Rating: 
Summary: Excellent prelude to what will be a new design paradigm
Review: I agree with one of the previous reviewers: those who should heed Cooper's instruction will rail against it. I am a software engineer, and I took no offense from Cooper's musings. On the contrary, it helped me recognize some of my own failings as a member of homo logicus. If you feel that engineers are not the whole problem (and they're not) at least open your mind to the possibility that we can be doing things better.
Rating: 
Summary: You're blaming the wrong people!
Review: In my experience with system design, it is rarely the engineers who add the "extraneous" features. We're a lazy bunch and like to design to spec. It's the non-technical people...the marketing department, the customer reps, who blather about the software doing this and that and the customer bites. The customer thinks they get all these great features, but when the technical folks try to explain why it's a bad idea, managment says "Just put it in, we already promised them."Besides, who says you HAVE to upgrade?? Most people upgrade because they believe they need all the 'new features' the next version has. I'm sure you've realized that nobody is fixing bugs in these new versions...ahem..windows..ahem...
Rating:
Summary: Insightful, educational, but sometimes ridiculous.
Review: The manner in which Alan Cooper points out problems with many high tech products is thoughtful and insightful. The book contains many descriptive examples and entertaining anectodes to illustrate the problem of "dancing bearware". His case for the necessity of "interaction design" is convincing. Overally the book is thought provoking and educational. So why only three stars? His accusation of engineers being the root cause of the problem is badly misguided, with a silly generalization of programmers as a whole. I develop software professionally for a living, and I certainly do not consider myself or my peers "techno-jocks". I do not look down upon end users any more than I would expect an M.D. to look down upon me for lack of knowlege about medicine. In the organizations I have worked in, I have seen that developers have the task of interaction design UNWILLINGLY thrust upon them due to miserable product specifications coming from sales and management. I have also seen useless gadget features come from sales and management more often than from engineers. From my experience, these things alongside unreasonable project plans and "we can fix it later" attitude on the part of managers have resulted in awkward products many customers dislike. Also, the book was too self-referential. In some portions, it appeared that the author was advertising his own company. It's a shame the "inmates running the asylum" theme and self-advertisements were over-emphasized. Aside from these things, this is a good read for both high-tech managers and engineers.
Rating: 
Summary: Every Software Developer Should READ THIS BOOK!!
Review: Looking at all the rubbish that's produced these days, and how hard computers STILL are to use by the general populace, we're NOT going to "conquer" the rest of the (non-computer-literate) world until we heed the basics stated in this book. I've been writing software for 30 years this year, and THIS BOOK REALLY opened my eyes. But, as one of the other reviewers stated here, most of it probably won't be headed; especially by the MBA-led software industry who believes you can ship it as soon as it compiles and as long as you're "first" !!!!
Rating: 
Summary: Mealy-mouthed whining at its very best
Review: Alan Cooper begins the book by accurately defining the software and application development model that pervades industry today. This lucid and insightful analysis is worth the two stars this book earned. However, as the book progresses it never fulfills even a smidgen of the promise we are lured into believing will materialize for us, should we choose to read the entire treatise. A tight concise target is identified early in the book and then this gem of an idea unravels into a slurry of whimpering diatribes that provide no useful information whatsoever. This book is fraught with good intentions and chalk full of pure "crap".
Rating:
Summary: If computers are driving you insane...
Review: I used to like computers--then I got a job where I was actually expected to get some work done on a computer. Every time we upgrade something on our system, I have come to dread the occasion because I know that my work will somehow be irreparably messed up. There was even one occasion where I actually discarded the upgrade and went back to the old version of the software. There is no question in my mind that the way software is designed today really needs to be changed. There is too much software out there that is built as if a third grade kid was designing a swiss army knife--it may have a lot of cool stuff on it, but you end up cutting yourself every time you try to use it. What this book does is to explore these issues in entertaining detail. The author explores several situations in which major problems or accidents that were blamed on "human error" could actually be blamed on poorly designed software--including at least one example where human lives were lost. The author also offers some specific suggestions on how software companies, and end users, can help to rectify the situation. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this excellent book. It's well worth the money.
Rating:
Summary: There's no accounting for the tastes of engineeers
Review: Because there is none. Also, don't bother to read reviews with cowards who won't list their names with the review. This complaint about "Scope creep" being caused by executives and marketing sraff just reinforces the central theme of the book - Engineers don't think of useability in their design and then complain when others who don't need parental supervision disapproves. We need the brillance of the creative engineers thoughts. Other than that, lock them all in one room and throw meat into the room occasionally. I disagree with the initial review on one point. She didn't take account of the style the author needed to use to attract the book's target market. It's self-referential sarcastic humor, or else why is Dennis Miller and P.J. O'Rourke favorites in the high tech industry? Buy the book for the laughs and the tragedies discussed in it. But don't expect engineering "geniuses" (which is an oxymnoron) to change any time soon.
Rating:
Summary: Worth the time and money
Review: Cooper has done a good job of pointing out common problems in software design. The book is well written, with interesting examples and anecdotes to illustrate the author's points. While most of the book focuses on "off the shelf" products, I think the author's arguments are even more relevant to custom software development. If you already believe that software is poorly designed, this book is unlikely to be a revalation to you. It will, however, give you some ammunition to use in discussions with "apologists". I agree with the earlier reviewer, who said that the people most needing to read it probably won't. This would seem to be a great book for development managers and purchasers of software, but I think the only people likely to read the whole thing are professional developers. I have two criticisms of the book (for which I give it 4 out of 5 stars): too often it comes across as an advertisement for the author's company; and I would have appreciated more "how-to" information. To this latter point, the author himself says in his preface that he had intended to write a "how-to" book, but was talked into writing a "business case" book instead. I hope that he will soon follow up this effort with the planned "how-to" book. A final question -- what is with these 1 star reviews? I've read a few of them now, for different books, and I have to question whether the reviewer has even read the book. If so, they seem to have completely missed the point. At the very least, if giving a 1 star review, please provide some detailed criticisms so I can decide whether I am likely to share your opinion.
Rating: 
Summary: Misguided
Review: Although the goal, usable software applications, is noble, Alan Cooper is misguided in placing the blame on the engineers. Feature creep is often caused by business and marketing professionals, as they think piling on more features will make it the product more desirable. Project plans and specifications are usually poorly planned, which leads directly to engineering problems. Perhaps the business/product management side of the story needs the work.
Rating:
Summary: Great introduction to a new approach to software development
Review: Those who have read Alan Cooper's _About Face_ know that he writes a readable, well-organized book, and his latest follows that model. In it, he advocates a very different approach to developing software than is currently widely in use. He likens the process he advocates to that used for making motion pictures. In both cases, the production portion (location shooting for movies; coding for software) is extremely expensive and done by specialists. In both cases significant time (about 5 times the production time) is spent on post-production activities (editing, scoring, advertising, distribution, etc. for movies; functionality, performance, and usability testing, user documentation, support strategies, training for software). However, in pre-production (scriptwriting, storyboarding, location selection, casting, etc. for movies; interaction design, audience analysis, environment analysis, etc. for software) there is a huge difference. A movie may spend two years in pre-production for a film that takes six weeks to shoot and six months in post-production. Software development efforts typically spend extremely little time designing, and begin coding early in the process. Cooper suggests that having a thoroughly-researched and completely documented design saves a lot of expensive production time and resource because the coders are focussed on what needs to be done and has been agreed to and don't need to guess or assume anything. If I had to find a shortcoming of this book, and it's a minor one, I would have liked to have seen more specifics on the techniques he describes as being successful in the Interaction Design process.
| 
