Norman,“Emotion & Design: Attractive things work better”

It is really nice to hear that Don Norman who is making a big emphasis on usability also care a lot about design and aesthetics.
The part that stuck with me most was the teapot example: how he owns three completely different ones depending on his mood and the context. It made me realize that “good design” isn’t this one-size-fits-all thing. Sometimes you need efficiency, sometimes you need beauty, sometimes you need practicality. And the fact that aesthetic appeal actually makes people more tolerant of design flaws is wild to me. It’s not shallow to care about how something looks since it genuinely changes how we interact with it.
I think what Norman’s saying challenges this weird guilt that exists around caring about appearance. Like, designers (or developers, or whoever) sometimes act like prioritizing beauty over pure function is superficial. But he’s providing actual evidence that positive emotion broadens our thinking, makes us more creative, more forgiving. A pleasing interface isn’t just nice to look at, it actually changes your cognitive state, and I believe it is really important to remember when creating designs and art pieces.
The contrast between tools for stressful situations versus relaxed ones was helpful too. I hadn’t thought about it that way before, but it makes sense that your design goals shift based on context. This really shifts the understanding of usability: thinking about how people feel when they’re using something can completely change the interaction in the first place. I believe this is something really usable lesson for us to consider when creating our designs and art pieces.

Her Code Got Humans on the Moon

I really liked this text. Not only because it tells an encouraging story about a woman in a field that is still male-dominated, even decades after the Apollo program, who was a key contributor to something as important as Moon travel, but also because it teaches valuable lessons.

One part that stood out to me was when her daughter accidentally discovered a “bug” in the code. I think error-handling is something that doesn’t get enough attention. If users were perfectly rational and never made mistakes, just like astronauts were assumed to be, then systems wouldn’t need to handle unexpected behavior. But in reality, humans are unpredictable and encountering errors is inevitable.

I think developers don’t always fully account for these cases, which is why serious issues, like the P01 mode problem, can be overlooked sometimes. This shows how important testing is, especially as technical field is growing so much now. Today, developers run huge beta tests for games, and I can’t even imagine how huge testing must be for projects as critical as the Apollo mission that Hamilton worked on.

The fact that such a serious issue was discovered accidentally by a child, and that the assumed “perfection” of astronauts didn’t prevent it, shows that systems should be designed to anticipate anything. There should always be built-in behavior to handle errors, no matter how unlikely they seem.

I agree with all of the author’s points that everything has a time, place, and purpose, especially when it comes to design. Sometimes, we need something that balances utility, aesthetics, and practicality. The author highlights that “design is preferable depending on the occasion, the context, and above all, upon my mood.”

The author also emphasizes that in cases of emergency, when people are stressed, they tend to forget how to use things effectively. In this situation, functionality plays a bigger role, which supports his point that design depends on occasion and context. Context plays a major role in many things—it determines how different aspects are prioritized. For example, when designing an emergency exit door, should I focus on making it visually appealing, or ensure that it works effectively in an emergency and does not cause an accidental stampede due to a design flaw?

I do not think the author is biased at all; in fact, I find his ideas and explanations quite objective. My beliefs largely align with his. However, I also think that aesthetics sometimes fail to consider usability. In many cases, we need both. For example, in Qatar, some cities are inspired by European architecture, such as outdoor restaurants or cafés. However, since the weather is not suitable for outdoor seating most of the year, these spaces often go unused about 90% of the time. My question would be when would be a time where functionality is not need or not important in our daily lives?

Her Code Got Humans On The Moon

The story of Margaret Hamilton was really inspiring. I was especially intrigued by her resilience to work even though she had a little daughter and she brought her to the lab to do her work. Her story about leaving a party to make a correction is something I can relate to. I recall countless times I have been at social events and a new idea or a realization on something I am working on just pops to my head. I may not be as enthusiastic about my work to leave the event but I really admire her for that.

This reading highlighted the difference between a computer and a human in when it comes to making mistakes. NASA trusted their astronauts not to make a mistake and be “perfect” but as Hamilton’s instincts proved right, one can make mistake irrespective of the training they have received so she designed a way out even though her superiors said that would never happen. This is something we will take into account when designing future projects. It should be based on the assumptions that the user is not perfect and can make some mistakes so a fail safes or a way out should be designed to ensure the program or device works as it is supposed to.

Looking back at the Artemis II mission launched a few days ago, I can only imagine the sophisticated software and computing used in this mission. If Hamilton and her team were able to design a whole software with such limited memory and storage and they were still successful I wonder what would be designed for the current mission with all the computing power and artificial intelligence available to the team. I am sure it will also contain groundbreaking innovations can usher humanity into a new age just as Hamilton’s “software” did.

 

Norman,“Emotion & Design: Attractive things work better”

The reading spoke about something which is usually unspoken of. The design element of objects. These designs if done right can make a user overlook all the flaws of a product or completely change the idea the user has over the product. Take for instance, popular brands like apple. Although there is no substantial change in the yearly iphones they released, when they change the colour of the phones or just position to camera in a different way, they are able to appeal to the beauty sense of the customer and ride on this to sell their products.

Reflecting on this reading, I go back to the first half of the semester where I used to design programs just for the sake of working. I did not pay much attention to the beauty and aesthetics of the program. Which the first encounter a user will have with my project. A boring interface can push a user away eventhough the logic or idea behind the program is amazing. This can also be seen in flashy adds and flashy designs companies make on their products. These are all strategies to reel customers in and focus their attention on exactly what they designers what them to focus on and overlook all the possible flaws of their program a

Her Code Got Humans on the Moon

I really enjoyed this reading, learning about Margaret Hamilton and her impressive contributions to the field of software engineering, especially at such a young age is truly inspirational. As someone who semi-aspires to be a software engineer, but sometimes feel that it’s not a welcoming environment for women, this reading really changed my perspective and gave me some hope and motivation. A few things stood out to me in this reading. First, Margaret felt a lot of pressure to avoid any mistakes. Mistakes are normal, but obviously, in such a high stakes environment, any mistake can be catastrophic. More than that, if she made a mistake, it would only worsen the image about women in “male-dominated fields,” and it would set a bad impression for future women scientists. For instance, the reading mentions a time where she suddenly remembered a bug in the code one late night, and immediately went to fix it, out of fear that any mistakes in the code would be blamed on her is a sad, but plausible scenario. Despite it being a team effort working on the Apollo software, any mistakes would’ve most likely pointed back to her. Luckily, that didn’t happen!

Another thing I found interesting is her attention to detail, implementing back-up plans for any scenario. Even when others on her team claimed that no astronaut would make such mistake, she still insisted on planning for every worst-case scenario. And it paid off. This reminds me of whenever I if-else statements, sometimes even though there are only two possibilities (true or false, for example), I still feel the need to write the second statement as an else if, JUST IN CASE. Obviously, this isn’t the same thing, but this two situations kind of related in mind.

Norman,“Emotion & Design: Attractive things work better”

This reading made me reflect on a lot of everyday things that we use. While I cannot think of any examples of the top off my head, I’m sure there are so many times where I’ve chosen the more aesthetic item, even when it is not functionally better. I think social media trends also contribute to these phenomena nowadays. Overall, I think Norman brings up some great points about how there sometimes always a trade-off between functionality and aesthetics, even though that is not necessary. His example about tools used during hazardous and stressful situations make sense, I guess that’s probably why emergency exits and fire extinguishers all look the same and work the same. Most emergency exit doors are “push” doors because that’s the fastest way to get everyone OUT, and it’s important that any tools needed to facilitate this escape are standardized and straightforward to use (fire extinguishers, ‘hammers’ in buses to break the window, etc.).

However, the balance between functionality and aesthetics still stands in calmer situations. Let’s say someone wants to pick up a new hobby and they buy a pottery kit. The packaging is aesthetic, the brand is well-known and trendy, and everything LOOKS good. Then, they go home and try to start working on their new pottery and nothing makes sense. The instructions are so short because they were trying to keep a minimalist aesthetic, and everything is organized really well but the user does not understand how to use anything. Now, this calm situation has become a frustrating one because what was supposed to be a relaxing, unwinding evening is now a confused, annoyed evening. This might not be what Norman meant by his explanations, but this is kind of what I understood. And this continues to apply in so many aspects of life, when an app developer makes a new app, the interactions should be built on user standards and shouldn’t require the user to think twice, or else the user will just delete the app and go back to what they know. The learning curve to adapt to something new shouldn’t be so high that the user abandons the experience.

Norman,“Emotion & Design: Attractive things work better”

In my opinion, the most interesting takeaway from the reading is when it talks about this “gut feeling” we have, like a sixth sense that immediately tells us what we want or do not want to deal with just based on how something looks. It is like a small light turns on in your brain from the beginning, and that already affects how willing you are to interact with something and how you are going to deal with it.

I also found the connection to the debugging video we saw earlier in class really clear. We talked about how when you are stressed or anxious, your thinking becomes very narrow and you get stuck. The reading explains this as “tunnel vision,” where you focus too much on one thing and cannot see other solutions. That might be useful in a survival situation, but for debugging or any kind of creative problem solving, it is the worst mindset to be in. It makes a lot of sense now why working while stressed feels so unproductive, because your brain is literally limiting your ability to think creatively.

Again, what stood out to me the most, especially because I am interested in design, is the idea that emotions happen before conscious thought. Because of course your brain is already reacting to a design before you even process it. I used to think usability and aesthetics were kind of separate, like one is how it works and the other is how it looks, but now I see that they are actually connected. This quote: If something makes you feel good, you are more likely to overlook small issues and just have a better experience overall. Is actually crazy to me, because I think this applies to many thinks, like for example the apple ecosystem. because of the aesthetics of it and how smoothly it runs even when it it loading, you could be waiting more time for something to download in a mac than on a windows laptop and you would feel like the mac is working better just for the aesthetics of it.

In future projects, I want to use design to influence how the user feels from the beginning. Since as the reading shows us, if I can make someone feel calm and comfortable, they will probably think more clearly, be more flexible, and have a much smoother experience using what I create.

Her Code Got Humans on the Moon

Reading about Margaret Hamilton really blew my mind. It is honestly incredible that a woman, and a working mother at that, was the one who made the moon landing possible during a time when women were not even encouraged to go into technical fields. What is even crazier to me is that she was the only one thinking about a backup plan or worst case scenarios. NASA literally told her that error checking code was not necessary because “astronauts were trained to be perfect.” To me, that is such a wild assumption because humans make mistakes all the time, but back then they just ignored that reality.

It actually makes so much sense to me that a mother would think this way. She saw her daughter, Lauren, accidentally crash a simulator by pressing a button that was not supposed to be used during flight, and she immediately understood that users will eventually do something they are not supposed to do. She used that to try to protect the astronauts from themselves, and it is honestly lucky she did. An astronaut on Apollo 8 made that exact same mistake, and Hamilton’s team had to spend nine hours figuring out how to fix it and get them home safely.

This whole idea of debugging and making systems intuitive for the user basically started with her. Before she came along, software was not even included in the official Apollo budget or schedule. She had to fight for her work to be taken seriously, even creating the term “software engineering” so it would be respected like other fields. It is insane to think that this one woman, working in what she called the “Wild West” of coding, helped create an entire field that now impacts the whole world. She did not just help us get to the moon, she helped shape the foundation of the modern digital world.

Since I don’t have that much time this week (staying with my Aunt means I do, in fact, need to go see all of her Cricket matches and record them), my reading responses are going to be significantly shorter than usual… sorry!

Her Code Got Humans On The Moon

• Looking at the Artemis II mission is making me a bit sentimental.
• Also she’s so cool, her programming job at MIT was a temporary thing… what…? And accidentally invented the concept of software engineering…?
• Lauren once simulated playing astronaut and crashed it by hitting the wrong program, and then it got flagged as a real risk. Then, NASA said astronauts wouldn’t do that… and… well…
•  This reading was pretty self-explanatory and easy to understand so I don’t. have anything to say which would not clash with the reading’s text, but she’s really, really cool. I was contemplating double majoring in IM and Mathematics and I think this confirmed it for me. 🙂

Emotion & Design: Attractive things work better

• I would like to see all of his teapots… and why would he buy them if they weren’t that functional… Why would you make a Carelman pot impossible to use? What is the actual function of a tea pot? What makes a teapot desirable? Why would you buy a teapot that makes you work harder than you should? He uses all of these teapots too… (actually mood makes sense…)
• “Usable but Ugly” does make sense. Would I rather have a cup that looks cute and takes me a bit longer to finish, or a cup that takes me very short to finish but looks really ugly? What if you find a solution that’s cute but also works well? 

• In MYP Product Design, we learnt about ACCESSFM when designing anything, which featured A(ccessibility) and F(unctionality). Why do we think we can compromise on either when we can find a solution that fits both at once? People DO judge books by their covers, so we should work towards that. 
• Psychology is everywhere! You study what people like to make a product that they will use. I didn’t know we had a judgemental system that tells us what’s good or bad, so it’s cool how you can literally trigger positive affect by pleasing design. Pleasing design makes you feel more creative while negative design makes you focus less on the design and more on the contents. That’s probably why important signs are very basic.
• There’s three levels – visceral (does it look/feel/sound good instantly), behavioral (is it actually usable) and reflective (what does owning this mean to me, what does it say about me). I never thought about the third one consciously. 
• Norman wrote The Design of Everyday Things (yay!) and then admitted that he wrote it too focused on logic and missed the emotional side completely, and then wrote this to fix it HAHAHA.
• I guess TL;DR is that pretty and functional are not opposites… and nice-looking things do perform/get treated better. That’s literally also how it works with people as well (unfortunately).

Norman,“Emotion & Design: Attractive things work better”

This is so interesting. I’ve thought about design quite often because it’s something I’m always interested in, but the way Norman explains it made me think about design outside the box. The idea that “attractive” or “pretty” things actually work better is something I never fully considered before. I used to think functionality comes first and that’s it, but now I’m realizing that looks and feelings can change how we experience it. One part I thought of was the idea of modernization. As someone with OCD, I used to want everything to be in a very specific and controlled way, at least the things I could control. Recently, though I’ve started to realize that a bit of chaos or imperfection can actually be better. Norman’s examples of teapots reminded me of older designs and advertisements. In the past, designs were mainly focused on solving problems and functioning well, while aesthetics didn’t matter as much. Now, because of technology and how easily we can solve everyday problems, aesthetics have become much more important.

Norman’s idea of feelings and the “science of emotions” explains how our emotions shape the way we interact with the world. At the same time, I think this idea can be tricky. A design might try to create a specific emotion for users, but not everyone will feel the same way? This is where design becomes complicated, because emotions are not universal. Still, we often rely on shared associations, like color symbolism, to guide those emotional responses. For example, European street lights have been trending recently on social media because of their yellow lights. Now, whenever people reference European streets or a certain “vibe,” it automatically connects to that lighting. Adding on to the city designs, streets and roads specifically, I usually think of New York and how the streets are structured. I used to believe that everything being clean, organized, and “perfect” was better, so I would compare it to how roads are designed in the UAE and imagine how beneficial it would be if they were more like New York. But now I realize that what looks visually appealing or aesthetic is not always what functions best.

Overall, this reading made me realize that design is not just about making something work, but about how it makes people feel while using it. In my future projects I want to experiment with this idea of ‘attractiveness’ as well as focusing on the feelings from my perspective as the artist/creator but also the audience’s perspective.

Her Code Got Humans on the Moon

I always think about fate and destiny, which I personally find very beautiful. If Margaret’s 4 year old daughter Lauren didn’t pre-launch the system, then they wouldn’t have discovered that flaw and she wouldn’t have been able to think about a solution. Thinking about Margaret’s perspective, I expected her to get mad over the “ruined” project, but instead she treated it as an opportunity to improve the system. That mindset really stood out to me because it shows how mistakes aren’t always setbacks, they can actually prevent bigger failures later.

I also found it interesting how people were punching holes into stacks of cards to represent code, and how everything had to be perfect before running it because there was no room for edits. This made me reflect on how different my experience with coding is today because I’m constantly editing, fixing, and experimenting with my code which I now am very thankful for this flexibility. Back then, one small mistake could cost so much time and effort, which means they had always think carefully. This connects a lot to my own work and even my daily habits. I always know that there is a command z button I can press and have everything how it used to be, and I know that I can always go back and fix things. But reading this made me question whether I’m sometimes too dependent on that flexibility instead of thinking things through more deeply from the start. Like I always say to my friends, I wish there was a command z button in life so I can go back.

Overall, I think Margaret’s story inspires me to be more aware of the “impossible” or unexpected scenarios, because there is always a possibility of things going wrong. I also want to start using bugs as opportunities for growth in a more intentional way because normally, I just fix the issue, learn from it, and move on, but now I’m thinking about how I can actually expand from a single mistake, whether that’s improving the system, adding new features, or preventing future errors. I guess I’ll have to experiment with that next time.

 

 

Reading 1(longer one):

One idea I got from the reading is that beauty is not just decoration. Attractive design can actually change how people feel, and that feeling can affect how well they use something.

I also thought it was interesting that people do not always choose things only because they are the most efficient. Sometimes we choose objects because they feel enjoyable, elegant, or comforting. That makes design feel more human, not just technical.

Another idea is that emotion affects thinking. When people feel relaxed and positive, they may become more open, creative, and flexible. But when they feel stressed, they focus more narrowly. This made me think that design should match the situation people are in.

The reading also made me think that usability and aesthetics should not be separated too much. A product may work well in a mechanical sense, but if it feels unpleasant, the whole experience is weaker. Good design should care about both function and feeling.

 

Reading 2(shorter one):

Margaret Hamilton did more than write programs. She helped make software into a serious field. At first, software was not even treated as an important part of the Apollo mission, but later it became central to success.

I also think the article has a strong message about responsibility. Hamilton understood that small mistakes in code could become huge real-life dangers. That makes her work feel very modern, because today we still depend on software in high-stakes situations.

The article also suggests that great inventions are not only about one person. Hamilton was a major leader, but Apollo software was built by a large team, including many women whose work is often forgotten. That makes the article partly about hidden labor and recognition.

Norman makes a really interesting argument that I see throughout daily life of how a positive mood is really a partnership of the aesthetics vis a vis the usability of the product. I mean, whenever I upgrade my own technology, I see a lot of benefits from the upgrade and with that, I can see how it does influence my thinking. As an example, with my previous Xiaomi phone, I found a lot of workarounds for say installing apps that aren’t available in my region or even some hidden features that made my use of the device much more intuitive.

However I’d like to extend his argument by saying that brand loyalty does also play a factor in our thinking. I upgraded to a Google Pixel phone and I think I mostly got sold on it, because of the abudance of features and the whole Google brand. I mean, I’m enjoying the phone don’t get me wrong, but when I encunter a minor issue, it doesn’t really appaul me, more so I’m patient but particularly because I strongly side with Google as the brand value of it. So there’s definitely an argument to made there that if you are loyal and trust a brand, then your thinking is based off it.

With regards to Hamilton, I think it’s really interesting that there was a time where people thought that humans didn’t need support or help because NASA just assumed that astronauts are equipped with a higher degree of knowledge. Nowadays, we constantly make mistakes (I mean even writing this I almost forgot to save my work 😭) and I couldn’t imagine living with technology without error checks. And I think some people do get offended or at least frustrated with error check screens as they’re so constant and everywhere. But man, imagine if we didn’t have them. What kind of society would we live in?

Concept

For my midterm, I created Strawberry Yurt Cafè, a cozy cafe game. I was inspired by a vlog by Gazi (https://youtu.be/eBt0nV0Y1Y0?si=4Hjy9PetN7n4hHwU) where she coded a game in one night, and that made me want to create a game for my own project too. I did not make mine in one night, but that idea encouraged me to build atmospheric game. I was also inspired by lo-fi playlists, and I wanted the game to feel soft and calm.

This project ended up being very different from what I originally thought I was going to do when I first posted my midterm ideas. My direction changed a lot during the process, but I think that actually helped me find a project that I enjoyed. Since I have been studying in cafes a lot recently, I liked the idea of making a cafe game ran by someone who loves strawberries.

Process

I started by outlining the main parts of the game that I would need to make:

1. The cafe environment
2. The kitchen area,
3. The drinks,
4. The recipe book, the ingredients
5. The customers

After planning those pieces, I moved into sketching.

I first drew the strawberry-themed cafe, the seller. I decided that the cafe would sell cakes and drinks, but the player would be the barista helping the seller prepare drinks for customers. Since the cafe has a dome-like shape, it reminded me of a yurt from my home country, Kazakhstan, which is a traditional home that my ancestors used to live in, so that is why I decided to call the game Strawberry Yurt Cafè.

 

After that, I chose the main color palette of the project. I focused mostly on pink, brown, and beige tones because I wanted the game to look warm and cozy.

 

 

 

 

 

Then I started drawing the individual assets so the drinks, ingredients, and customers. I also sketched the different stages of making drinks, so the player could visually see the process step by step.

 

 

I sketched the ingredients for the drinks like strawberry jam, matcha, milk, ice cream, strawberries, tea, whipped cream.

 

 

After I designed a variety of animal customers and ended up making nine different versions. I also created the recipe book logo in Adobe, which helped give the interface a more finished look.

How the Project Works

The game begins on an intro screen with instructions. After the player clicks Start Shift, the game moves into the cafe scene, where a customer appears with an order bubble. The player can open the recipe book, choose a drink, and then move into the kitchen scene. In the kitchen, the player has to click the ingredients in the correct order to prepare the drink before the timer runs out. If the correct recipe is followed, the customer reacts happily; if the wrong ingredient is added or time runs out, the customer reacts negatively.

One part I am proud of is how the game combines visuals, interaction, and sound to create a full atmosphere. I used my drawings to build the aesthetic of the game, and I also found sound effects for the ingredients, recipe book interactions, and customer mood changes. The game includes cozy background music when it starts, which helps support the feeling I wanted the player to have. Even though the gameplay is simple, I think it succeeds in giving the user a cute and relaxing experience.

Code Snippets

I structured data for the drinks so each one could have its own recipe and ingredient positions:

const DRINKS = {
  "strawberry latte": {
    steps: ["tea", "strawberry milk", "cold milk"],
    ingredients: [
      { target: "strawberry milk", ingredient: "strawberry milk", x: -155, y: -110 },
      { target: "cold milk", ingredient: "cold milk", x: -4, y: -107 },
      { target: "tea", ingredient: "tea", x: 139, y: -109 },
    ],
  },
};

By I creating a DRINKS object where each drink stores its ingredient order and the positions of the ingredient icons in the kitchen scene. Each drink has a recipe, and the game checks whether the player clicks the ingredients in the same order as the steps array. The ingredients array also tells the game where to place each ingredient on the screen. Because of this, I could add multiple drinks without rewriting the whole game logic every time.

Another code section I found important is the function that handles what happens after the player delivers a drink.

function finishDrink(deliveredCorrectDrink) {
  state.scene = "cafe";
  state.recipeBookOpen = false;
  state.ingredientsVisible = false;

  if (deliveredCorrectDrink) {
    state.goodDrinksMade += 1;
    state.reactCostume = "love";
    playEffect("sound-effect-twinklesparkle-115095", 1);
  } else {
    state.badDrinksMade += 1;
    state.reactCostume = "mad";
    playEffect("551543__philracoindie__8-bit-denyerror-sound", 1);
  }

  clearCurrentDrink();
  scheduleNextCustomer();
}

This function basically controls the result of the player’s action. After the player delivers a drink, the game goes back to the cafe scene. Then it checks if the drink was correct or not. If it was correct, the game adds one point to the good drinks counter, changes the customer reaction to happy, and plays a positive sound. If the drink was wrong, it adds one point to the missed drinks counter, changes the reaction to mad, and plays a different sound.

Reflection and improvements

One of the main problems I ran into was with the visual side of the project. At first, I wanted to create and draw some of the assets directly with code, but the results looked off and did not match the soft, cozy style I imagined. Because of that, I decided to draw the assets myself instead. After that, I also had some issues with image transparency, since some files showed unwanted white backgrounds or did not blend well into the game at first. Fixing those problems took time, but it helped me understand that sometimes hand-drawn assets and image cleanup work better for a project like this than trying to build everything only through code.

There are still many things I would like to improve in the future. I would like to add more drinks, more customer reactions, and more animations in the environment. I also think the game could cooler if I added more interactions in the cafe itself. Still, I am very proud of this project because it gives the exact kind of cozy experience I wanted to give to the user.