What if your observation is one of development of a *genre of products* over time rather than a *product*?

What I’m going at is that I see the patterns you mention - perhaps that initially technology by itself is sufficient, then subsequent development happen as demands on the technology increase.

However, the design of a good *product* seems to me to follow the opposite path.

First, the human’s need is defined. *Integration* of technologies is certainly one generic but applicable example. This is certainly not easily separable with the *experience* of using the product. This then defines the goal product, which is manifested with applicable technologies.

Of course the available technology needs to be taken into account at an early stage, but that should not be the “guiding star” so to speak.

Now, that’s a thought, which I don’t claim to be right. I do look forward to hearing what you think though.

Thanks for the article!

Marcus

To meet this need fully, and understanding of the

So … as above ” what products can you think of that do a great job of Stage III and IV today?”

Tim

Just stumled upon an article by Jared Spool on his framework for Market Maturity. It’s a simple four-step list on how websites and basically any technology develop. It’s just curious how many websites nowadays seem to skip the steps one and…

Oh, you’re right.

Does this mean I have to give back my Grammar Girl Secret Decoder Ring?

Thanks for pointing out my error.

Er..that’s “fewer functions, better experience.”