<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Craig Vogel&#8217;s Reaction to Don&#8217;s articles</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2005/09/22/craig-vogels-reaction-to-dons-articles/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2005/09/22/craig-vogels-reaction-to-dons-articles/</link>
	<description>Tasty Little Nuggets of Design and Innovation Goodness</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 09:05:08 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: niblettes</title>
		<link>http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2005/09/22/craig-vogels-reaction-to-dons-articles/#comment-61</link>
		<dc:creator>niblettes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 21:04:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://niblettes.com/blog/?p=7#comment-61</guid>
		<description>Ha!  perhaps you might be a little biased.  

I suppose this is one of the dangers of being an oft-quoted figure--the frequent quotations and references tend to over-simplify an otherwise large body of nuanced work.  And then your name becomes a metonymy for the over-simplification.  And this is where, I think, the problem is.  We used your name a metonymy not for your larger body of work, but rather to refer to your position that perhaps activity centered design might be a better approach than user centered design.

Given much of what you wrote in Emotional Design I suspect you and Craig agree on an awful lot in terms of product design.

(Part of it could also be my clumsy transcription from my phone conversation with Craig blunted his points--where I corresponded with you over email, making transcription much easier and more accurate.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ha!  perhaps you might be a little biased.  </p>
<p>I suppose this is one of the dangers of being an oft-quoted figure&#8211;the frequent quotations and references tend to over-simplify an otherwise large body of nuanced work.  And then your name becomes a metonymy for the over-simplification.  And this is where, I think, the problem is.  We used your name a metonymy not for your larger body of work, but rather to refer to your position that perhaps activity centered design might be a better approach than user centered design.</p>
<p>Given much of what you wrote in Emotional Design I suspect you and Craig agree on an awful lot in terms of product design.</p>
<p>(Part of it could also be my clumsy transcription from my phone conversation with Craig blunted his points&#8211;where I corresponded with you over email, making transcription much easier and more accurate.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Norman</title>
		<link>http://www.niblettes.com/blog/2005/09/22/craig-vogels-reaction-to-dons-articles/#comment-60</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Norman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2006 18:34:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://niblettes.com/blog/?p=7#comment-60</guid>
		<description>Hmm. Sounds to me that Vogel is correct.   This Norman guy seems over-simplistic.  Hmm, maybe the people putting words in Norman's mouth are being a bit simple.  

I may be biased, but I think Norman is actually deeper than that.  Hell, I bet Norman even agrees with Vogel!

But, as I said, I'm probably biased.

Don Norman</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm. Sounds to me that Vogel is correct.   This Norman guy seems over-simplistic.  Hmm, maybe the people putting words in Norman&#8217;s mouth are being a bit simple.  </p>
<p>I may be biased, but I think Norman is actually deeper than that.  Hell, I bet Norman even agrees with Vogel!</p>
<p>But, as I said, I&#8217;m probably biased.</p>
<p>Don Norman</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
