reading

In Emotion & Design, i feel like Norman focuses on how beautiful design enhances usability by creating positive emotions, which make users more flexible and forgiving. I agree with him because, who can argue that a product like the iPhone, with its stunning and iconic design, makes us ignore minor flaws just because it’s so visually appealing? I’m definitely more inclined to overlook its glitches simply because it looks so good.

Norman’s observation regarding the distinction between the design requirements for calm and high-stress settings is also something i agree on. For example, In emergencies, functionality must take precedence over aesthetics; fire exits should be clear and direct, regardless of their visual appeal. However, in a coffee shop,  good design is everything. For instance, Starbucks. The warm, inviting ambiance practically begs people to stick around, engage in conversation, or get some work done. The environment is not just a random occurrence; it’s a purposeful decision to merge practicality with an inviting look, encouraging people to stay.

However, I completely stand by Norman’s critique of designs that prioritize style over substance. I have direct experience with this, which involved a “smart” lamp. Sure, it had a fantastic appearance, but honestly, controlling it was nearly out of the question. Why bother making something aesthetically pleasing if it’s not functional? Function should always take over over mere aesthetics in design. Consequently, well-made products leave a lasting impact, while purely decorative ones quickly lose their appeal.

The story of Margaret Hamilton changed the way I think about design and leadership. She did more than her job; she made sure the program was safe, even though some people didn’t understand why it was important. I really admire that kind of dedication to quality, even when it’s not what everyone wants. It makes me think about how important it is to pay attention to the little things and set high standards, even if other people don’t always get it.

People often think that tech is a “man’s world,” but her story shows that this is not true. It’s inspiring to think that one of the first software engineers was a mother who worked full-time and took care of her family. It shows that diversity isn’t just nice to have; it’s important. In group projects and in real life, I’ve seen how hearing different points of view can lead to better ideas. Hamilton’s story makes me want to support diversity in every area I work in.

Leave a Reply