Design

the false dichotomy

On the off chance you haven’t read Emotion and Design please go do so now. The Don of […]

On the off chance you haven’t read Emotion and Design please go do so now. The Don of Usability rips down the curtain someone has erected between beauty and use, and placed them side by side in value, as they ought to be.

“My studies of cognition showed that color computer displays (or color TV, for that matter) offered no information advantage over black and white. But I would never go back to black and white computer displays or black and white television. So too should we not go back to ugly, ill-designed things. Heretical or not, it is time to have more pleasure and enjoyment in life. Although the cognitive analyses of usability and function are important, so too is the affective analysis. Let the future of everyday things be ones that do their job, that are easy to use, and that provide enjoyment and pleasure.”

Tragically this is accompanied by a recently added large ugly yellow table in the middle of what is otherwise a lovely front page. Did The Don’s design team not provide an extensible design with a style guide? it’s a shame.

7 Comments

Add Yours
  1. 1
    victor

    RE>Let the future of everyday things be ones that do their job, that are easy to use, and that provide enjoyment and pleasure.”

    Right, but people have been saying this for hundreds of years (“Firmatas, Utilitas, Venustas” from the architectural historian Vitruvias), and recently folks like Liz Sanders have been preaching the similar “Usable, Useful, Desirable”. What was great about NNg’s message is that they were compensating for the lack of usability where it’s needed. That’s a helpful message, and I hope they don’t drop that emphasis just yet.

  2. 2
    David

    Hehe – well, I periodically disagree with a designer friend of mine on this whole notion of usability. I think the false dichotomy thing is a good assertion but usability and design start in two different places. One starts with the designer, the other starts with the user.

    Anyhow, a friend and I argued about it for a while:
    David Seruyange says:
    The point I’m making though, is that the difference is that the judgement is made by the designer within design,
    David Seruyange says:
    in usability, it is the user.
    David Seruyange says:
    an important distinction.
    markus says:
    u would think
    markus says:
    ormaybeJacob Nielson
    David Seruyange says:
    The designer may depart from the “rules” – forget them as you say
    David Seruyange says:
    but upon *testing* the result the user does not appreciate this, thus removing the USABILITY of the design medium.
    markus says:
    form and substance is an old discussion — they interact
    markus says:
    one is not without the other
    David Seruyange says:
    I don’t think it is a matter of form/substance, it is a matter of start w/ designer, start w/ user
    David Seruyange says:
    both require a form/function approach
    markus says:
    you mean pleasing the client?
    David Seruyange says:
    I mean making a medium, say, a website, effective.
    markus says:
    design is effectivewhen it communicates effectively. It does so sometimes without theuser knowing about it
    markus says:
    most of the time
    David Seruyange says:
    hang on a second…
    David Seruyange says:
    usability is effective when a person is communicated to effectively. and *of course* usability is based on a lot of things the user will not necessarily recognize
    markus says:
    statistics?
    David Seruyange says:
    Sure, statistics. I know you distrust statistics but there are some statistics that are quite obvious and useful to make decisions upon.
    David Seruyange says:
    95% of people hit the “SKIP INTRO” button on my site.
    David Seruyange says:
    Hmmm… can I make an informed decision?
    David Seruyange says:
    80% of people put things into a shopping cart but didn’t purchase when asked to register *before* buying
    markus says:
    those are marketing and business considerations
    David Seruyange says:
    Of course, and they impact design.
    David Seruyange says:
    96% of people who buy my product are old ladies
    David Seruyange says:
    so what kind of design do you use?
    markus says:
    not design itself,just it’s application
    David Seruyange says:
    what is effective?
    David Seruyange says:
    This is where usability is feedback from the people who use your “design” and the design from others. It starts with *them*, not the designer.
    David Seruyange says:
    Case in point: I’m designing a “shopping cart”
    David Seruyange says:
    so I look at some usability studies on the web.
    David Seruyange says:
    90% of users look at the top of the screen for checkout links
    David Seruyange says:
    Hm, now my design.
    David Seruyange says:
    “design”
    markus says:
    that’s a broad use ofthe worddesign, I was referring to Graphic Design
    David Seruyange says:
    I think Graphic Design is impacted as much by usability in the examples I gave as other forms of design (say, Information Design).
    markus says:
    if you let it, ya
    markus says:
    you can’t practise graphic design based on usability testing … you’re right the design comes from the designer, not the audience
    markus says:
    but if it’s effective the audience can participates in the experience and there’s a real aesthetic experience
    markus says:
    that’s why as a designer you can’t directly ‘please’ the audience, because most of the time the audience is not really aware of their needs in technical terms, but can perceive it when it somehow ‘speaks’ to them
    David Seruyange says:
    it’s effective if it communicates effectively
    markus says:
    basically yes
    markus says:
    ‘it’ may be a whole lot of things
    markus says:
    and ‘effectively’ can’t really be statistically analyzed
    David Seruyange says:
    sure it can
    markus says:
    there is no methodology for design
    David Seruyange says:
    Let’s use the parking enforcement example
    David Seruyange says:
    If 90% of the people parking get tickets there
    David Seruyange says:
    is it effective “design”?
    David Seruyange says:
    If 90% of the people parking *never* have problems with it, is it effective design?
    markus says:
    it can to a certain degree, there are some very basic assumptions and limitations, but I’m talking design in it’s ultimate purpose
    David Seruyange says:
    The answer is obvious.
    David Seruyange says:
    A website:
    David Seruyange says:
    if 90% of users can find everything
    David Seruyange says:
    is it effective?
    David Seruyange says:
    if 20% of users can find things,
    David Seruyange says:
    is communication effective?
    markus says:
    ….. do you really want to learn about design, or is your mind already made up?
    David Seruyange says:
    sure, tell me your opinion and i’ll see if i agree
    markus says:
    I already did
    David Seruyange says:
    then i disagree if you say that graphic design can’t be based on usability and the effectiveness of graphic design can’t be effectively statistically analyzed
    markus says:
    you are entitled,and I’m not going to argue that point
    markus says:
    l8r

  3. 3
    mike

    Don said:
    My studies of cognition showed that color computer displays (or color TV, for that matter) offered no information advantage over black and white.

    Don doesn’t watch the weather channel.

  4. 4
    christina

    design should start with the user also– art starts with the artist.

    And victor, sure it’s an old concept– but it is apparently new to some. old doesn’t mean invalid, or nonuseful, or not worth putting out there in the world if it seems to be missing.

  5. 5
    Anne

    It seems to me that the IAs who argue about whether or not design equals “fluff” (and on a parallel track arguing about whether IA equals design) tend to fall into two camps: those who design interfaces, and those who do not.

    IAs who design interfaces as part of their jobs understand that visual design impacts utility. IAs who concentrate on larger, less visible structures like file structure or metadata don’t see the point. Visual design isn’t their bailiwick, so it matters less. They are still “designing” structures, but they may define what they do as something-not-design.

    So, many people reject a particular narrow definition of “design” because they define design as visual design. And as a corollary, non-interface-designing IAs are threatened by the possibility that something they don’t “do” will be included in the definition of IA.

Comments are closed.