<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><IMG alt="" hspace=0
src="cid:001101c6e25b$222e5180$b3446c55@fmcm" align=baseline
border=0></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>You need an effective intersection of function and
form.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Instead consider putting in some extra hours or
think of the reframing process as a side-project if you have to.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Every aspect of their communication with customers
needs to reflect that.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Function is no longer enough if it is not clearly
exposed and communicated.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>" and "Why do I care? But the user community can't
do the revolutionary innovation for us.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Experience design tends to become more important as
you move up the curve. " and "Why do I care? Clothing is another area where style is
a huge differentiator.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Everybody knows what knives and pans do: no
designer needs to communicate that to us. After all for utility to exist, a product
has to work. But the reality is that scientific and artistic forms emerge from joint
thinking, passionate conversations, and shared struggles.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>However, there are actually very few product types
out there that are only differentiated by style. If I could see a place where we
might diverge it is with your statement: "the focus on getting things to work. But
there's a lot of examples of it in action today.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>In the beginning, users need functionality. When
you say "functionality is the reason for the design" I know what you mean but
there's an important distinction you are glossing over.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>" and "Why do I care?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The main issue at that stage is what it does, how
it works. " to "If I could get half the things I want to get working to work, I
would be a successful engineer".</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Instead consider putting in some extra hours or
think of the reframing process as a side-project if you have to. Why not have
something that functions well and has great usability?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Function is critical. So MySpace will definitely
need to become more usable over time, unless it can repeatedly reset the lifecycle
by adding valuable functionality.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>When you say "functionality is the reason for the
design" I know what you mean but there's an important distinction you are glossing
over. We bought them because they work well. The first cars were essentially boxes,
as manufacturing caught up- you saw a lot more styling.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>This leaves very little time and money for
distinguishing design. </FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>