h1

Choice and Accessible Design

November 10, 2009

Choice can be an empowering thing, but it can also overwhelm.

Picture of a pile of question marks Many great designs have succeeded because they kept things simple. Consider the Apple iPod: a music player like many others in functionality, but in essence a much more desirable gadget due to its great design. At least as far as the original iPod design was concerned, the engineers at Apple concentrated on how the device would be used rather than loading it up with niche features. The competition chose to stuff their competing devices with extra features which invariably got in the way.

The market recognised that having an accessible, simple design was more important than niche features and voted with its money: today, the iPod commands a market share of at least half of all portable music devices sold, if not closer to two-thirds, whilst the ‘also-rans’ scrabble to be noticed.

There is a strong correlation between good, approachable design and how well a product or service is adopted in its marketplace. Google Search is another great example: a very simple, easy to understand search page. It didn’t bombard you with banner adverts or confuse you with options and niche functions. It simply reduced the choice in the interface down to a bare minimum so that the it got out of the way, and people loved it.

So, as software designers we should look to our designs and see what is important, what is fundamental to the operation of our product. Speak to the people who will ultimately use your product. Find out what is really important to them, and how they would see it working. Build software prototypes of your design, and let them try them out. Listen to their feedback. Get the fundamentals right, before you even consider any secondary functionality.

It might seem radical, but as the majority of software users make use of only subset of functionality, it’s our job to put the majority of effort into ensuring that subset is as good as can be.