THE TRADITIONAL DESIGN PROCESS VERSUS A NEW DESIGN METHODOLOGY
THE TRADITIONAL DESIGN PROCESS VERSUS A NEW DESIGN METHODOLOGY
复制标题
传统设计流程与新设计方法
DOI：
10.1007/11402985_15
复制
发表时间：
2005
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
G. Barham
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Gill;Paul Johnson;James Dale;Gareth Loudon;B. Hewett;G. Barham
本文报告了位于加的夫威尔士大学(UWIC)的国家产品设计研究中心(PDR)与诺丁汉特伦特大学(Nottingham Trent University)以及两家英国十大设计咨询公司--合金产品设计和产品设计开发(PDD)--合作的结果。这次活动由奥迪设计基金会赞助，旨在24小时内涵盖从简报文件到信息家电的完整设计和原型的整个过程。演习由两个团队进行，一个设在伦敦的PDD总部，由PDD和诺丁汉特伦特的员工组成，另一个团队由加的夫的UWIC和合金产品设计公司的员工组成。后者可以使用文件中描述的界面开发方法，而前者则不能。本文首先将重点介绍设在加的夫的界面设计团队的活动，他们的设计策略，特别是他们对UWIC开发的原型方法的使用。本文报告了“DAY”的结构、各团队之间的谈判、随之而来的让步以及界面设计过程中图形用户界面和硬件方面的整合。然后，它检查了诺丁汉特伦特/PDD团队努力的结果，并比较了方法和结果。总而言之，它检查了UWIC界面开发方法过程的优势和劣势，特别是通过与其他团队采用的更传统的设计方法进行比较。
This paper reports on the results of an exercise held at the National Centre for Product Design Research (PDR) which is based at the University of Wales Institute, Cardiff (UWIC) in partnership with Nottingham Trent University, and two UK Top Ten design consultancies, Alloy Product Design and PDD. The event was sponsored by the Audi Design Foundation and set out to cover the ground from briefing document to the full design and prototyping of an Information Appliance within 24 hours. The exercise was undertaken by two teams, one based in London at PDD’s headquarters and comprising staff from PDD and Nottingham Trent, and another comprising staff from UWIC and Alloy Product Design, based in Cardiff. The latter team had access to an interface development methodology described in the paper while the former did not. This paper will initially concentrate on the activities of the interface design team based in Cardiff, their design strategies and, in particular, their use of the prototyping methodologies developed at UWIC. The paper reports on the structure of the “day”, negotiations between the various teams, the consequent concessions and the integration of GUI and hardware aspects of the interface design process. It then examines the results of the Nottingham Trent/PDD team’s efforts and compares the approaches and the results. In conclusion it examines the UWIC interface development methodology process’s strengths and weaknesses, particularly through comparison with the more traditional design approach undertaken by the other team.