Emotion and Design
In the previous reading from Don Norman, he talked about how design flaws in everyday objects make it difficult for normal people to operate them, and how an object that is “usable but ugly” is more beneficial that an object that is visually pleasing but unusable; but his point was misinterpreted by many and had people thinking he advocated for usability over appealing design. In this reading, he clarifies that this was not to discredit visual appeal, but to bring usability to the same level of importance as it. He hopes that “the future of everyday things [will] be ones that do their job, that are easy to use, and that provide enjoyment and pleasure” [p. 41], emphasizing that even though usability gets the job done, it is still important for the design to be appealing and the functionality to be easy to figure out, because in the end, “it is time to have more pleasure and enjoyment in life” [p.41]. At the same time, he says what I think is the crux of his point: “To be truly beautiful, wondrous, and pleasurable, the product has to fulfill a useful function, work well, and be usable and understandable” [p. 42]. And I can’t argue with that.
Her Code Got Humans on the Moon
Honestly, before reading this, I only knew that Maragaret Hamiltion was a someone who did something in the Apollo missions. But what I didn’t know was the depth of her involvement in the missions; without her, there might not have been a mission. It is inspiring to learn about her essentially pioneering systems programming and leading the software division of 400 people, all while mothering a 4 year old. Makes me think about how I can barely finish my assignments on time even without the taking-care-of-a-4-year-old part. It was also interesting to read about the “That would never happen” story, which is a very apt representation of human fallibility. The purpose of good system programming, I believe, is to minimize this exact fallibility – in other words, to be smarter than humans.