We mold clay into a
pot, but it is the emptiness inside that makes the vessel useful. Tao Te Ching
The best products are aesthetically-pleasing
are plug and play have personal or professional value seem transparent offer clear affordances/instruction put functionality on the correct platform have responsive feedback use conventions... ...or something radically better make it difficult to make mistakes are aware of context of use have moments of delight respect time and effort
Obligatory Don Norman Quote [P]eople
are not willing to pay for a system that looks simpler because it looks less capable…[Make] the actual complexity low, the real simplicity high. That’s an exciting design challenge: make it look powerful while also making it easy to use. Don Norman
Companies love features, too. It
gives them something to easily market and talk about. It also allows them to simply replicate what their competitors are doing without having to come up with real differentiators.
It is hard to change
learned behaviour. Once people get used to do something one way, especially if they do it very regularly, it is hard to get them to change. It is often easier to change the non-human parts of the system than it is to change human behaviour.
Functional cartography Should the controls
be digital, physical, or both? When and where will the feature be used? What’s the feature’s priority? Does it need to be available all the time? Frequently? How much resources should be spent? Consider ergonomics. Will a physical control ruin the form? Will a screen? How tangible should the feature be? Does the feature need a visible presence (affordance)? This can also spread cross-platform too.
Start from the behaviour, and
then figure out what should control it: the physical form, UI elements on a screen, or even gestures in space. For users, the interface is the system, and they don’t care which discipline(s) designed it, only that it looks good and works well.