Category: Spring 2024 – Aya (Section 003)

Reading about Margaret Hamilton’s journey in programming the Apollo mission and Don Norman’s thoughts on emotional design made me think deeply about how we blend innovation and design in technology. Hamilton was working on something as monumental as landing humans on the moon. She pioneered women in tech and the concept of software itself. It’s fascinating and a bit disheartening to see how, despite such trailblazers, we still grapple with gender equality in STEM. I wonder what more we must do to make the field more inclusive.

One passage that particularly resonated with me was Hamilton’s description of her work as “both a joy and a responsibility.” This encapsulates her passion and dedication to her work, recognizing its immense significance. It also highlights the pressure and burden she carried, knowing that the lives of astronauts depended on the code she and her team wrote. Even when others saw it as unnecessary, Hamilton’s insistence on adding error checks speaks volumes about foreseeing and mitigating human errors in tech. It’s a reminder of how vital it is to balance trust in technology with caution, especially as we lean more into AI and automation today.

On the flip side, Don Norman’s take on design brings a whole new layer to how we interact with technology. His story about the three teapots, each with a unique blend of aesthetics and functionality, shows that design has a deep meaning about how things look and make us feel and work for us. It got me thinking about how we design our digital tools and interfaces. Are we considering how they feel to use, or just how they function?

Both pieces highlight the importance of looking beyond the surface, whether breaking down gender barriers in tech or creating designs that delight and serve. They make me believe that innovation has more meanings and aspects to explore. Some people think it is only about the next big tech breakthrough, but it has hidden meanings, like making technology more human, accessible, and enjoyable for everyone.

This piece blew my mind. I had no idea that one of the key pioneers of modern software and coding was a working mom from the 1960s! The fact that Margaret Hamilton was leading an MIT team writing the onboard flight software for the Apollo missions while also bringing her daughter to work makes her such an icon.

Just let that sink in for a moment. At a time when women were expected to stay home and support their husband’s career, Hamilton was leading an MIT team writing the critical onboard flight software that allowed NASA to accomplish the seemingly impossible – landing astronauts on the lunar surface and returning them safely.

What makes it even more incredible is that she was doing this boundary-pushing work while also bringing her young daughter to the lab. Little Lauren was napping under mommy’s desk as Hamilton and her team were inventing core programming concepts like error prioritisation and asynchronous processing from scratch. Techniques that are still fundamental today!

The part about the “Little Old Ladies” literally weaving the software into indestructible copper wires is so fascinating. It’s a stark contrast to our current world of seamless cloud computing and automatic updates. But it captures the blind ambition and faith in human ingenuity that powered that era’s space race.

My favorite anecdote from the reading though is Hamilton advocating to add extra fault protection to the code because her daughter had exposed a flaw in the simulator – and NASA dismissing it as impossible. Then that exact scenario happening on the critical Apollo 8 mission and Hamilton’s protocol saving the day! What foresight.

Stories like this are such great reminders that the technological marvels we now take for granted were once radical frontiers explored by true visionaries and pioneers like Hamilton. At a time when the concept of “software” was barely understood, she had the brilliance to blaze that trail through the unknown and invent an entirely new discipline.

This was such an inspiring read!!

Don Norman’s “Three Teapots” piece really got me thinking about how design isn’t just about pure functionality. The part that stuck out to me was when he talked about his three very different teapots – the bizarrely unusable Carelman one, the plain but practical Nanna pot, and the cleverly designed Ronnefeldt tilting teapot. Despite their varying levels of usability, Norman admits to using all three regularly depending on his mood and the situation. 

This challenges the idea that good design has to be 100% focused on usability above all else. Norman makes the point that aesthetics, emotion, and personal preferences also play a huge role in how we perceive and enjoy designed objects. His teapot collection shows that design excellence isn’t a one-size-fits-all thing – it’s about striking the right balance between functionality, beauty, and generating an emotional connection for the user.

I totally relate to this from my own experiences with products and objects. There have been times when something was highly usable but felt soulless and uninspiring. On the flip side, I’ve been drawn to gorgeous pieces of design that maybe weren’t the most practical but just made me feel good owning and using them. Norman reminds us that great design caters to our practical needs as humans, but also our emotional and aesthetic desires.

His points about how emotions influence our thinking and decision-making were also fascinating. The idea that positive emotions can boost our creativity and tolerance for small design flaws, while negative emotions can make us laser-focused but closed-off, is pretty mind-blowing. It makes me think designers need to consider the emotional resonance of their work, not just tick boxes for usability.

Overall, “Three Teapots” challenges the usability-over-everything mentality in a really insightful way. It argues that design should harmonize utility, beauty, and generate an emotional response in users based on their subjective needs and experiences. 

 

To begin with, I enjoyed reading another one of Norman’s chapters. Something I liked about his writings is how he always gives really good examples to his point which makes it very clear to the reader what exactly he is talking about and the point he wants to get across. In this chapter particularly, he gives an example of the teapots to show good design and usability.

When Norman wrote about “Affect and Behavior” it started to get a little confusing and seemed a little bit like a psychology lesson up until the “Implications upon Design” when he gave an example on how useful doors are designed for stressful occasions.

I highly agree with Norman when he wrote “Good design means that beauty and usability are in balance.” A lot of people do in fact sometimes pay so much attention to the aesthetics and design of the product rather than its accessibility and usability.  Overall, I like Norman’s way of giving examples when it comes to making his point more clear.

The second reading focused more on physical computing. I found it very frustrating when the simulator crashed, which was essential for them to come back. It was fascinating that just a child playing with the keyboard of the DSKY unit allowed for such a crash. Luckily, they were able to come up with a solution. Overall, I liked the story of how Margaret invented software and had her code get people to the moon.

Emotions & Attractive by Donald A.Norman

Reading about the author’s teapot collection and the talk about design was really thought provoking. I never realized how much design can affect how we feel about things. For example, the different teapots the author has are all for different reasons – some are pretty, some are just practical. It made me think about the things I have in my home. Do I choose the things because they look nice, or because they work well?

The part about how color screens were introduced in computers got me thinking about the things that I have with me. Do I like them more because they look cool, even if they don’t work perfectly? And then, there’s the talk about emotions and how they affect our choices. It made me think about the times when I bought something just because it made me happy and gave satisfaction, even if it wasn’t really practical.

Overall, this text made me realize that design is more than just how something looks. It’s about how it makes us feel and how well it works. It made me want to pay more attention to the things I buy and think about why I choose them.

Her Code Got Humans on the Moon

Learning about Margaret Hamilton’s role in the Apollo space program was really inspiring. It’s amazing how she broke stereotypes by being a working mom in a field dominated by men. Seeing how Hamilton faced various challenges and still made groundbreaking contributions to software engineering makes me think about the countless times that I doubted myself when faced with obstacles. She reminds me that determination and hard work can lead to amazing achievements, even in the face of difficulty.

Moreover, Hamilton’s leadership and problem-solving skills during critical moments, like the Apollo 8 mission, inspire me to be a better leader in my own life and encourages me to challenge myself, believe in my abilities, and strive for excellence in everything I do.

The sentence “After all, attractive things work better,” which the author repeats several times throughout the essay, resonated with me, cementing the notion that aesthetics should never be compromised in favor of usability. It seems that humans inherently seek out aesthetic objects. Many items, not necessarily usable, exist solely because they are beautiful in their own way—for instance, paintings, statues, and interior designs. In my view, aesthetics is becoming a trend. One example I can cite is the aesthetic cafes, known as “gamsung cafes,” in South Korea. These cafes are designed to entice people into taking pictures, thanks to their stunning interiors. Initially, I couldn’t understand the appeal of these places. However, upon visiting one of the famous “gamsung cafes,” I found myself enjoying the atmosphere and the emotions it evoked. This experience helped me realize that aesthetics can indeed touch people’s emotions.

This reflection also brought to mind the reasons behind the iPhone’s rising popularity. Usability is, of course, crucial. When comparing the two most popular phone brands, Samsung and Apple, I view Apple as the representative of aesthetics, while Samsung champions usability. While older generations might prefer Samsung for its user-friendliness, many from the newer generations opt for Apple. A YouTube video interviewing people about their choice of iPhones surprised me. Their answers were strikingly simple: “It’s beautiful.” That’s it. I believe this sentiment drives the current generation and represents a prevailing trend. As a Business Major, this reading underscored the ongoing trend that “After all, attractive things work better.”

I find it fascinating that there is this duality pertaining to how affect impacts the way humans function. Norman demonstrates that negative affect tends to have an effect on the mind that is contradictory to that of positive effect, for example, negative effect aids the focus process whereas the positive effect relaxes it; negative affect makes it harder to do easy tasks whereas positive affect makes it easier to do difficult tasks; negative affect makes simple tasks difficult whereas positive affect makes difficult tasks easier (4, 5). When it comes to a product, this duality has an even more noticeably contradictory impact on the engineers and the users. Positive affect can make the engineers design a product in a more comprehensive way, that is, to fill it with functions ranging from simple to advanced; this, however, can render some negative affects from the users especially when they cannot figure out how to operate the advanced parts of the product. Negative affect can sometimes make the engineers feel less incentivized to improve their product and only try to finish it, which can make the product become easier for users to operate. This may prime users’ minds and make them become more tolerable to trying advanced functions within the product when the engineers decide to improve it, as Norman argues, “although poor design is never excusable, when people are in a relaxed situation, the pleasant, pleasurable aspects of the design will make them more tolerant of difficulties and problems in the interface” (6).

Another point that Norman makes to which I find worth mentioning is the harmony between beauty and usability. Obviously, the product is useless when it is beautiful but not functional; similarly, the product is also hard to use design and appeal-wise if it is highly functional but not beautiful. However, I do not fully agree with him there has to be a balance between beauty and usability. This should be dependent on the purpose of the product itself and how it is going to be used. If users choose the product because of its functions, then there is no point that the product’s level of beauty should match its functionality; the product then only needs to be decent looking enough. Vice versa, if the beauty of the product is the main selling point, then that should be the manufacturer’s main focus in design and production.

As for the story about Margaret Hamilton and how her codes help the astronauts successfully land their mission, I really admire her determination to finish up the product that she helped start. It is about her integrity and not to give in when she has more to offer. When designing and creating a product, it is important to be as thorough as possible in terms of codes and functions. It is fine if the users decide not to use it, as in the case for most computers and laptops and their users these days. However, when the users want to maximize their laptops and computers, they will really need to use what is on the table, hard.

To begin with, having been in the Spanish National Table tennis team and competed at a worldwide level the mental classes that we took usually talked a lot about fear and anxiety. Every time I worked with pressure, my coach always said, “Pressure is a privilege,” and I agree with him 100%. “Anxiety focuses your mind, reducing distractions,” is a very powerful remark from the writing that resonates with my experiences. True, paralysis and fear can result from excessive anxiety. Although anxiety is sometimes misinterpreted negatively, when it is present in the right levels, it encourages self-improvement, ambition, survival, and guard against overconfidence. The key is to manage our anxiety such that it doesn’t become an impediment and improves our performance. While difficult to master, striking this balance is essential for successful performance.

 

Secondly, the piece clarified something I had not realized before: our emotional condition affects how much bad design we can tolerate. Everyday annoyances like traffic lights and slow computer loads can cause anger when under pressure or strain. On the other hand, when we’re at ease, we’re more understanding of these shortcomings. This finding makes me wonder how our emotional states affect how good a design seems to us. It emphasizes the subjectivity of experiences, which is in line with a current perspective on user experience. Even in situations that are objectively pleasant, a person’s mood can have a significant impact on how they interpret an experience. This thought connects with the reading we read a few weeks ago. This realization highlights the value of designing with empathy by recognizing that users’ emotional states at any one time can have a big impact on how they interact with and feel about a design. Designers may build more robust, user-centered solutions that accommodate a greater range of emotional states and events by taking into account the user’s emotional context.

A question that I wonder is the following: What effects does the design of commonplace technology take from the idea that “attractive things work better”? How does this affect the user experience?

 

When we consider Margaret Hamilton’s tale, we see not just the incredible achievements of women in STEM fields, but also the significance of these stories in empowering young girls. It is imperative that girls hear stories like this in order for them to understand that they, too, can be excellent in industries that have historically been controlled by males. By introducing them to the accomplishments of trailblazers such as Hamilton, we can spark an interest in science and technology and contribute to closing the gender gap in these sectors. These tales act as historical lessons as well as hope-filled reminders of possibilities for the coming generation.

Which approaches can mentors and educators use to make sure that curricula honor and appreciate the accomplishments of women in science and technology, like Hamilton?

I have always questioned the relationship between aesthetics and usability/functionality. In many of the designs that exist, I feel like people value the appearance more than the functionality of the design. Therefore, some designs failed to fulfill the purpose they were supposed to serve. In this case, although the design adds color and taste to the environment, I feel like they are not useful since they do not satisfy the role they should.

Donald A. Norman in his writing said “Although poor design is never excusable, when people are in a relaxed situation, the pleasant pleasurable aspects of the design will make them more tolerant of difficulties and problems in the interface” (page 5-6). Although I prioritize functionality over aesthetics, I found myself agreeing with what the author said. When my emotions are chill and I am in a relaxed situation, I become more tolerant and easygoing about designs that do not satisfy my needs. Whether or not I am pleased with the usability of the design, if I am in a “good mood” I forget about the the poor design and am convinced that it is a good design. Therefore, the mood of a person plays a big role in determining the quality of the design.

Similarly, when I am in a bad mood, small issues with the design seem big and they irritate me. Just as the author said, good human-centered designs are especially important in stressful situations and designers must find ways to create designs that will not make the users want to stop using them.

In all, I realized that there are a lot of factors that we have to consider when designing. Following up with previous readings, human emotion is a factor that greatly affects the quality and usability of designs. Due to the fluctuation in human emotion, I found the designer’s job very difficult and I wonder what other factors designers consider before releasing the design to the public.