The same technology that simplifies life by providing more functions in each device also complicates life by making the device harder to learn, harder to use. This is the paradox of technology and the challenge for the designer.
I really enjoyed this reading and it’s especially nice to read such a thorough and well-articulated explanation for something I’ve experienced in everyday life without having the words to describe them. This chapter immediately reminded me of this hilarious reel I saw the other day. While this isn’t my original video, I’ve had experiences with fancy washrooms being so confusing with their water faucets and sometimes even the flush.
My favorite thing about this reading is that it’s so easy to connect to real-life situations. The concept of Norman’s door is such a strong symbolism for the distinction between bad and good designs. What’s interesting is that in many cases, the solution to the problem is very simple: a handle for pull doors, and a flat plate for push doors. As we can derive from this chapter, though, bad designs either 1) does not consider functionality at all or 2) overconcern aesthetic that it takes priority over functionality.
My problems with doors have become so well known that confusing doors are often called “Norman doors.”
Although many of the examples from the chapter are of physical things, I find it super helpful to apply this principle of design on interactive media projects. It makes me think about when we design applications, websites, or games, when can we rely on affordances and signifiers, and when do we truly need written instructions?
Whenever you see hand-lettered signs pasted on doors, switches, or products trying to explain how to work them, what to do and what not to do, you are also looking at poor design.
It makes sense to me that visual cues should ideally guide the users, but I also wonder where exactly we should draw the line between written instructions and symbols and affordances. At the end of the day, the designers of the “bad” designs mentioned in this reading probably believed that their design made sense when they first designed them. I personally think that we shouldn’t completely abandon written instructions, because sometimes they are the only/most effective way to communicate something clearly! In my future IM projects, I hope to be able to step out of my perspective and imagine being a user interacting with my creation for the first time. Although this is easier said than done, this would be a really helpful step to refine my designs.