The design, UI and UX guru of Silicon Valley talking about everyday things - if you find your fridge thermostat or your microwave hard to operate (and who doesn't?) the problem is not you but bad design. Through affordances and signifiers, a product should effortlessly and intuitively communicate to a user the mental model necessary to operate it. (An earlier edition criticised design which focused on aesthetics, but Norman now considers this an element of "human-centred design".) This is often overlooked by product designers either out of desire to save money or just lack of awareness, and since consumers find it hard to judge usability when making a purchase - or tend to blame themselves when things go wrong - we are all stuck with our fridges on the wrong temperature. "Civilization advances by extending the number of important operations which we can perform without thinking about them." (A.N. Whitehead)

I found this book less revelatory than I had hoped: none of its insights are as complex or exciting as Norman seems to believe they are. But that is possibly because its core ideas have become part of the zeitgeist. (Norman: "Profound ideas are always obvious once they are understood.") Norman cites examples of good and (mostly) bad design in everyday life, and shows how designing for people who are handicapped in some respect can yield products that are better for everyone. In a surprising section near the end ("The Moral Obligations of Design"), he notes the tendency of companies to add unnecessary features or planned obsolescence in order to keep consumers buying new products. What is good for the bottom line is not necessarily user-centric. "The design of everyday things is in great danger of becoming the design of superfluous, overloaded, unnecessary things."

some haphazard notes:
- reads like a textbook or academic article >_>
- he quotes his own books so much ;-;
- i get that in technical writing, you repeat ideas to reinforce them and make sure the reader follows, but Don said certain things so much (and in such similar ways) that i was actually sick of reading them
- ok now that i've complained about things i didn't like, a strength of the book is that you can probably start reading it from any section of any chapter, in any order
- i think the concepts (before they are belabored) are interesting, especially if you're truly interested in design. some of the psychology stuff i've seen elsewhere though so it was boring
- chapter 7 (design in the world of business) was probably my favorite

I got this as an audiobook, based on the fact that it falls within my usual taste for non fiction and because it's been referred to by many other books. In many ways, this is a classic book that inspired many people to think more seriously about design. At least, that's my impression, garnered from the unreasonably long introduction in which the author talks about how great and important his book is.

Confession time: I didn't finish the book. I got down to about the last hour and ten minutes and finally had enough. This book is boring. I spent most of my time listening to it trying to figure out why it was so boring. I like design. I like sociology. I like pop science. I like non-fiction. Why did this book make me drift off and not know what he'd said for ten to twenty minute chunks? I'm not exactly sure, but I've got some ideas.

First of all, the book references illustrations. Yes. In an audiobook. I went to my audible account to delete it, and saw that the pdf of the illustrations had thoughtfully been included in the download. So I looked at the illustrations, but they still weren't that great. They clarified some things that I didn't understand, but they didn't add a tremendous amount to the understanding of the text. If the book had been littered with illustrations, with "here's good" next to "here's bad", it might have helped, but then it wouldn't have been a good audiobook.

Secondly, the book had too much abstract descriptions and made-up words.Remember when you were in elementary school and they'd have a textbook that talked about, say, the natural resources of a country, and they'd have vocabulary words in bold that you had to remember for the test? But they were artificial, like "grasslands" meant something different from "savanna" which was different from "prairie" This book kinda did that, at least in the first chapters, like he was structuring this as a textbook to teach you principles of good design. His principles sort of made sense, but they had too few examples to elucidate them, and what anecdotes and examples he included often were completely off-topic.

The middle to second half of the book got especially off-topic, degenerating at times into a rant about how hard VCRs are to program and DOS computers are to use. Which brings me to my third point: this book is really dated. In some ways it's cool; he describes a smart phone decades before one existed. In other ways, it's not really relevant. He talks about frustrating faucets, for example, he derides motion-detecting faucets as difficult to use because they aren't obvious. Most people these days use motion-detecting faucets just fine. He talks about how awful computers are, but he's talking about a computer that anyone under the age of 25 has never seen. Even if it weren't for the overly-abstract, poorly described principles he wants people to learn from, the age of his observations makes this book not relevant.

I don't recommend this book. It's an interesting topic, but this book is poorly written and too dated to be useful.

I really enjoyed this book. I feel like I learned a lot, but maybe the part I enjoyed the most was how suprisingly validated I felt about seemingly random topics. As someone who is often critical of things like door handles, faucets, and the differences in the process of ordering food at various fast food establishments, this book showed me that I'd already been thinking about the psychology of everday things for a long time. If you ever get pissed off by a faucet you cant figure out how to get water out of, or a door you cant open, I recommend this book to you. Also as someone who works on a product development team, Normans law of Product Development was very relateable and funny: "The day a product development process starts, it is behind schedule and above budget."

Quite possibly the best work of non fiction i have ever read.

Norman takes his ideas from The Design of Everyday Things and Emotional Design and applies them to "intelligent" machines or artificial intelligence in this book. However, given that this book was published in 2007, it does not have the groundbreaking quality of the earlier books. He also does not cover broader systems such as computer software or the web, which forms a large part of our human-machine interactions today. Ironically, many of the ideas he presents are probably more innovative when applied to software systems today.

One interesting idea here is the concept that intelligent machines/software need not, and should not, always attempt to predict or read human minds, an impossible task, at least for now. This has led to frequent frustration and occasionally, danger.

Instead, they should complement or supplement human behaviors and intelligence, allowing humans take the lead, and providing assistance while taking into account human emotions. Some machines might do better to simply provide humans with greater awareness through their better sensors or provide physical aid, allowing each party to do what they do best.

Another idea is that the communication to achieve this should be through non-intrusive, peripheral, means where machines should not demand attention unless absolutely critical. Machines designed for human use must take into account human emotions and irrationality, so the tone of this communication is also important.

When applied to machines today, these ideas may not seem that innovative, but I think there is great opportunity to apply them to content creation software tools, such as game development tools. Tools that always provide you with qualitative information of different factors (how many enemies in the level, how difficult so far, how complex, etc), tools that automate the creation of content like placing props, etc.

While interesting, this book is not quite as seminal as his previous work. One interesting aspect to cover in the future could be human social interaction and dynamics through, or with, machines.

A detailed insight into the world of design that covers a range of topics. Norman showcases the importance of good design through key examples of what constitutes bad design. These range from mildly cumbersome home appliances to electoral disasters such as the infamous butterfly ballot. Although many of the examples used throughout the book are dated, the lessons are still relevant and applicable. The elements of a well designed product are unpacked through detailed explanations and diagrams of the guiding psychological principles. The three levels of processing, for example, summarise what makes a product work in relation to the human psyche. It was an eye opener to learn about the level of thought that design requires and the sometimes uncomfortable truths about the human ego in particular. Through a section on mistakes, errors and slips, Norman advocates that more often than not, it is bad design rather than human incompetence that is responsible for such events. The blame game is presented as something we are culturally conditioned to play and often meets the requirements of lawyers and journalists but does not resolve the inherent problem with the design. The case for this was bolstered by the section on constraints which demonstrated how significantly mistakes can be avoided through designing to minimise human error.
Norman covers yet further ground by explaining the different elements of the design process and how they differ from the traditional waterfall approach and other commonly used project management techniques. He demonstrates the wisdom of the iterative approach for design but also its limitations in the context of budget and time constraints. A comparison between the designer’s motives with those of a marketing professional provide an insight into multidisciplinary working. However, rather than being mutually exclusive, both approaches have their purpose and play a pivotal role in the success of the final product. The resounding message here was that differing approaches are as important as each other and greater communication across multidisciplinary teams is a key component of success when it comes to designing a great product.
Designing inclusively to meet special needs also gets a section in the penultimate chapter of the book. I would have liked to see some case studies on this but alas the book is ‘a starter for design’ and never promised to cover everything .

If you want a detailed understanding of design principles and examples then you will be very pleased. If you require a more detailed insight into how to conduct design, including user research, collation and recording of data then there are plenty of books out there but this is not one of them.

I usually do not let books un-finished, but this one is mediocre, especially if you have some basic psychology concepts

This was written in a decade before authors learned how to write stimulating non-fiction.

This book has several very important ideas:

* Even if you aren't professional designer, you still use design everywhere in your life, including how you design your house, your resume, a report, some code, etc.

* Design is all about focusing on people's needs and abilities. You may think you know what those are by the virtue of being a human, but you don't, as most human actions are unconscious. Therefore, to be a good designer, you need to learn some psychology.

* Good design is all about finding the root cause (not just the stated problem) and using an iterative process (there are no failures, just experiments).

* Many of the things we attribute to human error are actually caused by poor design. This is because humans make mistakes _all the time_ and a good design _must_ take this into account.

For these alone, it's worth reading. That said, the book feels a little unfocused and scatter brained. It frequently goes off on tangents, most of which are interesting, but not always relevant to the main points. The book is also repetitive, repeating the same message about bad design, constraints, and culture over and over again.


Some good quotes:

Good design is actually a lot harder to notice than poor design, in part because good designs fit our needs so well that the design is invisible, serving us without drawing attention to itself. Bad design, on the other hand, screams out its inadequacies, making itself very noticeable.

We are all designers in the sense that all of us deliberately design our lives, our rooms, and the way we do things. We can also design workarounds, ways of overcoming the flaws of existing devices.

Two of the most important characteristics of good design are discoverability and understanding. Discoverability: Is it possible to even figure out what actions are possible and where and how to perform them? Understanding: What does it all mean? How is the product supposed to be used? What do all the different controls and settings mean?

All artificial things are designed. Whether it is the layout of furniture in a room, the paths through a garden or forest, or the intricacies of an electronic device, some person or group of people had to decide upon the layout, operation, and mechanisms. Not all designed things involve physical structures. Services, lectures, rules and procedures, and the organizational structures of businesses and governments do not have physical mechanisms, but their rules of operation have to be designed, sometimes informally, sometimes precisely recorded and specified.

Human-centered design is a design philosophy. It means starting with a good understanding of people and the needs that the design is intended to meet. This understanding comes about primarily through observation, for people themselves are often unaware of their true needs, even unaware of the difficulties they are encountering. Getting the specification of the thing to be defined is one of the most difficult parts of the design, so much so that the HCD principle is to avoid specifying the problem as long as possible but instead to iterate upon repeated approximations. This is done through rapid tests of ideas, and after each test modifying the approach and the problem definition. The results can be products that truly meet the needs of people.

A conceptual model is an explanation, usually highly simplified, of how something works. It doesn’t have to be complete or even accurate as long as it is useful.

When people use something, they face two gulfs: the Gulf of Execution, where they try to figure out how it operates, and the Gulf of Evaluation, where they try to figure out what happened [...] The role of the designer is to help people bridge the two gulfs.

We bridge the Gulf of Execution through the use of signifiers, constraints, mappings, and a conceptual model. We bridge the Gulf of Evaluation through the use of feedback and a conceptual model.

Most of us start by believing we already understand both human behavior and the human mind. After all, we are all human: we have all lived with ourselves all of our lives, and we like to think we understand ourselves. But the truth is, we don’t. Most of human behavior is a result of subconscious processes. We are unaware of them.

When we speak, we often do not know what we are about to say until our conscious mind (the reflective part of the mind) hears ourselves uttering the words.

When we perform a well-learned action, all we have to do is think of the goal and the behavioral level handles all the details: the conscious mind has little or no awareness beyond creating the desire to act.

We need to remove the word failure from our vocabulary, replacing it instead with learning experience. To fail is to learn: we learn more from our failures than from our successes. With success, sure, we are pleased, but we often have no idea why we succeeded. With failure, it is often possible to figure out why, to ensure that it will never happen again.
Scientists know this. Scientists do experiments to learn how the world works. Sometimes their experiments work as expected, but often they don’t. Are these failures? No, they are learning experiences. Many of the most important scientific discoveries have come from these so-called failures.

Eliminate all error messages from electronic or computer systems. Instead, provide help and guidance.

Humans err continually; it is an intrinsic part of our nature. System design should take this into account.

Eliminate the term human error. Instead, talk about communication and interaction: what we call an error is usually bad communication or interaction. When people collaborate with one another, the word error is never used to characterize another person’s utterance. That’s because each person is trying to understand and respond to the other, and when something is not understood or seems inappropriate, it is questioned, clarified, and the collaboration continues. Why can’t the interaction between a person and a machine be thought of as collaboration?

Our strengths are in our flexibility and creativity, in coming up with solutions to novel problems. We are creative and imaginative, not mechanical and precise. Machines require precision and accuracy; people don’t. And we are particularly bad at providing precise and accurate inputs. So why are we always required to do so? Why do we put the requirements of machines above those of people?

Seven fundamental principles of design:
1. Discoverability. It is possible to determine what actions are possible and the current state of the device.
2. Feedback.There is full and continuous information about the results of actions and the current state of the product or service. After an action has been executed, it is easy to determine the new state.
3. Conceptual model. The design projects all the information needed to create a good conceptual model of the system, leading to understanding and a feeling of control. The conceptual model enhances both discoverability and evaluation of results.
4. Affordances. The proper affordances exist to make the desired actions possible.
5. Signifiers.Effective use of signifiers ensures discoverability and that the feedback is well communicated and intelligible.
6. Mappings. The relationship between controls and their actions follows the principles of good mapping, enhanced as much as possible through spatial layout and temporal contiguity.
7. Constraints. Providing physical, logical, semantic, and cultural constraints guides actions and eases interpretation.

Never criticize unless you have a better alternative.

When people err, change the system so that type of error will be reduced or eliminated. When complete elimination is not possible, redesign to reduce the impact.

When many people all have the same problem, shouldn’t another cause be found? If the system lets you make the error, it is badly designed. And if the system induces you to make the error, then it is really badly designed. When I turn on the wrong stove burner, it is not due to my lack of knowledge: it is due to poor mapping between controls and burners. Teaching me the relationship will not stop the error from recurring: redesigning the stove will.

Why do people err? Because the designs focus upon the requirements of the system and the machines, and not upon the requirements of people. Most machines require precise commands and guidance, forcing people to enter numerical information perfectly. But people aren’t very good at great precision. We frequently make errors when asked to type or write sequences of numbers or letters. This is well known: so why are machines still being designed that require such great precision, where pressing the wrong key can lead to horrendous results?

In many industries, the rules are written more with a goal toward legal compliance than with an understanding of the work requirements. As a result, if workers followed the rules, they couldn’t get their jobs done.

Good designers never start by trying to solve the problem given to them: they start by trying to understand what the real issues are.

Don Norman's Law of Product Development: The day a product development process starts, it is behind schedule and above budget.

Good designers are quick learners, for today they might be asked to design a camera; tomorrow, to design a transportation system or a company’s organizational structure. How can one person work across so many different domains? Because the fundamental principles of designing for people are the same across all domains. People are the same, and so the design principles are the same.

Every modern innovation, especially the ones that significantly change lives, takes multiple decades to move from concept to company success A rule of thumb is twenty years from first demonstrations in research laboratories to commercial product, and then a decade or two from first commercial release to widespread adoption. Except that actually, most innovations fail completely and never reach the public.

I've been wanting to read this book for years now, but I was always discouraged by the seemingly complicated language that the book uses. And I was kinda right – the book reads more like a textbook than a pop-science book. Which is fine, just... It was kinda painful to go through.

Have you ever stood in front of a door, or a microwave, absolutely flummoxed, because the damned thing gave you no clue whatsoever how to open it. If so (even, I venture to think, if not), you will enjoy this book. In clear, coruscating prose he exposes the miserable flaws in the design of everyday objects which conspire to make our lives less convenient, more miserable, and sometimes more dangerous.

The book is not just an exposé of the appalling laziness and hostility to consumers that is commonplace among designers(not just in the software industry, which is a story unto itself - see "The Lunatics are Running the Asylum") - it is also a clarion call to action. We need not live in a world where it appears that appliances conspire to make us feel like idiots. And when they do - when you can't figure out which button to push, or whether a door opens inward or outward - remember that you are not the one at fault. It is the lazy incompetent designer of the thing which is making you miserable who is deserving of scorn and ridicule.

Far too often, in a design world which favors form over function and usability, crimes against the user get rewarded with prizes and the acclaim of the design cognoscenti. People who presumably never have to struggle with the consequences of their own reckless disregard for the usability of the objects they design.

This book is an outraged and eloquent call for change.