Happy Valentine’s Day! I bought a bacon rose for my girlfriend – #ihopeshethinksitsawesome?
I’ve been thinking a lot over the last few days about how to design applications that give users the foundation – the house – but let them add character and flair in a way that isn’t obtrusive. Even better, without doing much or any work on top of what they would be doing normally. Those type of interactions done well are delightful.
For example, in the CareWell application I’m designing and building for caregivers and their families, any user in the family can add and change the group’s photo. This will also update the background to the logo, visible on every screen. I’m betting that users will change the photo, not only because it affects what they see – but that because they know other members will see that photo and delight in it.
My guess is that individuals become more attached to things that represent their uniqueness, and are therefore less likely to stop using them. Individuals are also more likely to use things that help them express that uniqueness to other people.
This is the anti-path/fb Paper approach to design. They’ve gone ahead, curated, and built the whole shebbang. With perfect pixels and manicured swipes, the apps look great (I’m actually extremely envious of their design team talent!), but I’ll never use them again. There’s no room for me to make it mine.
This may very well be the fundamental difference between interaction design and industrial design. I want something physical designed to perfection, because it is immutable. It’s also easier to show off. Pixels, on the other hand, are hidden and ephemeral. Great design in this sphere requires thoughtful usability, restraint, and the respect to let the user co-create delight.No Comments »