Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • apple, of course, is a perfect example of this sort of thinking. no focus groups by design; either to maintain secrecy or to avoid the waddling march to mediocrity. three ways of thinking about this process--

    1. coder-centric: "let's make this work the way we think it should work"
    2. survey-centric: "let's find out how the user thinks this should work"
    3. user-centric: "let's make this work the way we know the user actually works"

    if you're good, and you obsessively practice the craft of learning how people perceive and use tools--as apple does--(3) is a no-brainer. the question is, how do you get better at (3) to begin with, and barring the time to improve in that area, is (1) or (2) actually more of a waste of time?