How Microsoft misunderstands the concept of user research (& how Apple doesn’t)

I think this can be turned off, and I think that at some point you turned it off... that's the only thing I can think of because getting to the root of a drive just requires going to the left of the window and clicking on the drive... most of the time (with the default finder configuration.)

You say this like its a bad thing. There is no "right way" to do things. Actually, there is: the most obvious/intuitive way is the right way for a particular user. If people intuitively use Copy/Paste to move files, it makes sense to make that functionality easier to get to. It does not make sense to try to "correct" their behavior in some way.

Coke's iconic bottle is not about affordance (though it does have good affordances) it is about signally fun, enjoyment, summer, etc. Coke has literally spent billions over decades to embed that emotional reaction in the American public.

http://www.hnl.bcm.tmc.edu/cache/The%20Pepsi-Coke%20challeng...

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_45/b41070892...

Pour pepsi in a coke bottle and it 'tastes' better ...literally your brain reacts differently when examined with an MRI when you know you are drinking Coke.

Apple's goal is to provoke the same emotional reaction with respect to their design language, and has also spent (billions?) doing so in commercials, actions and design choices over the last decade plus.

No one is immune to this. I have a Mini Cooper. I love it. But it is a direct example of favoring emotion over affordance. As a specific example: There is a bank of identical dip switches just below the radio. They look cool, and fit with Mini's design language. They however have Negative affordance. The switches all feel the same ... "Am I opening a lock? Rolling down a window? Or turning on/off Dynamic Stability Control?" I don't know ... hopefully it isn't they dynamic stability control.

And everything effects emotional connection. Mini's introduction of an SUV!?! My emotional connection to my own Mini is watered down by the company attempting to expand beyond the core idea providing that emotional connection. Is that rational? ... no. But it is real. My Mini still drives like a go kart, I haven't fallen out of love with it, but the existence of a Mini SUV does make me less likely to make excuses for its real failings.

Favoring design language over affordance is the reason for the gut reaction people have when they complain that this has poor design. It is based on an emotional reaction, not on whether it works. Whether it works is entirely besides the point.

If you design for emotional connection people look past actual usability problems. They may even make up fanciful explanations of why it is better (in the face of evidence) because they like it and want it to be better anyway. When you buy something to signal something about yourself there is an emotional need to defend it.

Obviously affordance vs design is not entirely an either or proposition. It is best to have both. Sadly emotional reactions are influenced by extremes. Sacrificing usability to provide the signal of usability can be a successful strategy. Sacrificing the signal of usability to provide usability is a much more difficult proposition.

First, there are two possible new-user intuitions about what drag and drop ought to do, and it won't always do what they expect. First, it could copy the file, and second, it could move the file. The default on Windows (and OS X, IIRC) is to copy when the source and target are two different drives, and move if it's the same drive. This is likely to produce the correct result, but it wiil not always do so. If you want one and get the other, you will be unhappy with the result.

If you have learned cut/copy/paste in an application, then you will know the difference between cut and copy, and this will help you achieve the correct result right away. I presume this is the reason for them traditionally promoting cut/copy/paste over drag and drop.

Second, drag and drop is not discoverable. Items on the a toolbar or ribbon are trivially discoverable, but new and unskilled users may not even realize that drag and drop is an option.

This is the advantage of a ribbon populated with commands. Not only are the commands preferred by infrequent explorer users (cut/copy/paste) easily accessible to them, but new users have the even more easily understood option of choosing "move to" or "copy to". Q: How do I copy this file to my flash drive? A: I select "copy to".

I think there is a bit of false transference. I program therefore I'm an expert. I can honestly say that my ability at C++ or Emacs never helped me figure out how to do anything in Office. Of course, I use it rarely enough that every time might as well be the first time.

Perhaps I'm odd in that most people make deeper use of Office more often than I do?