Donald A. Norman Quotes - Page 2

Attractive things work better When you wash and wax a car, it drives better, doesn’t it? Or at least feels like it does.

Behavioral design is all about feeling in control. Includes: usability, understanding, but also the feel.

So what does a good teacher do? Create tension - but just the right amount.

Also note that invariably when we design something that can be used by those with disabilities, we often make it better for everyone

When you have trouble with things—whether it's figuring out whether to push or pull a door or the arbitrary vagaries of the modern computer and electronics industries—it's not your fault. Don't blame yourself: blame the designer.

Everything has a personality: everything sends an emotional signal. Even where this was not the intention of the designer, the people who view the website infer personalities and experience emotions. Bad websites have horrible personalities and instill horrid emotional states in their users, usually unwittingly. We need to design things-products, websites, services-to convey whatever personality and emotions are desired.

Any time you see signs or labels added to a device, it is an indication of bad design: a simple lock should not require instructions.

In design it is important to shoe the effect of an action. ... Feedback is critical.

To me, error analysis is the sweet spot for improvement.

I'm not a fan of technology . I'm a fan of pedagogy, of understanding how people learn and the most effective learning methods. But technology enables some exciting changes.

Too many companies believe that all they must do is provide a 'neat' technology or some 'cool' product or, sometimes, just good, solid engineering. Nope. All of those are desirable (and solid engineering is a must), but there is much more to a successful product than that: understanding how the product is to be used, design, engineering, positioning, marketing, branding-all matter. It requires designing the Total User Experience.

Products were once designed for the functions they performed. But when all companies can make products that perform their functions equally well, the distinctive advantage goes to those who provide pleasure and enjoyment while maintaining the power. If functions are equated with cognition, pleasure is equated with emotion; today we want products that appeal to both cognition and emotion.

The major problems facing the development of products that are safer, less prone to error, and easier to use and understand are not technological: they are social and organizational.

Everyday people are not very good designers.

If you think of the product as a service, then the separate parts make no sense - the point of a product is to offer great experiences to its owner, which means that it offers a service. And that experience, that service, comprises the totality of its parts: The whole is indeed made up of all of the parts. The real value of a product consists of far more than the product's components.

We are victims of our own success. We have let technology lead the way, pushing ever faster to newer, faster, and more powerful systems, with nary a moment to rest, contemplate, and to reflect upon why, how, and for whom all this energy has been expended.

Scientists are always skeptics.

It is relatively easy to design for the perfect cases, when everything goes right, or when all the information required is available in proper format

Rule of thumb: if you think something is clever and sophisticated beware-it is probably self-indulgence.

If people keep buying poorly designed products, manufacturers and designers will think they are doing the right thing and continue as usual.

Computer scientists have so far worked on developing powerful programming languages that make it possible to solve the technical problems of computation. Little effort has gone toward devising the languages of interaction.

AS for all those mistakes I make - they are on purpose - to teach you how to deal with them

Go to the bookstore and look at how many bookshelves are filled with books trying to explain how to work the devices. We don't see shelves of books on how to use television sets, telephones, refrigerators or washing machines. Why should we for computer-based applications?

Academics get paid for being clever, not for being right.

The current paradigm is so thoroughly established that the only way to change is to start over again.