[IxDA Discuss] Anti Read: Want to build the next ?hot? technology?

[Mark Schraad]

So in simple and existing terms, we're are talking about designing things or designing systems right?

Mark


On Wednesday, September 05, 2007, at 05:03PM, "James Leftwich, IDSA" <jleft at orbitnet.com> wrote:
>Faith's take on Roger Costello's short blog entry is completely and  
>100% spot on.  It's exactly what he's trying to get at, but  
>unfortunately doesn't take the time or amount of words to clarify.   
>It's a rather complex issue - "metadesign" or the design of systems  
>or component sets within which sub-embodiments and/or extensions will  
>be further designed.
>
>Meta-design:
>
>Design of html/the Web
>Design of Blogger or Wordpress or Myspace or
>Design of the Second Life or World of Warcraft virtual worlds
>Design of an OS GUI framework and interaction pattern rule base
>
>Design:
>
>Design of a website
>Design of an individual blog or soc net page
>Design of a SL or WOW place, building, character, or behavior, etc..
>Design of an application for a particular OS
>
>Most of the design in the world occurs at the design level, not the  
>meta-design level.  But it's true that efforts in meta-design lead to  
>the opening up of entire worlds of opportunity to do sub-level design  
>and evolution.  That's what he's saying, and it's completely true.
>
>This same thing has been pointed out numerous times in the past.
>
>Jim
>
>James Leftwich, IDSA
>Orbit Interaction
>Palo Alto, CA
>www.orbitnet.com
>
>
>
> >  From: "Jarod Tang" <jarod.tang at gmail.com>
> >  Date: September 5, 2007 6:54:31 AM PDT
> >  To: "Faith Peterson" <f.a.peterson at gmail.com>
> >  Cc: discuss at ixda.org
> >  Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Anti Read: Want to build the next  
>?hot? technology?
> >  Design it so that it enables complexity.
> >
> >
> >  agree with your analyze. still doubt if this is enough misleading:
> >
> >  "I asked a very bright colleague, "What are technologies that  
>survive?" He
> >  responded, "Those technologies that enable  
>complexity." [Complexity is the
> >  ability of simple things to be composed to create complex things]"
> >
> >  for e.g. , there complex enough technology such as A.I. , which  
>as we know
> >  is almost waste of research and application energy.
> >
> >  Cheers
> >  -- Jarod
> >
> >  On 9/5/07, Faith Peterson <f.a.peterson at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >  Another take on that post is that it merely states the obvious.  
>He's not
> >  saying make your app complex. He's talking about combining  
>simpler objects
> >  into composites.
> >
> >  Examples: apps that make it possible for users to combine simple  
>objects
> >  like buttons, input boxes, and so forth to create GUIs. Enabling  
>users to
> >  combine characters and formatting instructions to create documents.
> >  Enabling
> >  Web users to combine articles, comments, and open editing to  
>synthesize
> >  information. Enabling real-world social network members/ 
>organizers to
> >  create
> >  online networks (a la Ning, although I doubt anyone would hold up  
>Ning as
> >  an
> >  example of good design - it's only an example of enabling users  
>to create
> >  something complex out of simpler things).
> >
> >  Non-software examples - combine images, words, and music to  
>create films.
> >  Combine ingredients to create food using a food processor, a  
>technology
> >  that
> >  changed the way millions of people work in the kitchen. Combine  
>fthe means
> >  to cook foods that need precisely controlled head sources, those  
>that need
> >  constant, uniform heat (and make it possible to cook things in this
> >  category
> >  that are different sizes, or require different temperatures),  
>those that
> >  benefit from speed/steam, along with the means to cook all of  
>these at the
> >  time of one's own choosing and a simple cleanup - do all that and  
>you have
> >  the modern dual-power, dual-oven self-cleaning range with split  
>oven racks
> >  and dedicated simmer/high heat burners.
> >
> >  That's not counter-design, it's what makes design necessary.
> >
> >  My .02.
> >
> >  -Faith
> >
> >  ------------------------------------------------------------
> >  Faith Peterson
> >  f.a.peterson at gmail.com
> >  Schaumburg, IL
> >
> >
> >  On 9/5/07, Jarod Tang <jarod.tang at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >  Want to build the next "hot" technology? Design it so that it  
>enables
> >  complexity.<
> >
> >  http://rogercostello.wordpress.com/2007/09/01/want-to-build-the- 
>next-hot-technology-design-it-so-that-it-enables-complexity/
> >
> >  should say, this article is quite a anti experience to read, too
> >  abstract
> >  but you'll see some real example of it. such as lovely vista.
> >  fully disagree with it.
> >
> >  Cheers
> >  -- Jarod
>