When programmers speak of “computer literacy,” they are drawing red lines around ethnic groups, too, yet few have pointed this out.

Most software is used in a business context, so most victims of bad interaction are paid for their suffering. Their job forces them to use software, so they cannot choose not to use it – they can only tolerate it as well as they can. They are forced to submerge their frustration and to ignore the embarrassment they feel when the software makes them feel stupid.

You can predict which features in any new technology will be used and which won’t. The use of a feature is inversely proportional to the amount of interaction needed to control.

To deliver both power and pleasure to users, interaction designers think first conceptually, then in terms of behavior, and last in terms of interface.

Sort of like the pilot saying, “We’re gonna make Chicago on time, but only if we jettison all our baggage!” I’ve seen product managers sacrifice not only design, but testing, function, features, integration, documentation, and reality. Most product managers that I have worked with would rather ship a failure on time than risk going late.

Like putting an Armani suit on Attila the Hun, interface design only tells how to dress up an existing behavior.

Computer literacy, however, is really a euphemism for forcing human beings to stretch their thinking to understand the inner workings of application logic, rather than having software-enabled products stretch to meet people’s usual ways of thinking.

The real interaction designer’s decisions are based on what the user is trying to achieve.

Homo logicus are driven by an irresistible desire to understand how things work. By contrast, Homo sapiens have a strong desire for success. Programmers also want to succeed, but they will frequently accept failure as the price to pay for understanding.

Usability’s strength is in identifying problems, while design’s strength is in identifying solutions.