For the birds

Upon reflecting on several technological purchases made over the years, I can say without trepidation that the determining factors in many of these purchases centered on whichever device was most complex and feature-rich. This, of course, proved true in my purchase of a PDA to replace an aging one. I simply browsed Sprint's website, scrolled to the very end and narrowed my selection based on feature set alone. This left me with two possible devices: a streamlined, simply designed, yet relatively feature-rich PDA by the name of the "Touch," and a much heftier, somewhat elegantly designed, supremely feature-stuffed "Mogul." I, being the feature-snob that I am picked the Mogul because in addition to all the features of the Touch, it included WiFi capability.

Complexity is justifiable in all designs as long as functions are assigned controls to a distinct ends, and are useful to the overall design. Simplicity is of importance in the design of things for the mundane tasks of everyday living. A broom should function to sweep and nothing more; a toothbrush should only be exactly that.

"The concepts of making things visible, simple, and easily mentally mapped will all always be vital aspects to design...These are all basic principles that will always be necessary to consider when designing a product. The mind will never stop trying to mentally map a device. It will also not stop trying to assume how a product works based on the parts visible. It is a natural process that occurs in the human mind, and as long as it continues to occur, designers will need to consider it when they design their products."
-Jeff

I find this quote to speak truthfully of the mechanics of the mind and how designers must compensate for or design in accordance with these natural tendencies to produce successful, intuitive design.