1、这又是一个关于“要不要听用户的”的问题。
2、“听用户的”，这是UCD的核心思想，就像我前面提到的一样，道理很朴素，产品是使用者，也是买单者，当然得听人家的。
3、
“不能听用户的”的例子除了下面的文中提到的Walkman、iphone，Porsche的例子，还有一个大家更加熟悉的例子就是“福特的汽车”的例
子。诚然，这几个极NB的产品的确不是通过用户调研出来的，然而这些例子也容易给我们一个错觉—不听用户的就能造出NB的产品，或者退一步说就是“不听用
户的才有可能造出一个NB的产品”。
4、出现这样的争论，或许是因为把“听不听用户”跟“做好产品”两个事件建立在一个强相关的的基础上，同时又把“听”与“不听”绝对二元化地给对立起来。
5、决定能不能做好产品的因素有很多，“听不听用户的”和“做出好产品”两个事件之间的关联比较弱。前者算不上“做好产品”的必要条件，更不是充分条件。既然如此，我们也就不必在“听”和“不听”的问题上去站队了。
+————————————————————————————————
No! Never Surrender To Your Users, Facebook.
170 Comments
by Michael Arrington on March 24, 2009
“A camel is a horse designed by committee.” (source)
The
camel/horse quote (no disparagement to camels meant, of course)
perfectly captures the problem when too many people have input into a
product. Seth Godin talks about how the Walkman would never have been
built if Sony had asked its customers what they wanted (see Purple
Cow). A few days ago Robert Scoble talked about how a Porsche would be
a Volvo if they let their buyers decide on features: “if you asked a
group of Porsche owners what they wanted they’d tell you things like
“smoother ride, more trunk space, more leg room, etc.” He’d then say
“well, they just designed a Volvo.””
The bottom line is, when
you listen to your users, you get vanilla. feature creep. boring. It
takes a dictator to create the iPhone and change the course of an
entire industry. Imagine if Steve Jobs let other people add features to
that device.
So I’m surprised that Facebook, which has stared
down its users so many times in the past, is folding on the most recent
redesign flareup and reverting back to some old features. Just because,
oh, a million people demanded it.
Facebook has always pushed
the envelope with users, and those users always hate it (the original
News Feed was hated, now people are up in arms to keep it from
changing). In an interview last year, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg
talked with me about how users are willing to accept change over time,
and that Facebook would continue to push things along. Suddenly,
though, they surrender because a few users have a belly ache over a
redesign.
If they wanted to make these changes anyway, they
shouldn’t have titled their blog post “Responding to Your Feedback.”
They should have just continued to ignore the ranting, and announced
further changes. Showing that you’re listening to feedback just invites
more of it.
Someday, if they’re not careful, someone is going
to do to Facebook what Facebook did to MySpace, who in turn did it to
Friendster. Making users happy is a suckers game. Pushing the envelope
is what makes you a winner.
