<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Designers and the value of design</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2009/09/20/designers-and-the-value-of-design/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2009/09/20/designers-and-the-value-of-design/</link>
	<description>Niko Nyman&#039;s blog on shifting topics.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 15:12:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Panu</title>
		<link>http://www.nnyman.com/personal/2009/09/20/designers-and-the-value-of-design/comment-page-1/#comment-216923</link>
		<dc:creator>Panu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 05:59:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nnyman.com/personal/?p=1341#comment-216923</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I think one of the reasons people use the term &quot;user experience&quot; so much is that it is appropriately vague. It provides an excuse for a lot of arm waving and convincing (potential) customers by extensive but fluffy verbiage. If UX were a better defined concept, like usability is, it would turn into something mundane, it would be under rigorous - possibly quantitative - measurement, and therefore lose all it&#039;s magic.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I feel that the UX community is intentionally keeping it that way.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Maybe it&#039;s also an attempt of putting art back to design. That there are more noble and obscure targets to UX design than just fulfilling the criteria that are set for the new artifact.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think one of the reasons people use the term &#8220;user experience&#8221; so much is that it is appropriately vague. It provides an excuse for a lot of arm waving and convincing (potential) customers by extensive but fluffy verbiage. If UX were a better defined concept, like usability is, it would turn into something mundane, it would be under rigorous &#8211; possibly quantitative &#8211; measurement, and therefore lose all it&#8217;s magic.</p>

<p>I feel that the UX community is intentionally keeping it that way.</p>

<p>Maybe it&#8217;s also an attempt of putting art back to design. That there are more noble and obscure targets to UX design than just fulfilling the criteria that are set for the new artifact.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

