[Wolves] E-mail

[sparkes]

The artist formally known as Stuart Langridge was heard to say...
> Rob Annable said:
>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 12:01:06 +0100 (BST), Stuart Langridge
>> <sil at kryogenix.org> wrote:
>>
>>> And beautiful doesn't interest me in an interface; usable interests
>>> me...
>>
>> Is beauty and usability mutually exclusive? If so, I gonna give in right
>> now.
>
> I knew someone was going to pick me up on that.
well it was obvious ;-)

>
> It is my experience, cynical though it may be, that something which is
> described as "beautiful" hasn't had much attention paid to usability.

Some things that are very usable are also very beautifull, examples are
all around us.  Shoes are normally very usable and very beautiful ;-)  The
human form does exactly what it needs to and in some cases is very, very
attractive while doing it.

OK, they are very odd examples the shoe has had thousands of years of
development to get it usable and looking good at the same time and
evolution of the human form occured paralell to our development of what is
actractive so can't be used as an example really.

A better example would be the mouse.  There are some pretty horrific
examples of mouse design from both asthetic and usable points of view but
sometimes they are brilliant from both points of view.  the apple
professional mouse is an example (yeah, 1 button I know but the interface
it was designed for only needs one button), dam sexy and when your
interface only needs one mouse button very comfortable as well.

> Moreover, what I said above was pretty much true; I'm a lot more
> interested in usability than beauty. Of course, this most certainly does
> not preclude me from liking an interface which is both usable *and*
> beautiful, but usable alone will do, whereas beauty alone will not.
The pedals in your car are a good example of this.  You would prefer them
to work over how they look.  Looking good is secondary to getting the job
done.  But in the right car the pedals are also a work of art.  Form and
function are not exclusive but in interface design you have to choose
function over form if only one is available at the budget or from
available alternatives.

Rob, designing buildings must be the same.  They have to be fit for
purpose first and then you can add the chainmail warthog look second ;-) 
I'm sure your urban redevelopments wouldn't be taken seriously if you
reduced the size of exterior doors by 18" and set them a foot off the
floor to create a more harmonious feel with the windows ;-)

>
> Aq.
>
>
sparkes - who likes interfaces working and sexy