. That, alongside some worldwide strategic partnerships with several education publishing giants.

The event was the start of a strategy but what is it?

My view, based upon what was shown, is that the strategy is to give people a more convenient excuse to buy an iPad.

You can imagine the conversation:

• Kid: Hey dad I *really* need an iPad.
• Dad: What on earth for?
• Kid: Apple have launched a new digital text book service which means I can study better and get a real boost in class.

The conversation will go on and on. In the end parental guilt will be invoked, and before you know it, dad will go to the Apple Store and buy the kid a new iPad; an iPad that will be used for everything else besides learning.

I'm reminded of the effort my friends and I expended to try to convince our parents that we needed a PC, or laptop for the exact same reason.

Sure, they were used for learning at first but inevitably they were used for other things. So is the destiny of the iPads bought to aid learning, eventually they will be used primarily to check email/Facebook/twitter, play games, watch films and listen to music.

I'm a passionate believer that technology can and does enhance our lives, and I honestly believe that there is a technology mix that will revolutionise the classroom but I can also say with certainty that what apple have announced so far will fall far short of that.

There problems to overcome are structural and behavioural.

Firstly, financially schools can not afford to provide an iPad for every student or even "one book for one student"  if they are to continue to provide the same level of student resources they do now. Currently, they buy books in bulk and recycle them between classes and school years. This keep costs down, allowing the school to provide equitable study resources to their students. The current commercial business model used by both Apple and Amazon are not inline with the financial realities of schools. Both need to look at a lending/leasing model, and to ownership transfer between devices. As this will give school the greatest flexibility on purchasing.

If schools are not going to provide the same level of resources they do now, then we have to accept that the classroom will become inequitable by design. Those with money will have access to higher quality resources than those without. Those without will continue to fall behind as the responsibility for provisioning learning materials moves from the school to the home.

Secondly there is currently an adequate solution. Classroom/textbook based learning is supplement by the internet. In the most part these resources are free, and just as immersive as anything that can be currently provided by an eBook. Essentially there is no incentive (in terms of lack of alternatives or not good enough solutions) to motivate the adoption of the technology as is.

Thirdly, provision of learning materials to be used out of class is problematic. In class students are forced to focus on the activity at hand. Out of the classroom, there are many more demands on their time, so students tend to cram and crib. It's hard to imagine that any student (except for the highly motivated) will revisit a full or partial class lecture in their own time. However, iBooks does have an good enough solution, it allows a student to aggregate their notes as a single document (anchored to the page/text the note was attached to) which can be used speed up homework tasks. The problem is that apple is competing with a pervasive low cost existing technology, a notepad and pen!.

Over the past year I have delivered several business, web development, and programming focused lectures at several different schools. Each time I offer follow up, out of class, help and additional reading materials and as yet I've not had one student contact me outside of class. Perhaps I'm a poor teacher, or I explained everything so well that there was no need to follow up but having discussed this with friends and more broadly with teachers I see the same pattern emerge. Out of class a students priorities is elsewhere.

Lastly, i have no reason to suppose that the content producers will make the best of use of the technology provided. You only have to look at the eBook/enhanced eBooks currently available through iBooks and Kindle to see on the whole a striking lack of quality.

I read a lot of non-fiction eBooks via iPhone, iPad and Kindle (over 100 books in the past year) and i'm constantly frustrated with the poor quality. Tables aren't displayed correctly,  images are two small and don't scale when zoomed in, words are broken in the wrong places.

In my experience (and only in my experience) the production process isn't mature enough to provide the fully immersive experience envisaged.

If this technology is to be used in the classroom to stream learning, so that the teacher can focus on the people with the greatest need (be it the worst or highest performing students) then what will the middle tier students loose through the poor production quality? More broadly, How will the transfer in responsibility for teaching (from teacher to interactive text book) effect the teachers, who's role will become more akin to support then leading the learning experience?

There are massive opportunities to revolutionise the classroom: You can: restructure the learning environment to take into account the latest understanding about how students learn, use assistive technology to help students focus on work and remember things. Also there is definitely a place for more immersive technologies that can be bring alive learning materials, videos, audio, slideshows etc. but the adoption of these approaches shouldn't be based upon the use of exclusive, expensive proprietary platforms.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

January 15 2001 was that day that, as a developer, I realised that at the end of my beautifully crafted algorithms was a person trying to get something done. In my case it was when designing software to allow a call handler from LAPD to review a 911 call to find any missed details of the emergency dispatch call she had just taken.

From that moment onwards I have dedicated myself to becoming the best craftsman I can be. In the subsequent years I have moved from being a developer (by way of development team leader, solution architect, project manager) to a user experience consultant.

Over that time I applied “user experience” thinking to how to manage and improve the “health” of my development teams, project teams and then my own business.

While reflecting I considered if it was my experiences: working in a variety of different environments (agencies, in house, freelance and contracting), for designing and implementing interfaces for desktop, mobile and web platforms would afford me the right to call myself a UX Consultant. Or if it is my grasp and application of the core principles of UX through Information architecture, interaction design, usability and accessibility that counts? 

Over those years I've spent hours participating in and where necessary creating, as with UX Exchange and other offline groups, the opportunity to engage with, mentor and learn from others in the field: User Researchers, UX Professionals, practitioners and academics.

Throughout that time, I purposefully subjected my thinking and designs to rigorous testing, and worked hard to learn what worked and what didn’t and in which contexts. The purpose of this testing was to help me to measure how far along the journey I had travelled.

I now believe that I have the skills and experience to meet, not only, the surface level challenges of the role but also, I now realise, the experience to apply user experience thinking strategically to address wider commercial challenges as a UX Consultant.

Perhaps most importantly I believe that my passion for: learning, challenging my own thinking, challenging the orthodoxy, recognising that I don’t know everything, for being confident enough to ask for help, for being brave enough to try and fail rather then never try at all has given me the requisite personal tools to adapt to any challenges the role will present.

In the end, I work extremely hard to craft products and service that work for people; People who are just on the whole trying to get on with living.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Every project has different outputs and needs. This framework approach allows me to focus less on a rigid process and more on addressing the business and customer goals. Depending on the nature of the project I will implement one of more of the following steps. For example, if the client requires a new solution definition, conceptualisation and evaluation may be necessary. If the project is already in progress only the evaluation may be required.

Definition - What is the problem space?

Definition is intended to establish what the intention of the project is, to understand what's happening now and how it differs from what needs to be achieved. The focus is on understanding the business, technical and user goals and to tum them into measurable outcomes.

Key output: High-level functional specification

Can include: project scoping document, business case, stakeholder workgroups, user research plan, user research activities, mental models, personas, business process models.

Conceptualisation - What will the solution look like?

Conceptualisation turns the high-level functional specification into a full functional specification including: wireframes, prototypes and user journeys, which are delivered to the design and development production teams. Throughout these steps the solution is validated against business, user and technical goals and revised where necessary through a project control process.

Key output: Full functional specification

Can include: wireframes, user journeys, prototypes, information architecture, stakeholder management, supplier management, technical liaison

Evaluation - Does the solution meet the intended outcome?

Evaluation allows for the specific measurement of the project against the stated business goals. Evaluation can be implemented prior to the definition phase to provide a benchmark for the next phase of development.

Key output: Evaluation report and next steps

Can include: usability testing, expert review, keystroke level mapping, conversion optimisation, competitor analysis.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

The advent of the e-book reader has changed reading for a whole swathe of the population. People have access to massive libraries of books, which can be purchased and delivered instantly. No longer do you have to wait a whole 24 hours to receive your book, you can now have your library in your pocket wherever you are.

While this is massively more convenient there are some downsides. The act of reading is a solitary pursuit, but the act of sharing knowledge and experience is a social endeavour. Discovering, discussing and sharing books is a big component if this.

Digital Rights Management

DRM means that it's difficult, if not impossible to share your books with friends and colleagues. It’s also next to impossible to quote books as the expected, copy and paste functionality is usually prevented.

Hope is on the horizon though, Amazon.com have started to enable lend features, which allow a kindle user to lend their book for 14 days to another kindle user. Currently this is limited to customers in the USA but I imagine it won’t be long before it’s rolled out to the rest of the world.

Empowering publishers

I imagine the option to “lend” books is controlled by the individual publishers, and an inherent fear of most publishers is that if you can too easily lend books then there is potential for lost revenue.

Currently if you recommend a book to someone, you have to either share your login information with them or they have to buy a copy of the book themselves. Given the current situation, where people are recreating their libraries digitally, it must be a boom period for publishers; as books sales have declined massively in recent years. The switch to e-books, for a limited period, must be giving the industry a glimpse of light at the end of the tunnel.

Empowering publishers, empowering readers

With the potential for this loss of a shared reading experience a middle ground must be found between publishers and readers; Whilst discussing this with a friend we came up with the following suggestions.

Firstly I would reduce the 14-day lending period offered by Amazon to a 7-day lending period and add two new elements. 

1. At the end of the lending period the recipient is given a discounted to buy the lent book.
2. If the recipient buys the book the lender should be give a small discount off their next purchase.

Reducing the lending period would entice readers to buy their own copy while they’re reading the book; I imagine most people in our time-poor society would take longer than the 7 days to read the book.

Offering a discount would make purchasing the book more likely, as by the end of the lending period, they are hopefully engaged by the book.

Providing a discount to the lender for a future purchases would entice them to lend more books, which will increasing the potential for additional revenue to the publishers.

Whilst there would obviously be some additional constraints, I believe a lending system as outlined above would provided a win-win situation for readers and publishers and will bring the social element back into the activity of reading.

My notes, your notes

Another area of change would be in sharing notes and quotes, through the lending system I would like to see lenders and recipients be given the option to share notes. Allowing them to have a conversation, facilitated through the context of the book.

Currently all e-book readers allow for annotations and highlights. Notes are private but highlights are shared globally. In the lending situation outlined above I would expect to see the option to share notes with the recipient, and the ability to comment on each other notes.

Perhaps, in the future we will be even the ability to see everyone's notes, and to facilitate a wider discussions. Of course you should have the ability to switch off or restrict access to the notes.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

135g - Plain Flour
1 - Egg
350ml - Milk

Will make approx. 6 pancakes.

---

1. Sieve flour into a large bowl
2. Make a well in the flour then break the egg into the well.
3. Gradually pour the milk into the bowl mixing the ingredients into a smooth paste.

--

Put a frying pan in to a low-medium heat with a little oil (sun flower oil is the best, olive oil sucks ass)

When the oil runs easily across the pan add a ladle of pancake mix.

When the top of the pancake looks mostly set flip over and cook on the other side.

Cook, turning regularly, to your required Pantone ;)

Enjoy your breakfast ;)

N.b did you know the browning reaction that happens when cooking is called the Maillard reaction?

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Call me a cynic but I'm a little skeptical of most companies social media policies; usually they're just another route for further direct marketing.

However, I've been pleasantly surprised with the use to which Blue Star busses and First Buses Hampshire have put their Facebook pages.

Throughout the recent cold snap both have used their accounts to give frequent updates about the road conditions and changes to bus routes affected by snow.

The staff have been manning the pages throughout the day and night, giving early warning of all changes and delays.

As a regular public transport user I've been very grateful, ensuring that I can get to where I need to go without much fuss.

Using social media platforms such as Facebook and twitter to support your customers, respond to queries and provide transparency is real world usability, straight out of book.

Anyone familiar with Jakob Neilsen's usability heuristics will recognise the following:

1. Visibility of system status

The system should always keep users informed about what is going on, through appropriate feedback within reasonable time.

2. Match between system and the real world

The system should speak the users' language, with words, phrases and concepts familiar to the user, rather than system-oriented terms. Follow real-world conventions, making information appear in a natural and logical order.

3. Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors

Error messages should be expressed in plain language (no codes), precisely indicate the problem, and constructively suggest a solution.

4. Help and documentation

Even though it is better if the system can be used without documentation, it may be necessary to provide help and documentation. Any such information should be easy to search, focused on the user's task, list concrete steps to be carried out, and not be too large.

The interesting thing is that the system, in this case is complex, made up of the delivery platform, in office business representatives, bus drivers and customers.

The platform is being used as an agent to ensure that the real word system notifies and supports its users in completing their tasks.

For a usability geek, the snow has been a lot of fun :)

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

The health minister is empowering councils to "nudge" us into a healthier lifestyle

This phrase confirms that David Cameron and the "compassionate conservatives" are acting on their consultations with Prof. Cass Sunstein and Richard Thaler about social policy reform.

For those of you who don't recognise the names, Prof. Sunstein is currently the Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Thaler is a behavioural economist most noted for his work with Daniel Kahneman and
Amos Tversky on the Nobel prize winning prospect theory.

Together they co-authored Nudge, a book about choice architecture, which is way of thinking about people and the choices they have, to improve the quality of decision making about "Health, Wealth, and Happiness".

In essence nudge is about understanding that human beings are not "rational agents" (I.e. given all the information a person will always make the best possible decision) and that through a series of rules of thumb (heuristics), constraints and errors of thinking (cognitive errors) humans tend to behave less rationally. The book describes some of the common errors we make and shows how to encourage people to make better decisions. On the whole it is a fascinating book and well worth the read.

However, the idea that our behaviour is being subtly influenced, by the way choices are offered to us, by any governing party leaves me feeling a little cold.

I'm not intending to sound like a bleeding heart liberal. I can see a lot of benefit in designing a way to offer choice, while reducing the burden on the population to process and understand complex information, across multiple verticals.

I'm also aware that this happens anyway and I'd personally prefer someone, who's informed, to be responsible for designing my choices then for it to happen adhoc with unknown consequences.

The reason my blood runs cold is simply that it's the conservative party that's doing it! This is not a statement on my political affiliation but is simply an extension of thought about choice architecture. If someone can design a way for me to make better choices by understanding my errors in thinking then surely my understanding of that persons motivations is as clouded by the same errors.

Think about it this way, I grew up under a conservative government. I remember the party being mired by the poll tax scandal, sleaze, individual self interest and rampant capitalism. They left power in 1997 with an extremely low poll rating and took 13 years to become a credible force in politics again.

It is quite possible that in the last 13 years the conservative party have changed. That they are the party of a fairer, equal society but for some reason I just can't buy it. (Baring in mind, they are openly using an approach to encourage people to make better decisions (on who's agenda?) which some could view as coercive and you can start to see my problem). Perhaps John Major was right and England is a "country of long shadows" and my cynicism is simply an instance of the Semmelweis effect, a "reflex-like rejection of new knowledge because it contradicts entrenched norms", perhaps?

Ultimately though I applaud the government for being open about what they are doing, and why. If I were them though I wouldn't be surprised if there were a backlash, as people misjudge their motivations.

Let's hope Thaler at least taught them about some other errors in thinking, which might cast doubt on their (no-doubt) good intentions.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

The many way's I've described UX

---

What is UX (1)

User Experience is an umbrella term for a series of different disciplines:

• Usability
• Accessibility
• information Architecture
• Interaction Design

but certainly not interchangeable with web developer, it's true to say that some web developers do some maybe all of the above but in the most part their job is about cutting code to create products. Also, some user experience professionals do cut code but it's not their primary role.

Lets not also forget that user experience operates outside of the web, so customer experience tends to refer to the experience a person has with a brand across all it's platforms: in the shop from, customer service calls, marketing materials etc. Where as Human factors and Ergonomics tend (??) to refer to products not services.

What is UX (2)

UX activities give us a unique insight into how the customers interact with our product and service but the product and services only really exist to improve the bottom line of the organisations who commission them. 

UX therefore should also be about defining and measuring business goals and validating the outcomes in terms of customer acceptance and business realisation. 

What is UX (3)

 "A person's perceptions and responses that result from the use or anticipated use of a product, system or service." - ISO 2941-210, (Thanks to Allen Caeg)

What is UX (4)

UX is the sweet spot between business, technical and customer requirements.

What is UX (5)

UX works across three elements of service delivery. 

1. Strategy I.e goal definition
2. Asset delivery i.e Outputs
3. Measuring the outcome

Depending on how you're engaged on a project you will view UX differently. 

Suppose we view "service delivery" as product lifecycle with 4 key phases. 

1. Definition
2. Design
3. Development
4. Testing

It's easy to see how the role of a UX professional won't fit easily into the definition I gave in what is UX (1)

Phase 1. Deals primarily with early stage tasks, setting out the business case for change, requirements analysis. Here a UX professional will use research techniques to evaluate the opportunity to help set the business goals for the project. There are some research techniques which can be used but very little outputs from IxD, IA etc. at this stage

Through phase 2. and 3. Were moving into the realms of creating outputs to support other functions delivering. Here IxD, IA etc can and do play a cruital role. It's in this phase that most UX professionals exist. 

Phase 4 is where UX professionals again provide a strategic role. Did the delivery meet the project goals?

All this rests on the premis that a project needs to pay equal weight to: business, technical and customer needs.

UX plays a role in all four phases although traditionally these roles are given different job titles. Business Analys, Change consultant, web designer etc. etc. The skills a UX professional has are relevant to all these job titles. 

Job titles are a way for a company to define and constrain a persons role to fit it's individual needs and area of responsibility. The skillsets though (as described in the diffrent UX roles) are present in most roles engaged in product or service delivery.

What is UX (6)

A way to chat up the only girl at a geek-up

What is UX (6)

What [Guru X] tells us it is.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Those who have worked with me will know that I can sometimes be as frustrating as hell! I work by a let's get it done mentality; rules be dammed. Why, I wonder, follow the rules when the bureaucracy actively prevents humans acting reasonably to work together to bring a project to fruition. Trust in enlightened self interest I say!

The fear is, of course, that at some point another's view or agenda will take precedence, diverting the project from it's original goals. We spend weeks and months defining and tying down, the how's to ensure that everyone knows what they are responsible for. These rules are ultimately designed to mitigate the financial risks of the organisations we work for.

There are real constraints though: a goal or vision must be defined and measurable, the outputs must be declared and the outcomes must be measured. Project plans, milestones and checks and balances exist to ensure the successful delivery of the project outputs. After all, we are ultimately constrained by time or money and usually both.

By measuring the project at the vision or goal level we are able to determine if a project has succeeded or failed, without having to legislating for every individual action. Conversely the act of legislation prevents creative thinking, and learning, from happening ensuring that efficiency and positive feature changes are not discovered.

By denying the activity of continual discovery we are unwittingly adhering to the fallacy that we can accurately predict future wants and needs. I.e. Future efficiencies and better functionality cannot be explored as the problem space is illuminated because they weren't declared ahead of time.

Where change is recognised, the business case is presented and a change request is created. Usually though this is a one way street. Features are taken out while project expenditure remains the same and additions always increase the project expenditure. Reinforcing the need to restrict change as "scope creep" is always presented as having a negative impact on a project.

I therefore suggest creating an feature/output trading scheme. Whereby all change regardless of the impact is assessed this includes the financial impact; Good or bad. If the impact is positive (for the project) put the balance in the project bank, for when something goes wrong. If it's negative and you have something to spend, spend what you have. If there is nothing in the bank to spend, you at least have the data you need to decide the next step.

For example

It is discovered that feature a/output b is no longer needed. An impact assessment is drawn up showing the impact of not doing it, including financial saving. If agreed, It's withdrawn and the saving is added to the project balance. Later if feature c/output d is required, an impact assessment is drawn up showing the impact of doing it. If the change is agreed and there is a positive project balance the costs are transferred and the change is committed. If there isn't a project balance a business case us drawn up and more fund requested with the data from the impact analysis used to support the request.

I'm in no doubt that this simple idea is unofficially in practice in most projects. Except, that when something goes wrong and you need to understand who's financial responsibility it is (I.e. Who's to blame) the whole house of cards can comes tumbling down. As it is unofficial: Change, financial impact and trade offs are not captured and therefore the problem can not be measured against the original brief.

By acknowledging the reality of the situation in a transparent, documented approach we can embrace change, allow new discovery to flourish knowing that at a later date, as long as the bank account balances, everything is okay.

p.s. for any agile practitioners out there i know an agile approach can facilitate change as described above. Agile isn't a pervasive methodology for most of the clients i work with.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

In the immortal words of the Scottish philosopher Billy Connolly "There is no such thing as bad weather, only the wrong clothes" and so it is with clients.

Let’s be honest, there are some businesses you should never work with and some who are slightly more work than others. Sadly, it’s this mismatch between agencies and clients that allows the "bad client" myth to prevail.

Clients you should never work with
Like people, there are some businesses you should never, ever work with. Do your homework; the engagement process is a two-way street. You can be certain they’ve checked you out thoroughly and you should do the same.

• Do your company cultures fit? If you're an agency that specialises in mobile website design for the games industry then don't commit to creating a corporate intranet. Say NO.
• What's their burn-through rate? If they are burning through a couple of agencies a year, something's broken and you probably won't be able to fix it. Say NO.
• Do you have to cut your prices just to get in the front door? You have overheads so what's the use in going out of business before the job’s done? Say NO.
• Are you being asked for the moon on a stick? You'll never achieve the impossible, so if they aren't prepared to be realistic say NO.

I know it's tough to say no. You're worried where the next cheque is coming from and there’s rent to cough up and staff to pay. But if you say yes you're going to hate it. Worse than that, you're going to demotivate your staff and you could miss the opportunity that's just right for you coming around the corner.

Clients that are more work than others
If there is nothing fundamentally wrong but you find yourself being knocked from pillar to post then it's time to take control. You're the experts, you've been asked to deliver a project and that's what you're going to do.

Four simple tips:

1. Be honest - explain the difficulties and propose a way of working to ensure a successful outcome.
2. Communicate - Let your client know what's happening. You don't have to respond immediately but don't neglect them. Most problems can be resolved quickly with a simple phone call.
3. Set realistic expectations - Do not over promise and under deliver.
4. Set ground rules - How will changes be factored in? What response time will you provide on emails and phone calls?

It's probably not going to be smooth sailing, and you'll probably have to reiterate the rules several times, but in the end you'll find a happy medium that works for both you and your client.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

In May BBC 2 and BBC HD will be showing a 5 part series entitled "The Genius of Design".

The series examines the history of design, focusing on inventions – such as the ring pull and the fitted kitchen – that have transformed modern life.

To accompany the series a companion book, "Genius of Design" by Penny Sparke, has been published and is available on Amazon et al.

About the book

See the full gallery on Posterous

This landmark book takes a unique, original and engrossing approach to design. Whether or not we are consciously interested in it, design is omnipresent; it affects and influences us all in every aspect of our lives. The Genius of Design illuminates what design is, how it works, and how it has shaped the world we live in.

Taking a broadly chronological approach, the book shows how the story of design has developed and explores major themes, with chapters including the birth of mass-produced design, domestic design and the contemporary home and the legacy of wartime design. The book shows how design reflects the political, cultural and economic themes of our times, how it connects both to the macro forces of history (industrialisation, consumerism, technology) and the micro forces (taste, money, desire) and how it manifests itself everywhere, from battlefield and boardroom to supermarket and schoolroom. More than anything, though, the book tells the stories that lie behind the iconic designs of our times.

It tells how the first fitted kitchen was based on the principles behind the Ford production line, how wartime research ultimately led to the biro, latex condoms and aviator sunglasses. It celebrates the heroes of design and the lesser know people responsible for some of the everyday objects we take for granted. And it examines the role of the consumer and the issues of taste - what really is good or bad design? Provocative, absorbing and packed with images, this enthralling book reveals what design means to us - the trivial and the mundane, the life-saving and the world-changing.

About the Author, Penny Spark

Penny Sparke (born 1948, London) is a British writer and academic specialising in the history of design.

She studied French Literature at Sussex University between 1967 and 1971 and completed her PhD in Design History in 1975. She taught Design History at Brighton Polytechnic (now The University of Brighton) until 1982 and at the Royal College of Art in London between 1982 and 1999.^[1]

Sparke has written 15 books about Twentieth-Century Design. She has also curated a number of exhibitions, including The Plastics Age at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London in 1990. Since 1999 she has also been a Professor of Design History at Kingston University, London. In 2007 Penny Sparke worked as a consultant for Pyrex helping with the communication project for their new cookware range designed by George Sowden.

From Wikipedia

I would imagine for anyone who enjoyed Don Norman's Design of Everyday Things I'm sure both the book and the series will be fascinating.

Note

A DVD of the series is already listed on Amazon.co.uk - so you might not have to wait until May.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Permalink | Leave a comment  »