Live data from Hacker News

The Design of Everyday Things – Book Summary and Notes

elvischidera.com

111–120 of 128 posts

Re: The Design of Everyday Things – Book Summary and Notes

#111
post #106

These kinds of things assume critical importance in the design of an aircraft cockpit. For example, the lever that controls the landing gear has a little tire for the knob. The flap controls have a knob shaped like a flap. All so you know what the control is without needing to look (or the cockpit is filled with smoke). The common theme with all these designs is they are driven by accidents. For some strange reason,…

> humans are pretty bad at creating intuitive designs I've always assumed that is because so few people care about design who are in power of affecting design. This is partially because it takes effort to think about a problem, and it's much easier to not care, or assume someone else will fix it.

The reason people in power don't care about design is because good design is hard to quantify and thus hard to justify effort and/or expense.

The results of bad design (i.e. takeoff power from grandparent) are much easier to quantify and therefore easier to use to catalyze improvement.

This is why Apple, under Jobs, was so unique. He helped rebuild the company around design despite the fact that their obsession with design cost them loads of money (in the short term). In the longer term, their products' success has spoken for itself but you can bet that past shareholders/board members were constantly asking "do we need this?"

Re: The Design of Everyday Things – Book Summary and Notes

#112

Warning: this book leaves some permanent imprints in your mind that will forever cause you to be annoyed at badly designed doors and other things.

Absolutely not. Atleast not with everything all the time. I love how the front camera on my phone is not concentric to the notch. How my table has uneven legs (I place a wooden piece to adjust). How the edge of my door is not aligned with the frame. How some of my t-shirts have slightly uneven sleeves. For me, imperfections make them personal. I am repelled by people ('designers' ;)) looking at everything to find fau…

You are taking the irregularities of t-shirt sleeves in the same way that one interprets the imperfections that result from the hand-making of bespoke clothing, for example, the seams of tailored suits. The latter is craftsmanship; the former is inferior mass production. Not the same.

Re: The Design of Everyday Things – Book Summary and Notes

#113
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel you are re-emphasizing the validity of the point. It should not be easy to use things wrongly, with more secret knowledge needed to use things that are more dangerous or require more skill than things that will do no harm when used wrongly. In other words, your lab equipment should be fool-proofed so that if I walked into the lab and try to use it, I might get it loud buzzing sound a emoji of a sad face. I am…

I think a problem with designing specialized equipment (such as lab equipment) in such a way that it is "obvious" to people without specialized knowledge is that it becomes annoying to use for power users, i.e. the lab workers who do have the specialized knowledge. Think of the command line. It would drive me crazy if it didn't exist, because I'm a power user. But it's not a good interface for a novice, it fails seve…

I don't think that the command line (take Macs) is difficult to discover, since you have just to digit "terminal" in spotlight. I think it is within easy reach of anyone, then if the word "terminal" doesn't mean anything to the user, there is no point in looking for the command line.

Re: The Design of Everyday Things – Book Summary and Notes

#114
post #107
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> humans are pretty bad at creating intuitive designs I've always assumed that is because so few people care about design who are in power of affecting design. This is partially because it takes effort to think about a problem, and it's much easier to not care, or assume someone else will fix it.

It's more about unknown unknowns.

Before we get to those as an explanation, we need to see less evidence of shit design you can spot instantly without having any experience in the field. If a user can instantly recommend an improvement to the design that most would agree is an improvement, that's evidence of shit design.

Re: The Design of Everyday Things – Book Summary and Notes

#115

Warning: this book leaves some permanent imprints in your mind that will forever cause you to be annoyed at badly designed doors and other things.

Absolutely not. Atleast not with everything all the time. I love how the front camera on my phone is not concentric to the notch. How my table has uneven legs (I place a wooden piece to adjust). How the edge of my door is not aligned with the frame. How some of my t-shirts have slightly uneven sleeves. For me, imperfections make them personal. I am repelled by people ('designers' ;)) looking at everything to find fau…

As people have commented defects aren’t desirable, but what I think your feelings are leading you toward is Wabi-sabi (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wabi-sabi). There is no such thing as perfection and if there was it’s undesirable.

“Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”

Re: The Design of Everyday Things – Book Summary and Notes

#116
post #52
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No case" worked for me for about 18 months. Now I'm forced to wear a case to keep the broken glass from cutting my fingers when picking up my phone (the back of the phone shattered but the front is perfectly fine with no screen protector). How / why the back of a phone would be made of a material that is essential glass is beyond me.

> How / why the back of a phone would be made of a material that is essential glass is beyond me. For wireless charging. If you pay for the extra warranty and break the glass screen you can replace it for $100. If you break the glass back the repair price is astronomical.

Yup, but this used to be the opposite. The front used to be the expense glass to replace.

Re: The Design of Everyday Things – Book Summary and Notes

#117
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But sports watches / ‘dive’ watches seem pretty popular. Maybe the sports involved aren’t so likely to involve damaging the watch somehow.

That's for a lower tier and/or for sending a different message. Someone with a million dollar watch presumably has several for different purposes. I wear the cheapest apple watch and could easily replace it if it breaks, but never has even when the limb bearing it has.

Awkward last sentence. I needed to reread it multiple times to parse correctly.

Re: The Design of Everyday Things – Book Summary and Notes

#118
post #22

This is definitely one of the books that has shaped my thinking the most. The book argues very strongly for functional design and design that makes usage obvious. “The way you use a thing should be encoded in the way the thing is, not in a manual”. I’ve been told there’s a follow up that concedes some of this and argues for emotional design. Something a long the lines of “this thing doesn’t need this handle, but it m…

Why hasn't Apple ever made a version with a built-in ruggedized case? I hate putting the case on but in practice it's too fragile of a thing for many people's usage patterns. Seems like one of those things, like the flashlight, where they would see how the people are using it and build it in for a more streamlined experience. I don't want to believe the cynical interpretation that they do it to sell more phones/repai…

Because Apple cares about form as much as function and will not sacrifice form. It was almost a religious pursuit for Steve Jobs.

Re: The Design of Everyday Things – Book Summary and Notes

#119
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a problem with designing specialized equipment (such as lab equipment) in such a way that it is "obvious" to people without specialized knowledge is that it becomes annoying to use for power users, i.e. the lab workers who do have the specialized knowledge. Think of the command line. It would drive me crazy if it didn't exist, because I'm a power user. But it's not a good interface for a novice, it fails seve…

I don't think that the command line (take Macs) is difficult to discover, since you have just to digit "terminal" in spotlight. I think it is within easy reach of anyone, then if the word "terminal" doesn't mean anything to the user, there is no point in looking for the command line.

Sorry, I mean using the command line. You can't easily discover which terminal commands are available, which is why the command line has terrible affordances -- in Don Norman's parlance -- for novices.

I didn't mean discovering the terminal app itself!

Re: The Design of Everyday Things – Book Summary and Notes

#120
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's for a lower tier and/or for sending a different message. Someone with a million dollar watch presumably has several for different purposes. I wear the cheapest apple watch and could easily replace it if it breaks, but never has even when the limb bearing it has.

Awkward last sentence. I needed to reread it multiple times to parse correctly.

OK, thanks. I suppose I could add an "it" before never, if editing were still possible.
Post reply on HN