Book reading #1: Design of Everyday Things

Overall book reaction: Overall, The Design of Everyday Things seems to me like a 200-page rant on the difficulty of the technology of the late 1980's rather than a universal guide to designs. While the tenets of his argument are applicable to all technologies of modern times, I found it frustrating to read his examples because many of them reference things that have come to be in the last 20 years (e.g. the "pocket calendar" that connects to his home and work systems). I appreciate his analysis of usability and his design suggestions, and I wholeheartedly agree that some things have been horribly designed and continue to be that way. Many engineers have trouble designing their work to be used by the common person, and it's a wonderful lesson for us to learn; of course, this relates directly to human-computer interaction, and I feel that this book has been a good introduction to how to design systems for various users.

Chapter 1: I find it interesting that telephones have experienced such a simplification; the author references analog telephones as failing to have specific hold/mute buttons and difficulty with other functions, yet my iPhone handles these functions rather gracefully. Overall, I agree with the "U-shaped" technological development. Technological development may make things actually more complicated, but it seems there has been a shift to more simplicity in modern times. Continuing with the phone example, telephones once required memorized telephone numbers, but I can now call friends with a single tap without knowing their phone numbers. The complexity required to make this work translates to a simple user interface.

Chapter 2: Yes, bad design makes me feel dumb. I agree with Norman wholeheartedly about his assessment of learned and taught hopelessness, though I certainly hope that no one becomes clinically depressed due to an inability to open file cabinets and childproof medicine bottles. The stages of evaluation and execution are interesting; though I usually do these things quickly, I pay no attention and did not realize that it required so many discrete steps. Similarly, I never would have given names to the difficulty of operating something simple and understanding the environment (the Gulf of Execution and the Gulf of Evaluation, respectively). I did find it amusing that he referenced VHS as an up-and-coming technology, stating "In a while...There won't be any film, just video tape." Any previous dated references (e.g. the pictures of analog telephones) were just steamrolled by a huge one.

Chapter 3: I laughed again at Norman's reference to a miniature computer with a calendar, reminders, and alarms to put in his pocket. (I reached for my phone to put a few school due dates on my calendar a few moments before) However, I find myself nodding once again--he makes good points about our daily lives and how design affects them, especially in dealing with spatial memory and reminders. Like reading the second chapter, I felt myself wondering how many terms for these phenomena are really necessary. Natural mappings are very necessary and obviously enhance the aesthetics of any design because it just makes life simpler. I have long known about the difficulty of swapping short-term memory to long-term memory.

Chapter 4: It's interesting to note that most of Norman's suggestions for visibility have come to pass. DVRs record television shows and tell us what show we're watching, for example. His in-depth discussion of affordances, visibility, and feedback seem like common sense to me, though apparently it wasn't popular in the '80s and '90s (the apparent era of the book). Aesthetics are nice, sure, but we need to keep "function over fashion" in mind. I have a quibble with the light switch in my apartment living room--instead of going to the overhead fan and light, it goes to an electrical outlet. While this does give me a chance to plug in any lamp I want, I found it frustrating to discover this and find which outlet it corresponded with. All in all, I must just say that I agree with him yet again.

Chapter 5: From our beginning classes, we have been taught to integrate error-checking into all of our work. This may seem obvious to us now, but apparently system error-checking was not popular when this book was written. Honestly, it gives me comfort that walking into a room and forgetting why I'm there is not an uncommon occurrence for all people. Understanding the brain will actually allow us to develop better and better interfaces; naturally, we will learn better when our designs match our physiology. I also never really realized the complexity of most games--when we are presented with a wide variety of moves, we are allowed to think more, and that entertains us. Forcing functions surround us; I am particularly intrigued by his statement that a particular law once required cars to alert us to unbuckled seat belts and that the law was repealed. It's back, it seems, forcing us to buckle our seatbelts or endure incessant, loud beeping. Interesting to see things come full circle.

Chapter 6: It's still interesting to see that his predictions for future technologies have indeed been slowly developed over the years. I always knew that the QWERTY keyboard was a relic from typewriters, but I didn't realize why--it proves to be an effective method for typing, even though it initially seems completely counter-intuitive. Again we see that aesthetics are nice, but harkening back to chapter 4, we need to keep the idea of function in our heads instead of focusing on aesthetics. In my opinion, we should design what we need and then make it pretty. However, if it's efficiently designed, not much modification is needed to make it pretty. Designing for specific individuals is difficult but doable, and we need to keep the end-user in mind more than the designer. I'm slightly nervous about the ethnography now because of Norman's observation that designers are often not the users. I suppose I don't understand the problems with featurism--through this whole book, Norman has been extolling the virtues of easy-to-use, multi-featured devices (I assume he loved the Palm Pilot and graduated to an Android or iPhone in good time), but now he fusses about adding too many features. It's hard to address his analysis of computer systems merely because I never experienced the frustrations and revolutions that he did.

Chapter 7: Manuals are tough to read and I don't like them. I think that's the prevalent philosophy, actually, and it makes more and more sense to design intuitive interfaces. Essentially, that's all Norman is saying, but with detailed examples about mapping and possible downfalls of certain designs (like velcro). The technology director at my high school had the perfect sarcastic saying: "Standards are great. Everyone should have one." Norman clearly agrees with this (or rather, the opposite statement, I suppose), as do I. Standardization makes life easy not only for users, but for designers as well. I understand the merits of making things deliberately difficult (like childproof bottles), and I appreciate the well-planned designs for those devices. He speaks again of the possibilities of "future computers", and again I find myself amused.

Good Design:

The iPhone's call screen is a stellar example of good design. All necessary functions are within easy reach, and they are clearly marked and need no instructions. (yes, I called myself for this screenshot)

This is the best cheese grater in existence. It apparently took humanity a very long time to decide that putting a grater over a bowl makes life easier. This eliminates fallen cheese (or whatever you're grating), huge messes, and it even measures it for you. Perfect design.

This hair dryer revolutionized my bathroom organization. It's intuitive (built like every other hair dryer, basically), its cord retracts with an obvious button, and the handle bends. How does it bend? You just bend it. Can't get much simpler than that. It's a relatively low-cost feature that makes this thing awesome. Fantastic. (for anyone who doesn't know about hair dryers--that's a diffuser, not a ray gun attachment, and it's used for curly hair) 

The built-in plugs in the tables in the new engineering building (ETB) are excellent. The lid has an opening on one side with enough room for fingers to lift it; it's clear which side it opens on, and the plugs include power, USB power, and Ethernet. It's very convenient for working on campus with our various electronics.

Poor Design:

Strangely enough, I love my vacuum cleaner. I have only one gripe, and it is the two buttons on it. One retracts the cord and one turns the machine on; they're the same size, shape, and color, and they even have very similar symbols on them. Why couldn't they have made the cord symbol a little squiggly line or made the button black or blue?

I love my car, too, and I love that it has an auxiliary audio input. However, the little door to the audio jack flips down, not up, and it's hard to hold it with one hand while plugging in the cable. Granted, flipping down keeps it from getting in the way of the power outlet, but it's still frustrating. I'm not even sure why a little door is necessary.

I hate this type of light fixture. Changing the lightbulb requires removal of screws (if you can find them while straining on top of a stepladder) and perfect replacement of the bowl when you are finished. One errant screw and the glass breaks. A screw-in bowl or something similar would be a great replacement for this difficult design.

This fan is counter-intuitive. The rotating switch goes from off to high to medium to low. Why doesn't it go from off to low instead? It's flat-out dumb. I have to switch it quickly if I just a slight breeze instead of a tornado in my bedroom (it's a powerful little fan).

The shower control in my bathtub is terrible. It took me some time to figure out which way to turn the clear plastic to adjust the temperature, and the dial to control flow is lacking. It's either high or off. Clearly marking hot-cold or making them separate controls would have been preferable. Also it's old and horribly unattractive.