

Simplicity Is Not the Answer - pbnaidu
http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/simplicity_is_not_th.html

======
rantfoil
What I'd love to see is a summary of great ways to marry both simplicity and
power. Low bar and high ceiling is something of a holy grain in any given
application.

Here are a few:

1) 80/20 -- pareto principle should be applied at all times to what is shown
on the screen.

2) minimize what is shown on the screen -- on screen = attention. you're
telling the user that something is important by showing it to them.

3) progressive disclosure -- if you mouse over or click on something, show
more things you can do with it. proximity and action = the user telling you to
show them more.

------
ca
I think that for some user types and in some applications sacrificing
capability for simplicity can actually be a good idea in product design. It
seems that most humans experience "decision fatigue" when dealing with
extremely feature-filled products and find their productivity decreases when
using it.

By decision fatigue I mean that it seems that on average, people make worse
decisions if they've had to make a lot of other decisions recently.
Furthermore, it seems that accepting that a certain option will not be chosen
also contributes to this. [1]

Relating this to product design, each new feature represents an additional
decision that must be made when a user attempts to accomplish a task where the
feature is presented as relevant -- "should I use this feature, or shouldn't
I?" Even if the feature is not used, it's presence as an option contributes to
decision fatigue.

I agree with Prof. Norman's point that good design helps alleviate these
issues by giving us the mental models to avoid considering irrelevant features
during interaction. The problem is that both the users of these designs and
the designs themselves are imperfect, leading back to the fatigue caused by
consideration and decision making about irrelevant details and options.

Maximizing capability is as incorrect as maximizing simplicity. I believe that
the ultimate goal should be one that balances simplicity with capability in a
way that takes the user's humanity into account such that _productivity_
(whatever it means for a certain product) is maximized. [2]

[1]
[http://www.chicagogsb.edu/research/workshops/marketing/archi...](http://www.chicagogsb.edu/research/workshops/marketing/archive/WorkshopPapers/vohs.pdf)
\-- The title is: "Decision Fatigue Exhausts Self-Regulatory Resources — But
So Does Accommodating to Unchosen Alternatives"

[2] I was going to say "productivity and enjoyment (...) are maximized", but I
think that maximizing the latter is required to maximize the former.

------
KevBurnsJr
Simplicity is overrated because needless complexity so often goes
unrecognized.

See law #5 : <http://lawsofsimplicity.com/?p=54>

------
hooande
If you haven't read Don Norman's book, you should do it. It's called "The
Psychology of Everyday Things" and it's a wonderful exploration of how to make
products easier to use (without sacrificing functionality). The examples are a
bit dated since the book is from the 80s, but the concepts all still apply.

My favorite quote is "It's a shame when something as simple as a door needs an
instruction manual, even if it's only one word".

------
13ren
_maintaining understandability, the feeling of control, and the pleasure of
accomplishment._

There's also complexity of interactions between features.

