Final Paper

Mihir Shah

History 2701

May 1st, 2015

The History of User-friendly Technology

Introduction

Technology progresses at an exponential rate and systems become more automated over

time. However, the success of user-friendly technology is determined by how easy it is to operate

and how natural the mapping of the controls are so that the user can intuitively understand how

to use the technology without having to read an instruction manual. In this way, people are

drawn to use technology if it is successful in that aspect. By analyzing accident proneness and

modernism, and through the use of Dieter Rams ten principles for good design and the

Technology Acceptance Model, successful consumer technologies tend be simple, elegant and

easy to operate.

People who encounter technology are different from one another. The term accident

proneness originated in the early twentieth century during the First World War in Europe. It is

defined as “the tendency of a particular person to have more accidents than most people,” and is

a consequence of injuries that occurred at the interface between people and technology

(Burnham, 2009, p.1). It was the period when the modern movement in architecture and

industrial design emerged, where machines and cities forced artists to reconsider their

environment, and changed the way people experience, view, and deal with the world (Denzer,

2004). The idea of accident proneness became an exquisite articulation for thinkers attempting to

deal with the interface between science and technology, and illuminated the ways in which

Western civilization interacted with technology. The phenomenon exemplified a transition from

human carelessness and recklessness that people believed could be prevented. Accident

proneness started to fade away toward the end of the twentieth century when safety precautions

were fixated in technology by experts in policy makers (Burnham, 2009). With the fixation in

Shah 2

safety precautions, technology became to be developed more carefully with a stronger emphasis

on design.

Until then, it was the modernist ideas that influenced every aspect of design, including

graphics, architecture, art, literature, and music. Modernism became a hallmark of modern

design, involving exploration of new resources, a dismissal of historical order, and a

simplification of structure by a dismissal of embellishment. An English artist, William Morris

drafted the modern belief that utility was equally important to aesthetic design. Morris despised

large-scale, inferior quality industrial items and encouraged a return to well made, handcrafted

items. He is known for his famous statement, “have nothing in your house you do not know to be

useful, or believe to be beautiful” (Denzer, 2004). Modern designers embraced new technologies

with the idea of consumerism in the 1920s. The aesthetic design of the machine became

fundamental principle in modernism, and the two important people who understood the industry

were Walter Gropius and Le Corbusier. Gropius had the foundation of uniting art with

technology and educated the new generation of designers and architects to adopt the idea of the

modern industry. Corbusier, who was an influential architect, initiated an obsession with the

designs of engineers that included automobiles cruise ships, and grain silos. His book Vers Une

Architecture became the best-selling architecture book of all time. Modernism became

widespread and the leading style of the 20th century when the foremost European modernists

immigrated to the United States in the 1930s and influenced the modern progressive artists

(Denzer, 2004).

It was in the 1980s when Dieter Rams, an industrial designer famously known for 20th

century furniture product designs such as the 1956 Braun SK 4 record player, became

increasingly disturbed by the state of the world around him. It was described as “an impenetrable

Shah 3

confusion of forms, colors and noises.” Knowing that he was an important figurehead to that

world, he questioned himself whether his design was good design. And since good design is

unable to be finitely quantified, Rams went on to state the ten significant principles (also known

as commandments) for what he thought was good design (Vitsoe, Good design, 2015).

According to the first principle, good design is innovative, meaning that there is always a

new opportunity for the development of an innovative design offered by technology. The second

principle states that good design makes a product useful, meaning it emphasizes the usefulness of

a product and ignores anything that takes away value from it. The third principle states that good

design is aesthetic; meaning the beauty of a product is integral to its usefulness. The fourth

principle states that a good design makes a product understandable, meaning that the product’s

form is well executed making it easy for the consumer to intuitively operate it. The fifth principle

states that good design is unobtrusive, meaning that a good product fulfills a purpose by being

discrete and impersonal instead of being decorative. The sixth principle states that good design is

honest, meaning that it doesn’t to more than what it was by being manipulative. The seventh

principle states that good design is long lasting, meaning that it never loses its charm with time

by becoming an antique. The eighth principle states that good design is thorough down to the last

detail, meaning that is accurate and carefully thought of with every aspect taken into account.

The ninth principle states that good design is environmentally friendly, meaning that it preserves

the ecological footprint by conserving resources and minimizing pollution. Finally, the last

principle states that good design is as little as possible, meaning that it is minimalistic with

essential features that make it pure and simple (Vitsoe, Good design, 2015).

Based on the principles of good design, one can determine whether a technology is user-

friendly or if it is complex to operate. From the ten principles described above, the components

Shah 4

that stand out in majority of user-friendly consumer products are an aesthetic design that is

useful and intuitive, an honest and thorough design that is less accident prone, and a

minimalistic design that resonates purity and simplicity. According to the Technology

Acceptance Model constructed by Davis and Warshaw in 1989, consumers tend to adopt a

technological product based on primarily two reasons. They are the perceived usefulness of the

product, and the perceived ease of use of the product. Through the perceived usefulness of a

product, the consumer will develop some value from the technology that serves as a sense of

functional purpose. Through its perceived ease of use, the consumer will believe that the

technology can be operated in a learnable and unforgettable method (Davis, Bagozzi &

Warshaw, 1989).

For instance, a successful consumer technology that follows Dieter Rams’ design

principles and the Technology Acceptance Model would be Apple’s revolutionary music device,

the iPod. The iPod is the first consumer icon of the 21st century, and it represents a seamless

balance between aesthetics and functionality, of audio and touch. This makes iPod “the auditory

world in the palm of a hand” (Bull, 2006). Also dubbed as the personal jukebox, the user can

listen to their music anytime, wherever they are, and at the same time control their music using

just their fingertips. In 2007, 35% of Apple’s revenue came from sales of the iPod, and the rest

were from their music and computer sales (Apple, Inc., 2007). The reason why the iPod was so

successful is because the product was designed to be user-friendly unlike the Sony Walkman

invented in the 1980s, or the Microsoft Zune that was not very successful in the consumer

market.

The flawless aesthetic design of the iPod makes it feel comfortable for the user to hold it

on their palms, to rub their thumb over the navigation wheel, and touch the smooth white colored

Shah 5

surface (Bull, 2006). Apple’s neutral color selection of the product, for instance the white and

gray, is also what contributes to the aesthetic property of the design. The reason why iPod is a

useful and intuitive product is because of the relationship between controls and their movements

or effects. The natural mapping between controls and their effects is what results in a greater

perceived ease of use. The effects of using the product correspond to the expectations that are

achieved from using the product. For instance, scrolling around the touch wheel to navigate the

menu feels natural. The icon of the universal ‘Play’ and ‘Pause’ symbol associated with the

lower button makes it an obvious choice for the user to play or pause their music. The left and

right arrows on each side of the wheel seem logical for the user to fast-forward, rewind, or even

change the song of their playlist. The upper ‘Menu’ button is what takes the user to the main

menu, and the button at the center of the wheel enables the user to select an option from the

navigation menu. In this way, the similarity of layout, behavior, or meaning associated with the

buttons makes iPod a device that has good mapping (Lidwell, Holden, Butler, & Elam, 2010, p.

152). This also ensures the perceived usefulness of the iPod because the consumer will believe

that the technology can be operated in an intuitive way. The same way, natural mapping can be

applied to the Segway transportation system or car windows. The Segway uses great mapping.

The user may lean forward to go forward, or just lean backward to go backward. As for car

windows, the association between the window control and the raising and lowering of the

window seems natural when it is fixated on the wall of the door. It would not appear natural if

the control is mounted on the surface of the armrest, as the user might accidentally open the car

window with their elbow on the armrest (Lidwell et al., 2010, p. 153).

As an honest and thorough design, the iPod was designed to be less accident prone

through its forgiveness features. According to the principle of forgiveness, designs should help

Shah 6

humans prevent errors and reduce the negative consequences if errors do occur. If forgiveness is

fostered, designs will provide a sense of safety, security, and stability, which enables the user to

learn, explore, and use the design. Through reversibility of actions, the iPod has reversible

functions if the intent of the user changes. For instance, playing the next or previous song by

pressing the left arrow or right arrow respectively ensures that the user does not accidently skip

their favorite song. The device is also designed to have has safety nets. For instance, if the user

erased the content on their iPod through settings, they can synchronize their device on iTunes for

a backup. The iPod is also less susceptible to accidental touches through confirmation, where

verification of intent is required before critical actions can be performed. This is because the

iPod has a ‘hold’ switch that can be switched on when the device is in the user’s pocket to in

order to minimize the accidental pressing of buttons. As a warning mechanism, the iPod also has

a battery icon on the screen that indicates how much power the device has until the next charge.

Using forgiveness by help, the iPod was designed to assist in basic operations and

troubleshooting through the intuitive scroll wheel and navigation menu. Similarly, the principle

of forgiveness is applied in road signs that are designed to make roads more forgiving by

cautioning drivers of imminent hazards. In a similar way as a safety precaution, fire alarms have

a ‘breaking glass’, which is a barrier that prevents accidental pulling of the fire alarm switch. In

modern consumer automobiles where there are airbags in cars, or even the pilot ejection seats in

an aircraft are designed to protect the human during a consequence of catastrophic failure.

(Lidwell et al., 2010, p. 104-105). Therefore, using the principles of forgiveness, user-friendly

consumer technology like the iPod were designed to make the product appear trustworthy.

Apart from the product’s safety features, the Apple iPod is a minimalistic design that

radiates simplicity and purity. This principle of Dieter Rams adopted by Apple makes their

Shah 7

products unique to many competitors in the consumer technology industry. For instance the iPod

was packed with less features than the Microsoft’s Zune. The Zune was integrated of the Zune

Marketplace with a pre-existing marketplace that supported Microsoft’s popular Xbox console.

The Zune also had the ability to wirelessly share media to other Zune users, a larger display to

view media, a music subscription alternative to the individual song purchasing mechanism, and

Microsoft’s large Windows user base which was the foundation of strength for other Microsoft

products. Because of this many, early reviewers believed that Zune’s additional features would

make the device a powerful competitor to the iPod (Huberty, 2010, p. 12). However, as a turn of

events, the Zune sold 2 million units since its launch in 2006, whereas Apple sold on average

3.53 million iPods a month. As of 2008, Apple sold over 140 million units of the iPod since its

launch in 2001. This gave the Zune a commonly used phrase, “distant second” (Siegler, 2008).

The reason why Apple sold millions of iPods is because their design is minimalistic.

According to Ockham’s Razor, given the option between functionally equivalent designs, the

simplest design must be selected. In that sense, simplicity is preferred to complexity in design.

As Albert Einstein would say, “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not

simpler,” Ockham’s razor is based on simplicity. His principle suggests that unnecessary

elements decrease a design’s efficiency and increases the likeliness of unanticipated

consequences. The aesthetic appeal of Ockham’s principle involves the “cutting” of unnecessary

elements from the design by removing impurities and making the resultant design more pure and

clean. For example, the iPod’s display was designed with the fewest visual elements that enhance

its readability. In that sense, every aspect of the iPod’s design was evaluated and many

unnecessary features were removed, without compromising the device’s function. Finally, the

expression of many elements in the iPod is minimized as much as possible without

Shah 8

compromising the function of the design. Another technology that uses Ockham’s razor is

Google’s website, which has a simple and minimalistic design unlike many other Internet

websites. On their website, Google eliminated advertising and ad hoc functions making it look

simple and elegant. The resultant website is the best in performance, and it made Google one of

the most user-friendly search engines on the Internet. In a similar sense, the Taburet M Stacking

stool is a minimalistic design built from a single piece of molded wood and has no extra

elements, as Ockham would suggest. The result is a strong, comfortable, and a stackable design,

which radiates purity and simplicity (Lidwell et al., 2010, p. 172-173). Using Ockham’s razor,

the Apple iPod was carefully designed, and because of its minimalistic design, it radiates purity

and simplicity. One can truly appreciate the minimalistic user-friendly design of Apple products,

which made Apple the most valuable brand in the world (O’Reilly, 2014).

Although user-friendly technology like Apple’s products makes consumer products

accessible to inexperienced consumers, they can also make its users dependent on their software

programs from Apple and its developers. It was Steve Job’s vision to apply the visual screen

elements to Apple products without revealing the programming language behind the product

design. In that sense, the programming features of the user-friendly device are hidden to the

consumer, and unlike other consumer products in the market such as Android phones, Apple

products do not have an open platform. Job’s intention was primarily to market the product to

the mass consumers (including technology illiterate people), and because of that interest, he

largely disregarded the social and intellectual principles that underlined the earlier designs. Job’s

decisions in how Apple products are designed became a historical turning point that led to

paradoxical situations for future developers of graphical user interfaces. Jobs thought of

computers as a tool instead of a medium that enables communication. Unlike many of his

Shah 9

contemporaries, he viewed the interface as a way that makes technology user-friendly. As Neil

Postman would say, “A technology………. is merely a machine,” and “a medium is the social

and intellectual environment a machine creates.” The same way Douglas Engelbart and Alan

Kay focused on the social and intellectual environments created by the computer. For instance,

Englebart would say that a computer technology should not be haphazardly developed. His

research focused on the social effects of human computer interaction. The same way, Kay was

also aware of the impact on computers on society. Kay’s interface model trailed a logical

intellectual development to cultivate computer literary skills. His drive was to develop the

computer as a communication medium by making the learning method available to children.

However, Jobs who thought of the computer as a machine had a different approach, which he

used for Apple computers. Even though Apple products like the iPod or the iPhone are user-

friendly for technology illiterate people, the design also limits the user and makes them

dependent on the Apple interface since such devices cannot programed by individual consumers.

Postman would refer to this as a “knowledge monopoly.” This is because only people with high

programming knowledge and access to Apple developer information are able to program the

machine. In that sense, even though Apple delivers their products to the mass consumers, it also

confines them to buy pre-programmed software equipment than only Apple can control (Barnes,

2010).

The strategy of consumer design interfaces in software where the machine operations are

hidden from the users became prevalent in 1984 with the idea of “user-friendly” software. It

created a group of people who can operate machines who are completely illiterate on how it

works or how it is programmed. In this way, today’s consumers are able to do some jobs without

understanding why or how it is done. It created a new industry that makes it possible to operate

Shah 10

technology without knowing anything about computing. The challenge is that it becomes

increasingly difficult to train the people who will design the next generation of computers.

Another problem with user-friendly consumer technology is that, by providing less support to the

progress of computer literary skills, graphical interfaces fail when is comes to developing

computing skills that are essential for the future generation to improve and sustain computer

technology. This further widens the gap between consumer technology users and professional

software engineers. This paradox also portrays that the social and technical variables that

influence technology are so different that it is difficult to determine how a technology will

develop since many technologies do not develop according to the intensions of its originators.

However, we can still argue that it was singlehandedly Steve Job’s idea to add a user-friendly

graphical screen to the Macintosh, and it changed the way in which interfaces are developed in

consumer technology. As a consequence, social outcomes of technology are moving in an

opposite direction that original inventors intended them to be (Barnes, 2010).

Conclusion

Before consumer technology became user-friendly and more accessible to technology

illiterate people, we lived in an era where we had to learn how to operate technology through

specialization. With the development of simple and elegant consumer technology that follows

Dieter Ram’s principles of design and the Technology Acceptance Model, successful consumer

technology such as the iPod has become more user-friendly and minimalistic in design. Although

the consequences of user-friendly technology may seem uncertain to future developers because

of the increasing gap between consumer technology users and skilled software developers as

discussed in Susan Barnes’ article, we are slowly moving into the era where technology learns

Shah 11

from us. For instance, AdSense is software developed by Google that customizes ad search

results based on the users’ search habits. Knowing that a user searches for a particular product,

the machine learns from the user and displays the product on typically every website that has ad

banners (Custom Ads Search). In this way, technology is evolving to learn from our habits. The

more consumer technology learns from our habits, the more automated they will become. For

instance, the Hyundai Genesis car features an advanced Automatic Emergency Braking System

that automatically deploys if there is an imminent crash. Using the cameras and the radar sensors

preinstalled in the cars, the system automatically calculates extreme conditions such as fog or

rain, and alerts the user of possible danger. As an additional element of safety, the system can

even apply a full brake force stopping power between the range of 5 and 50 MPH. In this way,

consumer technology has become more automated and less prone to accidents (Hyundai

Genesis). Although the future of consumer technology may be uncertain, by learning from the

past, we can deduce that successful consumer technology today has evolved to become more

aesthetic, honest, minimalistic, and less prone to accidents.

Shah 12

References

Apple, Inc. (2007). Annual report. Apple, Inc. Cupertino, California

Barnes, Susan B. (1996) User friendly: A short history of the graphical user interface," Sacred Heart University Review: Vol. 16: Iss. 1, Article 4. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1021&context=shureview

Burnham, J. C. (2009). Accident prone: A history of technology, psychology, and misfits of the machine age. Chicago: London.

Bull, M. (2006). Iconic designs: The apple iPod. The Senses And Society, 1(1), 105–108. http://doi.org/10.2752/174589206778055619

Custom Search Ads. Retrieved May 1, 2015, from https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/1239255?hl=en

Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982-1003.

Denzer, A. S. (2004). Masters of modernism. Retrieved April 26, 2015, from http://www.mastersofmodernism.com/?page=Modernism

Features. Safety technology. The all-new 2015 hyundai genesis. Retrieved from http://www.hyundaigenesis.com/features/safety-technology

Huberty, M. (2010). The dissolution of sectors: Do politics and sectors still go together. Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy

Lidwell, W., Holden, K., Butler, J., & Elam, K. (2010). Universal principles of design: 125 ways to enhance usability, influence perception, increase appeal, make better design decisions, and teach through design. Beverly, MA: Rockport.

Seigler, M.G. (2008). Microsoft surpasses 2 million zunes sold. Apple sells 3.53 million iPods a month. Retrieved from http://venturebeat.com/2008/05/09/microsoft-surpasses-2-million-zunes-sold-apple-sells-265-million-ipods-a-month/

O'Reilly, L. (2014). The 20 most valuable brands in the world. Retrieved May 1, 2015, from http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-most-valuable-brand-on-interbrand-2014-rankings-2014-10

Vitsœ: Good design. (2015.). Retrieved February 23, 2015, from https://www.vitsoe.com/gb/about/good-design

Shah 13