>And how many computer systems have you seen where the designers thought the interface was "intuitive" and the users had a terrible time with it. Just because someone thought it was easy to use doesn't make it so.

I keep thinking about this (not perfect) analogy:


A major e-tailer launches a redesigned user interface. By the end of the first week 460,000 different users have logged on and placed orders. Telephone operators receive many calls with questions on the new layout but most users seem to have no problems. But a week later angry email and phone calls start arriving. Eventually it seems that approximately 3000 customers received the wrong item and some 26000 never received anything at all.

The company sends each disgruntled customer this letter:

Dear Valued Customer,

We are distressed to hear about your problems with the new layout of our web site. Unfortunately we are not in a position to replace your merchandise or refund your money.

Please be aware that over 431,000 persons had no problems using the new system. This shows that there is nothing inherently wrong with new layout.

Our company puts a high value on responsibility. It is your responsibility to notice whether the system is performing accurately, and, if not, to notify us at the time of your purchase. Besides the test site has been available for practice for over a month.

You really should consider the possibility that you are not smart enough to purchase goods on-line.

Please accept our sincere regrets that we cannot help you at this late date.