Timeline for Is UX design subject to disruptive innovations?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 9, 2013 at 3:03 | review | First posts | |||
| Aug 9, 2013 at 3:09 | |||||
| Jul 16, 2013 at 16:17 | comment | added | user28446 | The whole theory of disruptive technologies is that traditional methods are better because they have evolved more. Certain new ways may be theoretically better, but cannot compete as well while they are underdeveloped. Eventually the theoretical benefits come to fruition and blow the old ways out of the water. Your observations are inline with the theory. | |
| Jul 16, 2013 at 6:02 | comment | added | Neil Tan | What I believe is that, for high level UI design (page layout, information architecture, etc.) we'd better base our ideas on known patterns which the mass users are already familiar with. And for the detailed level, such as element styles and interaction styles, we can be more innovative and brave. It's a bit like font design - we keep the general 'pattern' of letters unchanged (so that they are still readable), and change the minor parts. | |
| Jul 16, 2013 at 3:37 | comment | added | user28446 | So do you believe that a fundamentally better way to design may exist? Or should we always build on what is familiar to computer users. | |
| Jul 16, 2013 at 3:34 | history | answered | Neil Tan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |