Quick Upload

Loading...
Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view slideshows. We have detected that you do not have it on your computer.To install it, go here
Post to Twitter Post to Twitter
Share on Facebook
Myspace Hi5 Friendster Xanga LiveJournal Facebook Blogger Tagged Typepad Freewebs BlackPlanet gigya icons
« Prev Comments 1 - 3 of 3 Next »
Add a comment If you have a SlideShare account, login to comment; otherwise comment as a guest.

    Case Study: A Discount Approach to Comparing Multiple Design Alternatives

    from jmspool, 5 months ago Add as contact

    2689 views | 3 comments | 7 favorites | 13 embeds (Stats)

    Desc: From the IXDA Boston night of Short Talks (http://tinyurl.com/4uoqhn)

    I had 10 minutes to give this 32-transition presentation:

    What\'s the Best Way to Compare Multiple Design Alternatives?

    Good design practice suggests you create multiple sketches, which eventually evolve into full-out design alternatives. However, once you have those alternatives, what\'s the best way to decide which one wins?

    I will review one approach and talk about the pitfalls and advantages to evaluating multiple designs at once.

    (What's even more amazing is that I was really busy that week and didn't start working on the presentation until I'd sat down in the audience to hear the other speakers. The entire presentation came together in under 90 minutes.)

    Embed customize close
     

    More Info

    This slideshow is Public
    CC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License

    Views: 2689 Comments: 3 Favorites: 7 Downloads: 66

    View Details: 2249 on Slideshare 440 from embeds
    Most viewed embeds (Top 5): More
    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate

    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this slideshow as inappropriate.

    If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Slideshow Transcript

    1. No transcript available.