Comentários (4)

1 robinlangford comentou às Link permanente

Rawn, although it's an obvious reason I don't move to a new tool, I'd never really thought of the drag created by having to get used to doing the same things in different ways. I will move to a new system for many of the same reasons I go to a different grocery store: the old one doesn't have what I need, the old one is closed (or no longer supported), or the new one gives me access to people/groceries/services I didn't have before. Short of those criteria, I'm loathe to switch. <div>&nbsp;</div> Really good points you make here!

2 Bertrand Duperrin comentou às Link permanente

I think your point is right but that are also ways to get around. Let's turn the Fiat/ferrari comparison into an Airbus A3xx series comparison. These planes are designed to share so many common stuff that pilots can move from one to another without lots of training. <div>&nbsp;</div> What does it mean for any enterprise willing to start a "2.0 something" ? Start with a product that is scalable in terms of functionalities without changing the experience. Or start with a piece of a suite and then add the others as your need are evolving, provided the suite is conceived to provide a unified and consistant user experience. <div>&nbsp;</div> What matters is not only to assess that a product fits current needs but also that it there's a way to to bigger without loosing the benefits of the adoption efforts. <div>&nbsp;</div> Sounds "Vulcanian" ? Why not. Maybe what we didn't get when the project was introduced is that it would be help to fit scalable adoption, what I think is a very important point.

3 rawn comentou às Link permanente

Thanks Robin and Bertrand. One issue is that cars have a pretty fixed and very well known common controls that don't really change from car to car. Even how people use roads is mostly the same--except when you move from a 1st world country to a third world one. The rest is performance, appeal and asthetics that define the car. You may be unused to how the car drives but you don't have to relearn everything to get it to work. <div>&nbsp;</div> With social tools, even year the year we find very different types of social tools and how people interact. If you recall the transition from things like discussion forums to blogs, or blogs to Twitter. There are new controls and cultural norms to learn on how to use each. <div>&nbsp;</div> My guess is that social software will continue to evolve into completely new patterns and that's what causes people to consider moving to a new platform. Upgrades even with the same platform can bring very different features e.g. from Connections 2.0 to 2.5. <div>&nbsp;</div> -rawn <div>&nbsp;</div>

4 leeprovoost comentou às Link permanente

Hi Rawn, <div>&nbsp;</div> Thanks a lot for taking the extensive time for writing this follow up blog post! <div>&nbsp;</div> In hindsight the car comparison might not have been the best because it indeed looks like you just start over and over again. (also I have nothing against public transport, I'm a happy London tube user ;-) ) <div>&nbsp;</div> My main point that i wanted to make was that several large organisations seem to strive for the perfect solution, often ending up with nothing. Because they can't make a decision, can't align the stakeholders and well... perfection often takes an eternity :) <div>&nbsp;</div> I argue that instead of going for the most perfect solution, just "cut the crap" and get going with something that works now. <div>&nbsp;</div> Now, you are right that migrating from one platform to another isn't the easiest thing, and I did point out in my post that you shouldn't migrate a succesful community just for the sake of migrating. A very interesting solution that I quite like (rather than consolidating everything) is to use intelligent aggregators that brings the data from all these different data together and analyses it for expertise finding. <div>&nbsp;</div> When I read your post, I had a smile on my face because I recognise what you said about the change and people getting used to it. I've often seen that even though you introduce a crappy system, because the users really can't work without it they just get used to it and find some ways around it to make it work. When you present them a system that -from a user experience design point of view- is much more intuitive and better, you get a lot of resistance! <div>&nbsp;</div> Best regards, <div>&nbsp;</div> Lee Provoost <br /> Headshift

Incluir um Comentário Incluir um Comentário