dmv wrote:
] ] It has become commonplace to rail against the evils of
] ] PowerPoint talks; you know, those dull, boring
] ] never-ending ordeals where the speaker %u2014 or should I
] ] say "reader" %u2014 displays what appears to be a
] ] never-ending progression of slides, each with numerous
] ] bulleted points, sometimes coming on to the screen from
] ] unexpected directions in unexpected ways, each one being
] ] slowly read to the audience. PowerPoint should be banned,
] ] cries the crowd. Edward Tufte, the imperious critic of
] ] graphic displays has weighed in with a document entitled
] ] "The cognitive style of PowerPoint," in which, among
] ] other things, he credits poor PowerPoint slides with
] ] contributing to disaster with NASA's space shuttle
] ] Columbia, January 2003.
] ]
] ] I respectfully submit that all of this is nonsense.
]
] Don Norman versus Edward Tufte. Quite a matchup.
]
] Is jnd.org something a usability expert really wants to claim
] for his own? Perhaps it reflects a bit too much on Norman's
] style.

PowerPoint is no different than death metal. It needs to be done fast with as little intelligence as possible and only expressing ideas in the most base fashion.

RE: In Defense of PowerPoint