[IxDA Discuss] (no subject)

[Phillip Hunter]

I have to disagree on two points. I have definitely worked with stakeholders
who meant "everyone" literally.  And there are significant populations that
do not benefit from any of the products mentioned or require significant
modifications to the version they do enjoy.  And isn't ""everyone" within
certain *criteria*" just what we're saying: that there are definable groups?

 

Phillip

 

  _____  

From: Robert Hoekman, Jr. [mailto:rhoekmanjr at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 7:44 PM
To: phillip at speechcycle.com
Cc: IxDA Discuss
Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] (no subject)

 

"Exactly. Not unless you're designing a toilet. And even then... ;-)"
"Even telephones (and the systems behind them) aren't designed for
everyone."

You're debating semantics.

Clearly, the "everyone" in "we're designing for everyone" does not really
refer to "everyone". It refers to something more like, "a very broad range
of users, some of which are likely to be the exact opposite of each other,
who have internet connections, and are willing to do X, Y, and Z on the
web." Even the stakeholders realize that. 

"Everyone" is a lot easier to say. Rolls off the tongue, you know?

So, yes, it is *very* possible to be tasked with designing a product that is
for "everyone". And it is *very* possible to succeed. 

Cars, televisions, streets, water fountains - I could go on. Heck, I work
for a domain registrar - it's a prime example. These are all designed for
"everyone" within certain criteria. People can differ wildly and still fit
cleanly into a set of criteria. 

-r-