Stephen Downes has devised Nine Rules for Good Technology. His article considers the use of technology in an educational context, where money may be tight and a piece of kit may need to be shared between several groups of users over the course of a day, but many of his notions apply to pretty much any technology user. I do take issue with one of his rules:
5) Good technology is simple. Simplicity is a slippery concept, but the best technologies can be learned by looking at the input device, not by studying a manual.
Here’s how I distinguish between good computer programs and bad computer programs: I try to install and run the program without the use of any manual. Installation is much easier today, thanks to a good computer program called “Setup.” Running the program is a different matter. When I have to stop and think (and read very small print) about how to get rid of a paperclip icon so that I can type a letter, I know I am dealing with bad technology. Good technology, by contrast, is intuitive. To use an elevator, I press the floor number. Simple. To make a phone call, I dial the number. Easy.
Simplicity goes hand-in-hand with range of function. Features that you never use get in the way, and they make the product complicated and cumbersome.
Look for technology that does exactly what you want: no more, no less.
First of all, for most users software installation is something their PC vendor or IT support department does. Second, a computer program is a tool, and sometimes – not in every case, but quite frequently – it’s easier for the end user to have a single tool which pulls together a bunch of related functions rather than have to figure out how to combine half a dozen tools to get the job done. Simplicity is good, but not at the price of hiding away functionality just because not every user will require it. For an extreme example of how simplicity makes a user interface less useful, consider Microsoft Office 97/2000’s nasty habit of hiding away menu items that haven’t been used for a while. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve had to explain to users that the menu item I’m talking about is there, it’s just hiding behind that little chevron at the foot of the menu.
For any non-trivial software package, it seems to me that a consistent user interface is more helpful than a simple one.
[Via rebecca's pocket]