The main question in my mind after listening to this audiobook is easily enough answered: How old IS this book, anyhow? In the introduction the author talks about how the book isn't dated. Well, it was originally published in 1988. One of the pieces of technology most discussed is the videocassette recorder. The VCR. The computers being discussed are about a step beyond the ones that were capable of adding three numbers together using a bank of systems that would fill a room.

Some of the book is relevant no matter what, as the prologue or forward or introduction or whatever it was points out. But not all of it is.

Much of the point of this book is: "When people have trouble with something, it's not their fault. It's the fault of the design." And I don't buy it. Maybe it's because I have less faith in humanity than the author does, but – well, I've seen it (including, to be honest, in myself). I did not like the book Wizard's First Rule, but something I love and use all the time is its explication of Wizard's First Rule: "People Are Idiots". Yes, it should be obvious whether a door needs to be pushed or pulled to get the thing open – but in most if not all of the cases I've seen it's not actively hidden. In my experience, people just don't pay attention. People don't read.

Example: I can't tell you how many emails I've sent, only to have to reiterate some or all of it almost immediately. I used to run an international online-based Secret Santa, and every year after the emails went out I braced myself for the slew of responses asking questions that were answered in the initial email. Because people don't read.

I've learned that when I ask two questions or provide two pieces of information in an email, the second one is going to go completely unnoticed. More than two? Forget it. Now, I've long ago learned that my tendency to wordiness won't fly in business emails – I've learned to pare it down. Still, people don't read.

Recent example: in reply to a question from one of my bosses, I wrote "I’ve attached [three pieces of documentation for a delivery]; it looks like there was no delivery ticket created." That was the first line of my email. One of them replied with "Do we have delivery ticket?" I sat and stared at it for a couple of minutes, thinking of and discarding possible responses, and then just wrote back "There was no delivery ticket, as far as I can see". I just don't understand.

Example: I can't tell you how many people go up to the fax machine in the office and ask whether paperwork has to be face-up or face-down. (The owner of the company asks every time.) (Every. Time.) How do you work in offices as long as these people have without learning that there is a little graphic on the machine to answer just that important question. (I also can't tell you how many blank faxes I've received over the years, because people a) didn't read and b) didn't ask, and just faxed away. Upside down.) The design is just fine: the question is answered. I'm not sure how else it could be addressed; bright colors or flashing lights? Or big letters? Nah. It's fine. People are idiots.

So your car radio is difficult to use while driving? Here's a thought: Don't use it while driving. You might want to watch the road instead.

The author talks about an expensive hoity toity Italian washing machine that was so badly designed the owners were afraid to touch it. "Why did they buy it?" the author asks. Well, because it's an expensive hoity toity Italian machine – and they're stupid. They wanted conspicuous consumption, or got snowed by a salesman who perceived their weakness. Plus they probably hire someone to do their laundry anyway, or at any rate seem to be able to afford to.

And the author complains about the problems inherent in lowering a projection screen in a lecture hall – but it sounds like the hall long predates slide projectors. The projector had to be installed in the place long after the fact, and in such a way (I would assume) so as not to do any mischief to the structure or artistry of the room. So – yeah, it's not perfect. It doesn't exist in perfect conditions. Work with it. Or hold your lectures somewhere else.

And the author complains about senseless instructions for those VCR's, and all I could think was, well, they're often translated, badly, from Japanese.

The author talks about a design feature – or not – in an Audi which allowed the sunroof to be closed without the ignition key in place, but only if an odd sequence of steps were taken. Why, he asks, was it such a peculiar combination of steps? Well, a) because it was accidental, and/or b) because a non-peculiar combination might result in an accidental opening of the sunroof when you really didn't want it open. (I say "you" because I'll never so much as sit in an Audi.)

Now, I do agree with the basic premise of the book. Of course an object should be designed so that it's not difficult to use. But … well, see, over the sink in my apartment there are three switches. When I had a tour of the place I was told that the one on the left controlled the light, the one in the middle controlled the garbage disposal, and the last one was for the dishwasher. When I moved in a little while later it took about five minutes' trial and error to work it out again. Now I don't have to think about it. I don't need a huge sign on the wall. Figure it out yourself: you'll probably remember it longer. "Control/alt/delete" isn't an intuitive command for the computer – but the reason for that is pretty sensible: it's not something that can be done using one or two close-set keys … because it's not something you want to do accidentally. And once it's learned, it's easy enough to remember.

Okay, go back to the whole door thing. The author admits that he has problems with doors. And I get it – if there's no label on a door it can be hard to know whether you're supposed to push or pull or whatever. But – at least nowadays – I think every door I see in a public venue has a little sign. Or - know what? If you're meant to pull, there's probably a handle, and if you're meant to push there's probably a bar. And … I'm sorry, I can't muster up a whole lot of sympathy for the person who pulls on a door that says "push", or vice versa – including me. Honestly, I have little patience with anyone (including me) who doesn't read the damn directions.

I also don't have a lot of patience for someone, like the man in this book, who goes out and buys a massively expensive Italian washing machine without making sure he understands how to use it. Yes, that can be blamed on the design; it can also be blamed on the salesman seeing dollar signs, and on the fact that any instruction manual is probably translated from the Italian – and on a level of carelessness and lack of preparedness by the buyer. I'm sorry – if you don't put in a certain level of research into a big purchase, you deserve what you end up with.

If I need, for example, to make a spreadsheet do something I don't know how to do, I don't write a letter to MicroSoft complaining about the poor design of Excel. I figure it out, or I look it up. If I don't know what a word means, I look it up. You know the adage that God helps those who help themselves? I like it. I work with people who don't bother to try to solve any problem for themselves. If they don't know how to do something, they sit in their seats and yell like children for help – literally. It sounds like the author is in favor of this attitude – everything should be obvious, and if it's not you're entitled to squawk. It's learned helplessness.

My feeling on this is basically that if I can figure it out, or look it up, anyone can – and damn well should.

And read my damned email, jackass.

So, no – technology of any sort should not be intentionally or incidentally obscure. But also, and equally, people should be able to learn and follow the instructions that are present and hone their deductive instincts. It's an ability that will only ever make life easier.

Not a bad book, but a bit too boring for my tastes.

Norman presents a few useful frameworks for reasoning about design in an abstract way: from buildings to iPads to drawers. I appreciated the simplicity with which he analyzes things, but at the same time I can't say I took much away from this.

In this revised edition Norman also claims that he tried hard to cut anything unnecessary. I find that hard to believe because the book isn't exactly concise.

Orsù, imbranati di tutto il mondo rianimatevi

Una volta sfrondato dalla reiterazione sfiancante alla È facile smettere di fumare se sai come farlo il messaggio profetico emerge in tutta la sua evidenza.

Non siamo noi ad essere cerebrolesi, ma è il progettista ad essere diversamente scadente.

Detto questo, mi accingo a progettare una ciotola a sezioni basculanti con timer incorporato e pulsanti a idrogetto per il mio cane, in modo che anch’esso (si noti il lieve sadismo in crescendo che culmina in un anch’esso da tenore), si convinca di quanto bello è, il caro e vecchio design della ciotola rossa/acqua, ciotola blu/ cibo.

This book gets props for teaching me how the temperature knobs in my refrigerator work because I never would have figured it out otherwise.

This book doesn’t feel horribly dated despite being over 30 years old, but I do love the part where he’s like, “Someday we’ll have small computers that we can carry around with us in our pockets” and he spends a minute talking about how great that will be.

It’s true. It’s pretty great.

At the end he talks about the hot new tech: hyperlinks.

The concepts in this book are timeless, BUT you have the added time capsule bonus which makes me love this book even more.

The only reason I didn't give this book five stars is simply because it could have been shorter. I would have cut out some of the stuff in the last half. But it's still an excellent book and I think it's should be MANDATORY for anyone who designs anything for anybody because when people design without realizing these concepts it's absolutely infuriating.

Couldn't get in to it. Maybe I'll try again at a different time. On a side note, I found it odd that a book about user-centered design had line-broken right-justified headings and baffling use of italics.

This book is just uninteresting and not very useful.

It takes the simple and makes it even simpler. It's like if common sense explained common sense to itself. It's written like a dry University textbook. I went in thinking I would get some cool, insightful, fascinating examples of how everyday items were designed and came into existence. (Like the flushable toilet, key locks, gaming controllers, etc.) That I'd get a grasp of how people go about innovating and making new things. Nope. Just simple mundane concepts written out into diagrams and steps.

A big part of what makes The Design of Everyday Things so enjoyable are the descriptions of flawed designs that Norman peppers throughout the book. These case studies serve to illustrate both how difficult it is to design something well, n how essential good design is to our lives. Norman draws on his own (often humorous) experiences with poorly designed objects, as well as anecdotes from colleagues n friends, n paints an all-too-familiar picture of design gone awry. If you’ve ever struggled to program a VCR, pulled a door handle when you were supposed to push, or been mystified by the taps in a public restroom, then you’ll be sure to relate to these encounters with bad design. Norman uses the book’s examples of substandard design as a springboard for examining the factors that frequently derail the design process, n he proposes that matters can be improved when designers adopt a user-centered design philosophy n focus on the needs of the user.

While The Design of Everyday Things deals mostly with the design of physical objects, its principles are equally applicable to the design of websites n other interactive systems.

good!

A must-read for everybody --regardless of one's profession.

For years, we have wrongfully called a "human error" what was truly a design problem. We have placed the blame on users instead of demanding more from developers. But this book is a guide to precisely avoid those mistakes. The way Don Norman provides heuristics and frameworks is incredibly useful to develop design-thinking approaches, which are key to deliver better services, products, and systems. This book will help you become more observant of the products and services you use in your daily life and much more passionate about the implications of poor design.

A painful read. There are nuggets of good argument and principle, hence the 2 stars. But I don’t think I’ve ever read a book before and thought “was there an editor for this title?”

Overly verbose, full of stories that marginally support their chapter’s theme but don’t help to make the point, and full of unsupported “just take my word for it because I wrote the book” argumentation. No footnotes to back it up?

Hard to believe this is the best book on design. Way overhyped. Glad I’m done with it - had to read it for work.

Take in account this book is actually the original source for most of the concepts you probably already knew… so if it seems boring sometimes think you are reading a piece of art like when you are long fue to watch the golf father movie series.

This book can easily change any product developer life. Specially if you are new.

That said… design is not just for designers. Engineering it self is about designing every time from designing the interface of a method in a programming language to designing how to interact in the dev life cycle and design ofcourse and more obviously the software architecture.

I disagree with the author when it tries to talk about “engineers” as something alien to design.

I recently read “the chance character of human existence” a great practical introduction to materialism. This book made me remember that idea of we humans as designers are merely discovering by change, by sense interaction with the universe. We are not creating new stuff. This humbling exercise allows me as engineer and designer to be more creative.

At the 25% mark I started speed reading. I learned absolutely nothing valuable from this book, which might be due to the fact that I have read a lot of other better books about slightly related fields (ie Thinking Fast And Slow) and therefore I was bored to death by this book.

If you need to design common everyday things like a door, a faucet or a nuclear power plant, then by all means, go and read this book. Otherwise save your time and read a tl;dr somewhere.

The book basically introduces a few keywords like "Affordances" and "Signifiers" and one or two concepts like "The Seven Stages Of Action" and "Knowledge in the Mind vs Knowledge in the World". It then describes "Human Centered Design" and "Design Thinking"...

I don't know, as a software developer of 20 years I found everything in here just painfully obvious.

The author mentions that he renamed the book from "Psychology of Everyday Things" to the current title "to make it more accessible" or something like that. I call bullshit. The rename happened solely to sell more copies. The original title would have been a vastly more honest title. 80% of the book is about people, not about things.

This book is exceedingly outdated. Many of his suggestions, which were originally made 25-30 years ago, relate to technology that is no longer in use. It is amazing that this recent edition includes so much dated material that has obviously been reprinted with no attempt to update it.

The interesting and thought provoking content in this book could easily be compressed to fit into 15% of its current length. Sad, because it is such a fascinating topic. I was really disappointed.