Why Simple UX is a Bad Thing

So I found this article on AIGA and the basis for this article is to stop making UX (User Experience) so simple. I found this article to be really useful as it really pertains to my skill set.  It also subcategorized different aspects of UX design, stating that making something simple isn’t so simple in fact. It states that every designer that has used an iPhone tries to base their design off of their layout, as it is the best example of simplicity, but in reality it is not as simple as it looks. The reality of it is, there is a constant learning curve and is incredibly complicated. It states that every app that apple comes out with introduces a new way of doing things, but in reality the difference is very minimal and comes in an endless supply.

            In this instance, good design can be applied to make the complex appear simple, creating clarity in the design. In reality, the iPhone handles a lot of different programs and services. iPhone’s are anything but simple, but neither is a 30-page survey on a dating website. The design may be beautifully designed, sophisticated, and considered, but one thing they are not is simple.

            As the article states, not everything can be simple or easy to use. A lot of apps out there are extremely complex, but it is necessary to limit the type of user who uses the app or service. But even though they are complex doesn’t mean that they can’t be clear, delivering the desired message to the user.            

            The writer of this post states that the most common question he receives is how to apply lessons in core web application design principles; his response is “You apply them to each and every interaction exactly as you would in a narrow-scope application. The principles all still apply. The system you’re working on may be more complex, but the principles can still then be applied on a micro scale to each screen within it”. This could not be more true, just because it appears to be complex and difficult to navigate, does not mean it can’t be simple and beautifully designed.

Angry Ram Studios

So, this is my first official post announcing the fact that I plan to launch my own business upon successfully graduating with my masters in entertainment business. Launching my own business is something that I really didn’t plan on doing going into this degree program. Starting this degree program, all I was really looking was to learn the business aspect of working for a company and all I really wanted to do was to eventually become a great creative director. But now, with more than ¾ of the program already over and graduation looming even closer, I realize that I want to start my own design studio. The purpose of my company will be to provide graphic services to a variety of clients, varying from complete marketing packages to something as simple a designing a logo for a new business.

            Elaborating on the types of services my company will provide, we will do pretty much anything the client may ask. It may be something as simple as designing a single page advertisement for their company highlighting who they are and hinting at what kind of service they provide or maybe a product they are trying to sell. Each client will have their needs met, provided my staff will be able to execute it. If not, I will not be afraid to “hire” a freelancer to help meet the goals of the client.

            But starting my own business will be an adventure within itself, getting the paperwork together is just a small part of it. Making sure my business proposal is together to ensure that when I apply for a small business loan to not only pay my employees, but to also purchase the gear and software essential to running my company, making sure that my employees have the most up to date software to ensure the best possible work.

Industry Liabilities

The first lawsuit involves a large number of organizations suing Google, more specifically relating to their illegal scanning of millions of books and other publications that contain copyrighted images and displaying them to the public. This action was taken in order to protect the interest of owners of copyrights in visual works.

Basically this lawsuit was brought on because various artists, illustrators and photographers were disregarded their basic rights and were not given their due credit or even consulted by Google reps when they uploaded their work to the site. In my opinion, what Google did was wrong, they should have consulted these artists before they uploaded their work to their search engine or at least given them credit for their work.

            This next lawsuit involves the popular gaming company, Blizzard Entertainment, suing a popular cheating bot for copyright infringement and ruining the “gaming experience for legitimate players.” Blizzard notes that the bots created by the company “Honor Buddy” infringe on its copyrights, ruining the fun for other players, causing financial damage to them.

            This lawsuit was brought on because an outside company created a program that helped destroy the integrity of Blizzard games, and also diverting revenue from Blizzard to their own bank accounts. This is wrong, to create a program to basically feed of inexperienced “gamers” for their own financial gains. On top of that, there is the belief that the company made millions through the bot sales.

            The final lawsuit is filed by Modern Dog Design against Target and Disney. They claim that Disney and Target used their design in a tee shirt they were selling and also featured photos of the shirt on their website. The grounds for the claim against the two companies are the fact that they are making unauthorized copies of the artwork for use on shirts.

            This lawsuit really hits home for me because these two companies stole the image from their book and used it for their own gains, without even compensating the company or even giving them credit for using their artwork. This raises a lot of questions for me personally and also some fears, that something like this could happen to my business.

https://www.bigclassaction.com/lawsuit/copyright-infringement-lawsuit-google-lawsuits-class.php

http://sites.udel.edu/cisc356/2015/04/29/modern-dog-design-vs-target-and-disney/

https://torrentfreak.com/blizzard-sues-bot-maker-for-copyright-infringement-151111/

Negotiation Tactics

For this assignment, I watched 3 different videos that each discussed negotiation techniques. The first video I watched was William Ury’s video “The walk from “no” to “yes”. One fact that I took away from this video was the story at the beginning of his speech regarding the 3 brothers who were trying to figure out how to divide up 17 camels between themselves. What I took from this short story was how to reach a mutual benefit between the 3 brothers in how to divide up the camels. Much like the story people need to step back from situations and find the “18^th” camel in and come to mutual grounds when it comes to a negotiation.

            Stephen Stuart gave the next video I watched and he discussed the Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA). In the video he said the best thing to remember is to not bargain over your position. Any negotiation should produce a wise agreement, it should be efficient and it should improve the relationship between parties, not damage them. A wise agreement is one which meets the legitimate interests of each side to the extent possible and resolves conflicting interests. Basically this entire speech revolves around the BATNA and one key fact he pointed out was that a party should not accept a worse resolution than it’s BATNA and that care should be taken to make sure that deals are accurately valued, taking all considerations into account.     

            Margaret Neale gave the next video I watched and she talked about getting what you want in a negotiation.  In the video she covered the basic outline of negotiations, one thing I took away from the video was that you have information that your counterparts don’t have, and that is what you should bring to the table. If they had all your information, they wouldn’t need you but because you have unique information and they have unique information, value is created between yourself and the people you are negotiating with.