Norman’s discussion on affordances, constraints and conventions in relation to digital media is very relevant today as technology become increasingly integrated into our daily lives. Internet of Things places real needs to consider the difference between real affordances and perceived affordances, as these objects are often physical and so do the invention of a range of OS’s available (Android, iOS, Windows, Linux etc.). With the majority of products being sold around the world, the constraints that come from conventions in various places needs to considered. Reading this article has given me a new language for thinking about the “actions” that can be taken on an object, its affordances, and the process of developing new objects for humans to interact with.
Talking about interaction, the interview of Suri also provides an interesting view on how human’s act on objects around them and what we can learn from that. Whereas Norman considers the object as it is designed and physically built, Suri thinks more about how to even get an idea in the first place. She encourages us to look at everything around us, especially human behavior or what is a result of humans and think about what drive that behavior. Ironically, she mentions the case of what makes sense intuitively versus the action described on signs using the example of a door. The entrance to the AB says “Pull” but many people walks straight up and push it in, as if the sign said “Push.” It is a good example that what was the “designed” intention – the designer’s the perceived affordance – is not how it is used by the user.