Login | Register


The Feature Creep

A place for discussing what users want versus what users need. Trying to nail down what makes software easy to use, what makes a site fun to use and how to keep them coming back for more.

Previous in Blog: Usability Bubbles   Next in Blog: The Comfort Zone (The Hammer pt.2)
Close

Comments Format:






Close

Subscribe to Discussion:

CR4 allows you to "subscribe" to a discussion
so that you can be notified of new comments to
the discussion via email.

Close

Rating Vote:







3 comments

The Hammer pt. 1

Posted September 19, 2006 11:52 AM by BRodda
Pathfinder Tags: design Feature creep hammer

Lets get started by talking about the hammer. It's one of the earliest human tools and something that people still constantly try to improve upon. So lets boil down what the function of the hammer is at its simplest form and figure out what its features should be and then we can decide what are good features and what are bad features. Then lets convert it to software and see if we can apply the lessons learned from the hammer exercise.

What is a hammer? The funny thing is that the hammer is just a way of transferring kinetic energy to an object. It is a lever with more mass at one end of it. When you say hammer to most people and this is the image they get.

That a carpenter's hammer and its a false assumption. We need to decide what the application we really want to do with the tool. You can't let the assumption of what the tool is decide it's features or even what type of tool it is. If you don't know what the users need the tool for you can't even start the design process. Otherwise you might end up with a hammer like this.

or thisor even this .

They are all still hammers, but they all have different design specs. They all have different applications. I've been in to many meetings where we were told to design an e-mail tool or a Gigabit Ethernet hub or some other THING without any regard to what the end user REALLY needs the tool to do. Part of it is that no one likes to write up a Design Requirements document, part of it is everyone assumes that everyone else knows what they want and mean, part of it is the desire to avoid the months of meetings that some places require to get consensus on what users really want. In some cases they hear what the users want "We want a hammer" without looking into what the problem they are having, "We are trying to fit square pegs in round holes."

So lets set up a basic Design Requirements:

1) The hammer needs to be one handed for ease of use.

2) The hammer is intended to drive nails into wood.

Very simple, but it does get rid of 90% of the features that could have been designed; war-hammers, sledgehammers, ball-peen hammers, etc.

And you have an application that might not even need a hammer like we were told. Its possible that what people thought they needed was a hammer, but the best tool might be a something different.

Like a nail gun.

So when you start designing you should look into what you want the end result to be, not what you think is the best way to solve what they tell you they want.


Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.
Power-User

Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 398
Good Answers: 1
#1

Re: The Hammer pt. 1

09/20/2006 10:29 AM

It does not seem like this is creating a lot of interest. I guess the hammer has just been around for millenia and cannot be fundamentally improved upon, kind of like the bow and arrow. But wait, someone did just that, invented the compound bow and made a fortune.

I think the first thing one has to do is list the short comings of hammers that an improved design might overcome.

i.e. Safety

Hammers can miss the nail and hit your thumb.

Hammers have hardened faces, which if two hammers are struck together, can fracture sending high velocity splinters of metal into your eye.

Hammers can strike a nail improperly and send the nail flying off into someones face.

Hammers can slip out of your hand and go flying into someones head.

Continuous use of hammers can result in repetitive motion injury.

When working on ladders and scafolding, you have to use two hands to set the nail and hit it, meaning you have to let go of your support and increase your risk of falling.

The Feature Creep

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 1076
#2
In reply to #1

Re: The Hammer pt. 1

09/20/2006 10:41 AM

I guess its a bad name for the post because I'm using it as a metaphor. By keeping it to an item that everyone (I hope) knows I was hoping to cover good design theory.

The point of the best tool might not be the one you originally assume was my point. But you raise some good points. For example plastic hammers for places where sparks could cause explosions (coal mine, silos, etc). The application determines so much of the features that I find it odd that more people don't really sit down and figure out what it is that users want. The design it and hope their target market wants it.

__________________
"The future is here. It's just not widely distributed yet." -William Gibson
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member United Kingdom - Member - New Member

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Harlow England
Posts: 6364
Good Answers: 82
#3

Re: The Hammer pt. 1

06/03/2007 12:42 PM

What the customer NEEDS, WANTS and THINKS HE WANTS. are three different things.

And often the man who thinks he is the customer ISN'T!!!

I write simple control software for dosing chemicals into processes, a lot of it is very simple commercial dishwashing (warewash).

This is an interesting example because:-

Our equipment is 'given away free' by the man who sells the chemical.

It is installed by an 'engineer' (fitter).

The end use is the kitchen staff!

Who is the customer?

...The installer...in the first instance.

He is the man with the clout (to equate to your hammer metaphor). He wants it simple & quick to install and reliable.

The Chemical supplier THINKS he wants it cheap....he doesn't really, he wants simple and quick to install (as he has to pay for this), he also wants reliable as he will end up paying for any call outs.

The kitchen staff just want reliable.

So...when do we get to the software?

It has to be user friendly simple (and consistent). If an installer has to refer to a manual he won't install your products again, he'll recomend something else to the chemical guy.

Just to complete the picture the Dishwasher manufacturer will charge a lot for any call out (after all he has already made his sale!)...so if there are any problems the kitchen supervisor will call the chemical guy, who is reliant on the repeat sales and will respond for fear of losing custom.

The whole point of this is the secification....

You have to ask the right people the right questions, else you get the wrong spec' and the wrong product.

__________________
health warning: These posts may contain traces of nut.
3 comments
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

BRodda (1), Del the cat (1), Howetwo (1)

Previous in Blog: Usability Bubbles   Next in Blog: The Comfort Zone (The Hammer pt.2)
You might be interested in: Impact Hammers, Desktop Personal Computers, Industrial Hand Tools