4 ms·

I once got a recommendation for "The design of everyday things" (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Design-Everyday-Things-Donald-Norman/dp/0262640376 http://www.amazon.co

I once got a recommendation for "The design of everyday things" (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Design-Everyday-Things-Donald-Norman/dp/0262640376 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Design-Everyday-Things-Donald-Norman...) with a warning: It will break the world for you, because you'll go around noticing how things are designed counter-intuitively, requiring large signs to explain what should be obvious. A good example: "Push"/"pull" signs on doors. Multiple branches of humanity independently developed the ability to design doors that any other human that understands the concept of a door can figure out how to open. Then, suddenly, around 50 years ago, that knowledge apparently vanished, and we started to have to put big "how to use" instruction stickers on one of the simplest and most intuitive objects ever invented.

rrmm 14y ago
I read Norman's book for an HCI grad class. I would definitely second the recommendation.
sethg 14y ago
It could be worse. I used to work at a hospital with an automatic elliptical revolving door (I assume it was designed that way so you could push a gurney through it). On the one hand: automatic revolving door, shiny! On the other hand: they had to post a sign telling people how to walk through it.
taeric 14y ago
It may be that many things are counter intuitive, but it seems calling out doors as something that has ever been intuitive is fallacious. Perhaps they used to be more consistent, but it doesn't take a lot of effort to find horrific accidents that happened years ago because doors weren't designed well. Not to mention, watching my kids learn different doors has been amusing. I would think intuitive is the wrong word, so much as simple determination will get you through most any door. It seems more likely that around 50 years ago the technology and literacy rates had finally advanced enough that push/pull signs could be easily attached to commonly used doors.
- mseebach 14y ago
  Yes, I exaggerated on artistic license, maybe a bit more than the anecdote could carry. That doesn't change the fact that a door that adults in a civilized country needs written instructions to operate is completely and utterly broken.
  - taeric 14y ago
    I still disagree that this is at all a new found thing. There is a reason building codes had to be drafted requiring exits to open out on buildings, after all. (So, really, the design of the door shouldn't even matter. Adults can remember that the main doors open out, right? :) ) I mainly question if it is truly a sign of a problem, as seems implicated by it being brought up. Still seems to me that it just happens because the cost for doing so is essentially nil.
    - mseebach 14y ago
      The fire exit issue is a separate one: The reason emergency exits need to open out is that you can't count on being able to take a step back and open the door in a panic. In non-panic situations (practically all of them), doors work equally well opening in or out.
      - taeric 14y ago
        Yeah, but my point is two fold. First: Exterior doors to a building open out, pretty much period.* So, the handle is moot. If people really gave much thought to doors, they would be able to remember that, regardless of the handle. Second: The reason for the exterior doors to open out is rather obvious (once you've considered the reason). Yet it was not originally in building code. This implicates that many places do it "wrong." Or, at least, they did years ago. The first claim really just leads to "most people do not pay attention to such every day things." Even if you get it wrong, you only lose a second at a door. The penalty just isn't high. The second is to say that it isn't like people were making flawless doors in the past. (Though, I particularly dislike "pocket" doors. I think those have fallen out of favour, thankfully.) * Of course, I look at my house door and remember that residence entrances open in. Maybe that fundamental inconsistency is the true culprit here... :) I realize there is a good reason to keep the hinges internal to a house. So... not sure what to say about that.

rrmm 14y ago

I read Norman's book for an HCI grad class. I would definitely second the recommendation.

sethg 14y ago

It could be worse. I used to work at a hospital with an automatic elliptical revolving door (I assume it was designed that way so you could push a gurney through it). On the one hand: automatic revolving door, shiny! On the other hand: they had to post a sign telling people how to walk through it.

taeric 14y ago

It may be that many things are counter intuitive, but it seems calling out doors as something that has ever been intuitive is fallacious. Perhaps they used to be more consistent, but it doesn't take a lot of effort to find horrific accidents that happened years ago because doors weren't designed well. Not to mention, watching my kids learn different doors has been amusing. I would think intuitive is the wrong word, so much as simple determination will get you through most any door. It seems more likely that around 50 years ago the technology and literacy rates had finally advanced enough that push/pull signs could be easily attached to commonly used doors.

mseebach 14y ago
Yes, I exaggerated on artistic license, maybe a bit more than the anecdote could carry. That doesn't change the fact that a door that adults in a civilized country needs written instructions to operate is completely and utterly broken.
- taeric 14y ago
  I still disagree that this is at all a new found thing. There is a reason building codes had to be drafted requiring exits to open out on buildings, after all. (So, really, the design of the door shouldn't even matter. Adults can remember that the main doors open out, right? :) ) I mainly question if it is truly a sign of a problem, as seems implicated by it being brought up. Still seems to me that it just happens because the cost for doing so is essentially nil.
  - mseebach 14y ago
    The fire exit issue is a separate one: The reason emergency exits need to open out is that you can't count on being able to take a step back and open the door in a panic. In non-panic situations (practically all of them), doors work equally well opening in or out.
    - taeric 14y ago
      Yeah, but my point is two fold. First: Exterior doors to a building open out, pretty much period.* So, the handle is moot. If people really gave much thought to doors, they would be able to remember that, regardless of the handle. Second: The reason for the exterior doors to open out is rather obvious (once you've considered the reason). Yet it was not originally in building code. This implicates that many places do it "wrong." Or, at least, they did years ago. The first claim really just leads to "most people do not pay attention to such every day things." Even if you get it wrong, you only lose a second at a door. The penalty just isn't high. The second is to say that it isn't like people were making flawless doors in the past. (Though, I particularly dislike "pocket" doors. I think those have fallen out of favour, thankfully.) * Of course, I look at my house door and remember that residence entrances open in. Maybe that fundamental inconsistency is the true culprit here... :) I realize there is a good reason to keep the hinges internal to a house. So... not sure what to say about that.