I’m not sure what this quote means. Interfaces are often badly designed and get in the way a lot, and that’s definitely bad. But surely that’s a truism.
Does the quote mean the interface should map 1-to-1 to the reality of the thing it’s an interface for, not introducing new abstractions or complications for the user to learn?
Sometimes that is the right approach. Other times, an interface is good precisely because it simplifies a complex domain, even if at the loss of some power. I’m glad the now-universal ‘file explorer’ interface has a much simpler model than the underlying API. Except when I need to manage hardlinks or mountpoints or device files, in which case the interface gets in the way (and I switch to a different interface).
I don’t want to think of myself as using a computer, I want to think of myself as doing my job.
Many (most?) jobs which utilize computer interfaces exist because of computers, or have been radically transformed by them. These jobs’ purpose is to manipulate computers. Their interfaces allow a lot of design leeway, since the underlying computer system is also designed, often by the same people. UX designers often disagree about things like skeumorphisms, or about the use of UI metaphors that are familiar because of 1980s UI design and have nothing to do with the actual problem domain (like desktops). What would Norman say about this?
I’m not sure what this quote means. Interfaces are often badly designed and get in the way a lot, and that’s definitely bad. But surely that’s a truism.
Does the quote mean the interface should map 1-to-1 to the reality of the thing it’s an interface for, not introducing new abstractions or complications for the user to learn?
Sometimes that is the right approach. Other times, an interface is good precisely because it simplifies a complex domain, even if at the loss of some power. I’m glad the now-universal ‘file explorer’ interface has a much simpler model than the underlying API. Except when I need to manage hardlinks or mountpoints or device files, in which case the interface gets in the way (and I switch to a different interface).
Many (most?) jobs which utilize computer interfaces exist because of computers, or have been radically transformed by them. These jobs’ purpose is to manipulate computers. Their interfaces allow a lot of design leeway, since the underlying computer system is also designed, often by the same people. UX designers often disagree about things like skeumorphisms, or about the use of UI metaphors that are familiar because of 1980s UI design and have nothing to do with the actual problem domain (like desktops). What would Norman say about this?