Most folks have been sold a story that every new technology they start using is supposed to be “intuitive”; and that if it is not “intuitive” then it must be defective or willfully perverse.
For example, novice programmers often stumble when learning their second or third language, because it differs from their first. Maybe it uses indentation instead of curly braces; maybe type declarations are written in a different order; maybe it doesn’t put $ on its variables; maybe capitalization of identifiers is syntactically significant.
And so they declare that Python is not “intuitive” because it doesn’t look like C; or Go is not “intuitive” because it doesn’t feel like PHP.
It should be obvious that this has nothing to do with intuition, and everything to do with familiarity and comfort-level.
Commercial, consumer-oriented technology has leaned heavily into the “intuitive” illusion. On an iPhone or Windows, Android or Mac, you’re supposed to be able to just guess how to do things without ever having to confront unfamiliarity. You might use a search engine to find a how-to document with screenshots — but you’re not supposed to have to learn new concepts or anything. That would be hard.
That’s not how to learn, though. To learn, you need to get into unfamiliar things, recognize that they are unfamiliar, and then become familiar with them.
Comfort-level is also important. It sucks to be doing experimental risky things on the computer that’s storing your only copy of your master’s thesis research. If you want to try installing a new OS, it sure helps if you can experiment with it in a way that doesn’t put any of your “real work” at risk. That can be on a spare computer, or booting from a USB drive, or just having all your “real work” backed up on Dropbox or Google Drive or somewhere that your experimentation can’t possibly break it.
It should be obvious that this has nothing to do with intuition, and everything to do with familiarity and comfort-level.
Not to be petty, but I think that intuitive is not that different to familiar.
I mean, the problem is in using the word intuitive when “selling” something in the first place. User interaction involves ton of things, large and small, and the intuitive things are rarely noticed. Such promise is likely going to lead to disappointment.
Adapting to these small differences is a skill in itself.
Most folks have been sold a story that every new technology they start using is supposed to be “intuitive”; and that if it is not “intuitive” then it must be defective or willfully perverse.
For example, novice programmers often stumble when learning their second or third language, because it differs from their first. Maybe it uses indentation instead of curly braces; maybe type declarations are written in a different order; maybe it doesn’t put
$on its variables; maybe capitalization of identifiers is syntactically significant.And so they declare that Python is not “intuitive” because it doesn’t look like C; or Go is not “intuitive” because it doesn’t feel like PHP.
It should be obvious that this has nothing to do with intuition, and everything to do with familiarity and comfort-level.
Commercial, consumer-oriented technology has leaned heavily into the “intuitive” illusion. On an iPhone or Windows, Android or Mac, you’re supposed to be able to just guess how to do things without ever having to confront unfamiliarity. You might use a search engine to find a how-to document with screenshots — but you’re not supposed to have to learn new concepts or anything. That would be hard.
That’s not how to learn, though. To learn, you need to get into unfamiliar things, recognize that they are unfamiliar, and then become familiar with them.
Comfort-level is also important. It sucks to be doing experimental risky things on the computer that’s storing your only copy of your master’s thesis research. If you want to try installing a new OS, it sure helps if you can experiment with it in a way that doesn’t put any of your “real work” at risk. That can be on a spare computer, or booting from a USB drive, or just having all your “real work” backed up on Dropbox or Google Drive or somewhere that your experimentation can’t possibly break it.
Not to be petty, but I think that intuitive is not that different to familiar.
I mean, the problem is in using the word intuitive when “selling” something in the first place. User interaction involves ton of things, large and small, and the intuitive things are rarely noticed. Such promise is likely going to lead to disappointment.
Adapting to these small differences is a skill in itself.