Hi, in reply to this letter:
>>...proposed scheme on disk to the client and presents it on a laptop
driving
a remote screen. The client can then critique it and suggest changes that
the architect can implement for evaluation. Of course, the architect
cautions that one must be comfortable doing "design on the fly," must warn
the client that the changes could change again once it goes back to the
office. Also, this architect adds that it is a good idea not to reveal too
much about how the software is used, or exactly what is happening. This
keeps the "hocus-pocus" level high and helps maintain the architect as the
more powerful of the participants.
>>In response to Randy, I'd have to say that the computer can be an
EXTREMELY persuasive tool, especially with the ability to do virtual model
walk-throughs and the like. In terms of the designer/client relationship,
I think the computer has only some impact, as the humans are the ones
controlling it...
I totally agree that the computer can be extremely persuasive, but most of it
is because the client is fascinated by the technology. In time, people will
become used to laptops, it won't be an amusing toy anymore. The computer is a
tool, a very good tool, when used the right way. Don't misunderstand me, I
love computers and work with computer graphics all day. But I believe that in
time people will use the computer just like they would use any other piece of
equipment.
As to presenting changes on the spot, I would think it is quite dangerous to
have the client next to you as you are working. One good reason is: the
modification the client wants might be one that takes too long and he (or
she) will not wait. For somebody who is fast enough there is always the
problem that the client will think: "this is too easy for him, why am I
paying him so much if he can do it so fast", when we all know that it takes a
long time to master and have speed with a computer. And there is always the
possibility of other disasters, such as computer crashing, not being able to
do the modification without loging on other software,etc. Believe me, I've
tried it. Clients and computers with modifications on the spot are no good.
Only my 2cents.
Eni
>>...proposed scheme on disk to the client and presents it on a laptop
driving
a remote screen. The client can then critique it and suggest changes that
the architect can implement for evaluation. Of course, the architect
cautions that one must be comfortable doing "design on the fly," must warn
the client that the changes could change again once it goes back to the
office. Also, this architect adds that it is a good idea not to reveal too
much about how the software is used, or exactly what is happening. This
keeps the "hocus-pocus" level high and helps maintain the architect as the
more powerful of the participants.
>>In response to Randy, I'd have to say that the computer can be an
EXTREMELY persuasive tool, especially with the ability to do virtual model
walk-throughs and the like. In terms of the designer/client relationship,
I think the computer has only some impact, as the humans are the ones
controlling it...
I totally agree that the computer can be extremely persuasive, but most of it
is because the client is fascinated by the technology. In time, people will
become used to laptops, it won't be an amusing toy anymore. The computer is a
tool, a very good tool, when used the right way. Don't misunderstand me, I
love computers and work with computer graphics all day. But I believe that in
time people will use the computer just like they would use any other piece of
equipment.
As to presenting changes on the spot, I would think it is quite dangerous to
have the client next to you as you are working. One good reason is: the
modification the client wants might be one that takes too long and he (or
she) will not wait. For somebody who is fast enough there is always the
problem that the client will think: "this is too easy for him, why am I
paying him so much if he can do it so fast", when we all know that it takes a
long time to master and have speed with a computer. And there is always the
possibility of other disasters, such as computer crashing, not being able to
do the modification without loging on other software,etc. Believe me, I've
tried it. Clients and computers with modifications on the spot are no good.
Only my 2cents.
Eni