Don Norman: Simplicity is overblown.

simplicity has been touted as overdone.

Author: Don Norman

Translator: Ark K [N G of A R K

Statement

This article is translated and published by Don Norman on his personal website, "Simplicity is highly overrated", with the consent of the original author. Original url:http://jnd.org/dn.mss/simplicity_is_highly_overrated.html

This article was translated from Don Norman's post "Simplicity is highly overrated" on his web site, under the Permissi On the author. Original Post url:http://jnd.org/dn.mss/simplicity_is_highly_overrated.html

Description: This is the most misunderstood article in all of my articles. After reading this article, please continue to read the "Supplemental" section, if there are objections, then consider the response or attack me is not too late. I don't care about criticism, I don't care about making mistakes-that's one way I learn. But it is painful to be misunderstood.

"Why the product can't be simpler. "The New York times, Wall Street Journal and local newspaper commentators are shouting. "We need to be simple. "People who are confused about the various functions of new products are shouting. Simple is really what they want. Not really.

If the journalists really wanted to evaluate the so-called simple products they had listed, they complained that the products lacked the features they thought were "critical". So, when people call for simplicity, what does it really mean? They really want the product, only with a button to operate the best, but also to include all of their favorite features.

I used to stroll through a department store in Korea. When visiting a country I've never been to, visiting department stores and the local market is my favorite pastime, because it helps me to better understand the local culture. Different places of food and clothing are not the same. And in the past, various instruments have also been different: electrical appliances, kitchen utensils, gardening tools and workshop tools and so on.

In this Korean department store, I am more interested in "white goods" such as refrigerators and washing machines. This shop will naturally have Korea's own brand LG and Samsung, as well as foreign brands such as GE, Braun and Philips. Although the product specifications and prices are almost the same, but the Korean brand products look more complex than foreign brands of products. "Why is this so?" "I asked my two companions that they were all usability experts. "Because Koreans like things that look complicated. "They answered. It is a symbol that reflects status.

In the shop, I marvel at the high complexity of all the instruments-especially those that used to be simple. Toaster, refrigerator, coffee machine ... They all have several control panels, several LCD displays, and their complexity is hard to say.

Once upon a while, the toaster had only one knob to control the degree of baking, and that was all. A simple control lever lets the face fragments into the toaster, and then it's ready to bake. That kind of toaster, the price is 20 dollars up and down. In this Korean shop, I found a German toaster with a price of $250. In addition to complex control components, the machine also has a motor to put bread into and eject the fuselage. In addition, the machine also has an LCD panel, which is covered with icons, graphics and numbers. Is this simple?

After a stroll in the Korean shop, my two companions and I came to the new car stand, where two new Korean SUV cars were parked. is still the same complexity. I was born early enough, I remember the steering wheel is really just a steering wheel, the former rearview mirror is really just a rear-view mirror. These new cars have complex steering wheels with multiple buttons and controls, including two sets of sound and sound control components, one for controlling music and the other for controlling the phone--not counting the levers on the steering wheel. The rearview mirror of the new car has two control parts, one for the dial lighting and the other with a "mirror", and a red light will open when pressed. Is this the so-called rearview mirror with a switch? Even salespeople don't know what they're doing.

Why is there such an expensive toaster? Why are there so many buttons and controls on the steering wheel and rearview mirror? Because that seems to be increasing the functionality that people want. These feature differences make products look different-especially at critical moments such as sales.

Why is that so? Why do we deliberately create something so confusing to the user?

The answer is: because you want to have a variety of functions. Because the so-called simplicity is only a myth, that era has passed-if there ever was a simple era.

No one buys anything simple. When people choose, people will always choose things that can do more things. Functionality trumps simplicity, even if people realize that it adds complexity. I guess you do the same thing: put the two products in a contrasting function and then choose the one with more features--haven't you ever done that. But you don't have to be ashamed, because it's a normal behavior.

A complex and expensive toaster. I'll bet that's a good sell.

The thing that really confuses me, though, is that if the manufacturer finds a way to turn an operation that would otherwise seem incomprehensible to an automated operation, the design of the device should be simpler, and the truth is not. Take a look at the following example:

Siemens has recently launched a washing machine, which describes the website: "(this product) is equipped with intelligent sensor equipment, can detect the capacity of clothes in the laundry tank, fabric, but also to detect whether the clothing is dirty or not too dirty." Users only have to choose the ' power rinse ' or ' gentle cleaning ' mode, and this product is for all the things left. ”

Hail. I shouted. As a result, the entire laundry process is fully automatic, because only two control components are required, one to choose whether to "power rinse" or "gentle cleaning" and the other to turn on the washing machine. But what is not wanted: This washing machine has more control parts and buttons than the manual washing machine. "Obviously you can only do one or two control parts is enough, why instead of doing more." "I consulted the acquaintance at Siemens.

"Are you the kind of person who would rather give up control than think the less the better?" "You don't want to have more control," the usability expert asked. ”

It was a strange answer. Since it is difficult to understand and believe, why do you want to engage in this so-called automation. Yes, I happen to be the kind of weirdo who thinks less is better.

It seems that marketing has the upper hand. Maybe the marketing path is right. Would you like to spend more money on a machine with less control? To think calmly and rationally, maybe. But if you're standing in a store, I'm afraid it's not necessarily true.

Please pay attention to this wording: "Spend more money on a washing machine with less control function". A reviewer in this article marked the sentence as a mistake and asked, "You should mean ' less money '." "But this is precisely the key question that reflects my point of view." If a company spends more money to design and manufacture an appliance that is so useful, such automation requires only one switch control, then everyone will reject the product. "This simple thing is more expensive." "People will complain," what does the factory want? I might as well buy a cheaper one and have more features. It's better to have more features, isn't it. But also save money. ”

Marketing does have to be the boss, too. Companies that neglect marketing are never long. Marketing experts understand that the purchase decision is affected by the number of features, even if the purchaser knows that most features may never be used. Even if these features are inadequate and confusing, they are still the same.

Yes, we want to be simple, but we don't want to lose any functionality. simplicity has been touted as overdone.

Supplemental Section

I am an elegant, simple and useful supporter. But as a business person I also understand that the company must make money, the company must launch the products that customers actually want, rather than launch the products that the company thinks the customer should want. But the truth is: "Simple" is not good to sell. What is this again?

One of the respondents in this article has clearly grasped the key to the problem:

After reading this article, I was puzzled by one thing. Do you mean that there is no easy interface for a multi-functional system? Or is it that people are reluctant to spend money on products that are functionally identical but operate simpler because their interfaces seem to have little to manipulate, making them look functionally less powerful than those that look very complex.

The answer is the latter: The reason people are reluctant to buy seemingly simple systems (products) is that simple systems appear to be less functional and weaker. So the fully automatic system will still have a lot of buttons and control handles. Fog Creek Software's Joel Spolsky also made a compelling explanation for the problem and explained why it was necessary to increase the apparent complexity. For more information, see his blog:

Http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2006/12/09.html

Several people also responded by saying they support the idea that "complex products look more powerful." Some cite an example from Iran:

Every time I go to Iran, I find this surprisingly outrageous situation. At the Consumer electronics Bazaar in Iran, concepts such as luxury, sophistication, and craving are linked to more features (and sometimes, for mobile phones and networks, some features that are not useful at all), and anything with less functionality, whether good or not, whether expensive or inexpensive, are considered to be a much worse product.

In my above article, I used the experience of Korean department store to give an example. As a result, many readers seem to think that I am the only one experience on the feeling and write this article. Some readers seem to think that it is the first and only time to go abroad (or Asia) to visit. That's amazing. The view of this article and the writing of this article derive from my decades of experience in design, especially in the design of consumer products. Moreover, my opinion is universal. Do I travel a lot. Ha, I flew 140,000 miles alone in 2006. The recorded total distance of the flight is nearly 2 million miles. So, does it have to go to Korea or Iran to find that trend? No. I also found the same in the United States. For example: I am assisting a company to design a new product plan for its regular products. The new product looks very simple. In a user test, one person said he really liked the product, but unfortunately he didn't want to use it.

"Why don't you want to use it?" "We asked.

"Because it's not powerful enough to solve my particular problem. The tester replied.

"You try to take a look at it," We suggest, "we want to know where there are problems so we can improve better." ”

In fact, there's no problem. The new product can solve his problem well. The root of the problem is that the product looks simple. In his view, if a product looks very simple, then the function of this product must not be strong.

Many of the complaints I get are about how poorly designed complex devices can lead to difficult use. Hey, I'm not advocating bad design, just pointing out the truth in life: In general, buyers prefer powerful devices. They equate the obvious simplicity of a control component with a function that is not strong enough to equate complexity with power. Not that everyone is so, but that most people do. And most of these people are the targets of marketing experts. I think that's understandable.

One person was deeply misunderstood because he advocated hiding more control parts, thus preserving the simplicity of the surface. I'm sorry: it's superficial complexity that pulls sales. After that, it is the complexity that makes people puzzled. But then it was too late to know, because everyone has bought the product back.

Many of the respondents in this article understand this, but they still give quite reasonable and logical reasons why this should not be the case. One thing I have to explain here and again is that logic and reason are very good traits, but they do not play a role in describing human behavior. The case of trying to justify a point of view with a wise, reasoned argument is what I call the "engineer fallacy (engineer's fallacy)" (and The Economist's fallacy, economist's fallacy). We must design according to the actual behavior of people, not according to the expectations of engineers or economists for people's behavior.

To deal with these problems, you cannot rely on logic. Human behavior is the key. The fallacy of engineers and economists should be avoided: not to derive your solution, but to observe the actual behavior of humans. We must design on the basis of those characteristics that accept human behavior, not based on the expectations we infer.

I certainly prefer good design, attractive products and easy-to-use products. At the time of purchase, people tend to choose more powerful products, and they will judge how powerful the product is based on the visible complexity of the product's control components. If this is how people choose to buy a product, we must cater to it, while ensuring that the actual complexity is low and the actual simplicity is high. Making the product look powerful, yet easy to use, appealing, cost-effective, practical, environmentally friendly, and all ages-is an exciting design challenge.

That's why I love design-design always brings great challenges.


There are more rhetoric: why 37signals is so arrogant.

Statement

This article is translated and published by Don Norman on his personal website, "Simplicity is highly overrated", with the consent of the original author. Original url:http://jnd.org/dn.mss/simplicity_is_highly_overrated.html

This article was translated from Don Norman's post "Simplicity is highly overrated" on his web site, under the Permissi On the author. Original Post url:http://jnd.org/dn.mss/simplicity_is_highly_overrated.html

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial use-no derivative of the 2.5 Chinese mainland license agreement.