As I was reading A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design, what really struck me was how much we’ve just accepted the idea that “the future” means shiny screens everywhere. Bret Victor makes a strong point that even though technology looks cooler and sleeker, the way we interact with it hasn’t fundamentally changed — it’s still just tapping and swiping on glass. It’s kind of depressing when you think about it, because the excitement around “new technology” mostly ignores the fact that humans are physical, three-dimensional beings. We have hands that are capable of so much subtlety, but all we do is poke at flat rectangles. Victor’s frustration feels justified — it’s like we’ve totally surrendered to convenience at the cost of creativity and human potential.
At the same time, I found myself wondering: is it really fair to expect interaction design to be radically different when so much of our world (work, entertainment, communication) has moved into the digital space? Maybe part of the reason we keep using screens is because they’re the simplest way to deal with abstract information. But still, Victor’s examples of more tactile, nuanced designs made me realize we’re probably limiting ourselves by not even trying to imagine alternatives. It’s like we’re stuck optimizing what already exists instead of exploring what could be fundamentally new. After reading this, I feel like a good interaction designer shouldn’t just make apps easier to use, but should rethink what “using” even means.