The Design of everyday things
[The design of everyday things] May herald the beginning of a change in user habits and expectations, a change that manufacturers would be obliged to respond to. Button pushers of the world, unite!
Los Angeles Times
Summary
First, businesses discovered quality as a key competitive edge; next came service. Now, Donald A. Norman, former Director of the Institute for Cognitive Science at the University of California, reveals how smart design is the new competitive frontier. The Design of Everyday Things is a powerful primer on how--and why--some products satisfy customers while others only frustrate them.
Review
The chat took place on 4th June 2005 (start at the bottom and work up)
18:40:35 [Matt] The diffrence reading it this time, over the last is i could see what new stuff i'd picked up over the years.
18:39:59 [Rebecca] True, very true.
18:39:35 [Matt] yes i agree
18:37:29 [hpadkisson] Also, sometimes "old" ideas presented in new ways can shed a new light on how to discuss them with others. I work as a consultant and I'm always looking for good "hooks" in discussing usability and usefulness.
18:36:00 [hpadkisson] To be honest, I don't think I learned much new. However, I always find it useful to go back and review "old truths." It is inspiring and motivating.
18:35:19 [Rebecca] For me it was a formulization of things I've picked up along the way. It did read as if it were 'the basics explained'; considering my lack of training in IA - it's certainly a good place for me to start.
18:34:32 [Rebecca] The idea of limiting the number of things people have to remember (short-term) is always good. I'm just regularly amazed how often it is, and isn't, applied.
18:34:17 [Matt] Given how Don's "moved on" Is there anything new, to be learnt from DOET? or is it just a touch base to re-align yourself with old usability values?
18:30:52 [Matt] (sorry following on from Heidi)
18:30:21 [Matt] since then it's been suggested that it doesn't really apply to the web despite being an eternal truth.
18:29:05 [hpadkisson] I've heard it called the "magic number 7." the idea is that you can only hold 7 items in short-term memory at a time. Early in web development, people incorrectly applied this to mean no menu should contain more than 7 items.
18:28:03 [Rebecca] Er... I don't think everyone knows about the 7 click golden rule.
18:27:16 [Matt] a place where the golden "7 click" rule really does matter
18:26:00 [hpadkisson] I think they are hard because you need to rely completely on short-term memory.
18:25:32 [Matt] I don't (use automated phone systems) I purposeful press the # button to talk to someone
18:25:01 [hpadkisson] Yes--it was a surprise. It was an engineering-driven company. They really believed people would want to do this.
18:24:44 [Rebecca] I understand why voice-activated menu systems are in place (they save the company money) but does anyone actually like them?
18:24:04 [Matt] I wonder if it was a surprise to those who designed it
18:24:03 [hpadkisson] They installed it at McDonald's also. Can you imagine all the menu options over a cell phone?
18:22:45 [hpadkisson] The product failed.
18:22:43 [Rebecca] Eep. And I thought getting a coke from a vending machine with your cell phone was ... odd.
18:22:26 [hpadkisson] The product was just silly. But I was hired to help them improve the usability of their voice-response system. It was fruitless.
18:21:58 [Matt] Do people use that?
18:21:34 [hpadkisson] A friend of mine worked for a company that made a system that allowed people to advance-order their latte order to Starbuck's using their cell phone.
18:21:23 [Matt] I agree, especially when there is reams of guidelines on how to do usability. Usefulness (as we've discussed) is much more subjective
18:21:23 [Rebecca] Or, I suppose, isn't that helpful to a large enough market share?
18:20:20 [hpadkisson] I believe poor usability is much easier to overcome that poor usefulness. Sometimes, a product's core concept just isn't that helpful.
18:19:20 [hpadkisson] That's a good question. I think the take-away from the book is still more usability-focused.
18:19:16 [Rebecca] Is poor usability easier to overcome than poor usefulness?
18:18:32 [hpadkisson] Sometimes, I think the effects of poor usability of overstated. I'm not saying that poor usability is good. It's just that in an attempt to make a point, overstated claims are made.
18:17:49 [Matt] Is usefulness the most important message from DOET? Or is there something else?
18:17:04 [Matt] I've got a digital camera like that, i bother to learn how to use it because i want to take good photo despite the clunky input and menus
18:15:11 [hpadkisson] I am training for my first triathlon. I joined a site called beginnertriathlete. It's a usability nightmare. Yet, I spent the time learning the site because it is super-useful if you can figure it out.
18:14:49 [Rebecca] Makes sense.
18:14:18 [Matt] I agree
18:13:17 [hpadkisson] To me, you can have usefulness with poor usability, in which case if there is a high degree of usefulness, people will put a lot of effort into using the system. Conversely, though if you have poor usefulness with good usability, nobody will use the system.
18:11:26 [Matt] how does usefullness relate to IA? isn't an overarching product thing?
18:10:48 [Rebecca] Cool.
18:09:50 [hpadkisson] Actually, we evaluate both when we test. We conduct post-task interviews to get at usefulnes. Sometimes problems of usefulness come out when people verbalize their thoughts.
18:07:42 [Rebecca] I would guess that knowing what is usable to your client base is the result of usability testing. Useful though, where does that determination come from in relation to IA?
18:07:04 [Matt] maybe show's DOET is more relevant now then ever before?
18:06:37 [Matt] usable and useful.. i've noticed that that message is en-vouge again recently. i've seen some good article about that.
18:04:14 [hpadkisson] Yes, an important point that the book makes is it must be usable and useful.
18:04:04 [Rebecca] But there's always going to be the ... learning-disconnect. You know, knowledge in the head instead of in the world? Getting the knowledge into the head is a slow and hard process. It requires a willing subject first and foremost. And not all of us are willing.
18:03:35 [hpadkisson] I helped teach my mother in law to do word processing. She got the hang of it. Remember WordStar? What a nighmare.
18:03:02 [Matt] I agree, but i think we've moved past just usability now - a lot of programs are more usable but do the support goals as full as they can.
18:01:58 [hpadkisson] I think that computer programs, despite the bloat, are a lot easier to use than they were in 1989.
18:01:28 [Rebecca] It reminded me of the K-car. It had a voice assistance system and would say things like 'a door is a-jar' when the door was open. Cute but only for a limited number of times. There was no 'official' way to turn the sound off.
17:59:59 [Matt] Reading the book reminds me of my washing machine.. I only use setting 4. I’ve got 10 of them
17:59:56 [hpadkisson] Yes-- I want to read the book on emotional design.
17:59:19 [Matt] (need a spell checker on here )
17:58:59 [Matt] I agree, which i suppose is why Don has moved from usability to emotional design. There reflective qualities of having a feature rich product.
17:58:33 [Rebecca] Also gadget items tend to be purchased not just for what they can do, but for the marketing spin that's put upon them.
17:57:45 [hpadkisson] I think a lot of people, when purchasing, aspire to use the features and feel like they might be missing out if they selected a less feature-rich product.
17:55:51 [Matt] even if you restrict the user input? as Heidi's research suggest people only use a small number of individual keys
17:55:00 [Rebecca] It's also easier to work with a known broken design than learn a new one.
17:54:37 [Matt] Market force do seem to be changing though - In the uk, vodaphone have just started promoting a cell phone which only makes and receives call. no camera, no sms - is the tide turning?
17:53:12 [hpadkisson] Yes...I think this is a hard habit to break because people keep buying stuff that is bloated with features. Is see market forces at work here.
17:51:32 [Rebecca] That old habits are hard to break?
17:50:59 [Matt] As you and Heidi pointed out there are a lot of well designed products out there but if cookers and lighting systems still don't have natural mapping then what does that say?
17:50:23 [hpadkisson] The keyboard had a lot of shorcut keys that were either pre-programmed or people could program. Nobody really bothered. Extra mouse buttons were also pretty much ignored (beyond right, left, scroll).
17:49:49 [Matt] Rebecca - it's design like that which makes me wonder whether we've come as far forward as we think we have.
17:48:19 [Rebecca] I think there's a similar door at work (glass door, right at the top of a stairwell). We're just waiting for a day when someone leaving the office slams the door into the facee of someone coming up those stairs.
17:48:07 [Matt] for access keys etc?
17:46:31 [hpadkisson] I've done some user research for computer input devices. There is a lot of pressure to make them highly desireable with lots of features that people think they are going to use when they purchase. But my studied showed that very few people used anything beyond the core QWERTY keys.
17:45:48 [Matt] yeah - all okay. My ego was bruised more then anything else
17:45:09 [Rebecca] Hope you're alright.
17:44:50 [hpadkisson] Oh no, Matt!
17:44:40 [hpadkisson] Yes...it is worrying. But I think Norman goes a good job at pointing out the market forces that lead to product complexity.
17:44:31 [Rebecca] I think such guidelines should always be relevant; after all things are always being invented. Is it worrying? There are a lot of well designed things out there. How do we determine how many good/bad designed things there were in 1989 and now.
17:43:51 [Matt] I fell down some stairs at work trying to demonstrate the affordance of the door at the top to a colleague
17:43:02 [hpadkisson] Yep...I used the stove example, referencing the book, and took a picture of my stove (which has poorly mapped controls) for the presentation.
17:42:37 [Matt] Is it slightly worrying that a book written in 1989 is a relevant now as it was then?
17:42:12 [Matt] What a great coincidence
17:40:40 [hpadkisson] Mid-way through the book I needed to do a presentation on UCD for graphic designers (at a conference). It was great to have the ideas in the book "top of mind." I think it helped me put together a better presentation for my audience of mostly non-interactive designers.
17:40:29 [Rebecca] I'd not read the book before, although I've heard a lot about it.
17:39:28 [Matt] I agree, re-reading it for this group made me feel like i was going back to a safe place (if you know what i mean) that the things which trouble me now, were known and understood decades ago, that i'm not alone
17:38:59 [hpadkisson] I think it might be easy for experienced IAs to read it and feel it's "old hat." But even though I was familiar with many of the concepts I think it's always useful to read a fresh presentation.
17:38:21 [Rebecca] While I might lend it out, I'm definitely keeping this book as it contains a great set of very general guidelines.
17:37:41 [Rebecca] I guess it's a sign that the book is definitely a classic. It is standing well against the test of time.
17:37:10 [hpadkisson] That's a good idea, Rebecca.
17:36:17 [hpadkisson] I found myself thinking back to the late 1980's and what technology was like then to have appropriate context.
17:35:44 [Rebecca] Also enjoyed reading the book. When I finishd the book I re-read the parenthetical comments (and end notes) because they best drove home the rules he was outlining.
17:35:28 [Matt] LOL, i know what you mean. It's interesting to see where the luminary were in 1989, compared to where we are now.
17:34:46 [hpadkisson] It seems to be a classic in terms of "required IA reading." I guess the fact that I am somewhat embarrassed that I've just now read it testifies to that.
17:33:40 [hpadkisson] First, I enjoyed reading the book a lot, though I felt like it got a little slower at the end. I think it's because some of the earlier ideas were discussed again and the very last section is of course out of date.
17:31:58 [Matt] Firstly i though we should consider, what our impression of the book were and what the impact of the book has had on the community IA/usability community