Why “ghost”?

So what’s the meaning of the title, Ghost in the Pixel? It’s quite simply a riff on the richly profound and stylish anime flick Ghost in the Shell, elements of which inspired and are mimicked in one of my all-time favorite films, The Matrix.

(I think both should be required viewing for all interaction designers as they concern issues of identity, control, choice, image vs. reality, trust in systems, man-machine interfaces, and their threats to humanity)

As suggested in the anime film, the concept of ghost here refers to some vague, yet significant sentient consciousness or perhaps “soul” that serves as the animating and emotional force behind the dead and lifeless artificial matter, whether cyborg bodies or Flash-based website. Pixels on the screen are merely abstract blips of light via human optical perception, but imbued with a sense of context, purpose, behavior and emotion, they can take on an added richness that hopefully adds value to the human engagement with digital media, from cell phones to websites to car dashboards to bank ATM’s or self-service checkouts. That value can be described in terms of usability, utility, desirability, and commercial viability, as well as technical feasability. Much more on this later!

This blog aims to dig deeper into those “ghosts” that animate the pixels on-screen (as well as atoms in the real world, for physical things), those issues of human experience and philosophy that can guide designers effectively in solving mundane practical problems, and thus avoid getting lost in the immediately obvious haze of electronic artificiality. What are the key questions to ask? What are the critical issues for users beyond achieving tactical efficiencies?

But please don’t get hung up on “ghost” as a term too much :-) It’s simply an evocative metaphor that’s a fun and memorable way of digging into abstract issues. Plus, nothing paranormal or spooky here!

Blog re-boot (and happy new year!)

Finally, after a year since getting the DreamHost service and registering the “ghostinthepixel” domain, I have settled on the foundation of what I hope will be a regularly updated blog focused on the deeper issues underlying interaction design–and the groundwork for a personal design philosophy.

Why am I doing this?

  • As a quietly emerging thought leader, it’s expected to have a blog I suppose for “street cred” value… Hey, I’m game!
  • Frankly, this blog is partly a reaction to what I read on ixda’s discussion list. I’ve grown tired of endless tedious debates that seem to ignore (imho) the potential of interaction design as I’ve been taught. And what does that entail? I shall lay it all out here…slowly…over time…trust me!
  • Following from that, the posts may become a book somedy, much like my fellow Carnegie Mellon School of Design alum Jon Kolko has done (see www.thoughtsoninteraction.com). So yes, I am generating content!

This is a space for various wonderings, hypotheses, and concepts about interaction design as a humanistic and strategic activity (more on this soon). Illuminating upon issues not commonly discussed or identified in daily practice as designers get literally lost in the pixels. The intent is to be more “macro” than “micro”. Many ideas may seem bizarre or (to some folks) flat out wrong (from their point of view ;-)

Finally, the flavor of thinking presented here is distinctly “CMU” with no apologies about it! As I get older and more years removed from my student  days, I fear forgetting critical lessons, so I want this to be my online record (a reverse diary of sorts?) re-capturing and reflecting upon CMU-based design theory and philosophy…and blending that with what I gather from practice along the way, as I work for clients to cultivate my personal approach of Design.

Some of you may know that Dan Saffer has an excellent account of his CMU years which I have often referred to, but peers have often asked me to post my own perspective on the same ideas, given my experience and such.
So finally, here it is. I hope you enjoy it!

** Quick note: I imported posts from a previous blog hosted on blogger, which emphasized issues of digital construction and development. From here on out, the focus will mainly be design theory and strategy. Maybe a couple pixel lessons along the way ;-)

AEA: Seattle 2007 Review

I had the pleasure of attending the Event Apart gathering held June 21-22 in Seattle along the waterfront at the Bell Harbor Conference Center. (big thanks to Involution Studios :-) It’s not my usual kind of conference, with its focus on the pragmatics and tactics of designing websites: css, xhtml, php, grids, accessibility, etc. I typically attend events like DUX, IDSA, IA Summit or even DMI Seminars dealing with broader aspects of design strategy, theory, and process relating to “user-centered design” or “user experience”. So this offered a new view for me into a kind of “web design subculture” if you will…Done by the same folks who do A List Apart, this event is explicitly dedicated to “people who make websites”, with an incredibly level of passion and talent for that space.

Overall, it was a very well-done showcase of thoughts from the field by the practitioners who have become truly the legendary names for the css/xhtml web design crowd: Eric Meyer, Jeffrey Zeldman, Khoi Vinh, Jason Santa Maria, Shaun Inman, Jeff Veen, and so forth. I can almost guarantee these names are not familiar to those who come from Carnegie Mellon, Chicago’s ID, or Stanford HCI :-) Which is quite telling about the different “sub-cultures” of design that have emerged in the last decade, focused on various aspects of designing user experience–whether it’s experience theory, innovation planning, human factors, or visual craft & web technologies. Nothing wrong with that, of course. There’s a wonderful plurality of design philosophies, styles, and methods that should be acknowledged; cross-pollination is usually a good thing!

So at AEA are hands-on designers who practice the craft of web design to a supreme level of mastery. Plus, they are (mostly) able to communicate effectively about that!! (which I think is actually quite rare) The event was well worth the time and expense, to hear directly from these masters of the craft, network with like-minded professionals, and become inspired about new ways of thinking and designing… Highly recommend attending future AEA’s, which I believe feature a mix of speakers at each venue, including Cameron Moll, Luke Wroblewski, and other notables in the web design arena.

My hope, however, is that future events will talk more about the challenges and opportunities for what can be called “digital product design”–going beyond content-driven websites towards full-blown transactional UI’s that user’s interact with for data discovery, utility, communications, etc. This could be web-based products like Oracle’s e-business suite, Google Docs, Salesforce.com’s CRM apps, iTunes jukebox, mobile phone UI’s, or even car navigation UI’s or ticketing kiosks at the airport. Basically anything digitally manifested that requires user input and sensory engagement, as well as feature definition. It’s a fast emerging space requiring full-on product development with engineering and business strategy to a level beyond websites.


Zeldman on writing: humorous, lively, great examples, excellent points about the text as “interface” to enable usability and overall aesthetic voice, suitable for a particular given audienceJason Santa Maria: great overview of his process, lots of pencil sketches, nifty “gray box comps” for wireframing, and how to propose options to clients. He’s a big fan of showing the client 3 options to help involve the client and get them participating in the critical decision-making moments.

Andy Budd: great overview of “user experience” as the sum of visual, interaction, and usability with prototyping built-into all that, excellent examples from apple to Starbucks to flickr, also mentioned the challenge of balancing or solving business problems with a powerful design strategy beyond some slick visual style

Mike Davidson: riffed on his time with espn.com (making it standards-compliant), how lame the W3C has been getting CSS3 and other markup updates into the mainstream, praised “elegant hacks”, breaking the rules to further progress, etc.

Khoi Vinh: very nice talk on grids, the history of grids, and showed how to create a basic grid and variations for laying out content… hands down the best looking slides!

Shaun Inman: good overall presentation, basically thoughts on application design, evolving UI with quick user feedback, using Mint as his primary example

Zeldman on clients: another home-run, this time on dealing with clients, selling a design, etc. with wit and verve!

Jeff Veen: he’s at Google now, but still seems “wired” :-) easily the most passionate and enthusiastic speaker, a truly engaging preso, spoke about user experience in general, why “design is so hard” (the challenges of problem discovery and resolution), “finding patterns in data” (references to Tufte), sticky notes exercise (very much like the box exercise for organizing functionality), flow diagrams, etc. a great ending to the conference!

Design for the Other 90%

From IHT:

The numbers seem nutty. There are 6.5 billion people on this planet, 90 percent of whom can’t afford basic products and services. Half of them, nearly three billion people, don’t have regular access to food, shelter or clean water. Yet whenever we think, or talk, about design, it’s invariably about something that’s intended to be sold to one of the privileged minority – the richest 10 percent.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/27/arts/design30.php

Why So Many Design Flops?

From IHT:

The odd thing is that no one sets out to design something that’s mediocre. So why does design go wrong so often? Let’s set aside the rational reasons why projects can fail – like budgetary constraints, deadline pressure and lack of talent – to concentrate on the scenarios that should be easily avoidable, but crop up again and again, with predictably dire results.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/06/arts/design9.php?page=1