Since we now expect our devices to be with us wherever we are and easily accessible with a thumb or fingertip, interaction design has had to become simpler and more straightforward. Designers eschewed crowded menus and tiny buttons in favor of clear icons, swipe and pinch gestures, and instant visual feedback. The goal was to make every touch feel natural, letting technology fade into the background and allowing us to focus on our work.

Today, our screens look a lot nicer because of high-resolution displays and better graphics. We see smooth animations and detailed images that make using a computer or phone more fun and engaging. We also don’t just use a mouse anymore—touchscreens, voice commands, and even gestures have become part of our everyday interactions. This means you can tap, swipe, or talk to your device, making the whole experience feel more natural.

Despite these changes, some core ideas have stayed the same. The basic setup of having windows to organize work, icons to represent files and programs, and menus to find options is still common. This familiar structure helps us feel comfortable, even as technology improves.

However, there’s still room to make things even better. As we use more devices like smartphones, tablets, and smartwatches, it would be great to have a consistent look and feel across all of them. Making screens even easier to use for everyone, including people with disabilities, is also important. Future interfaces could learn from how we work and adjust themselves to suit our needs, helping us work smarter without extra effort.

Before her work, many designers believed that if they made clear plans for a system, users would follow those plans perfectly. Suchman pointed out that life is messy and full of surprises. People have different needs and may use technology in new or unexpected ways.

Because of her ideas, designers now try to see how people really use technology in everyday life. They spend more time talking with users, watching how they work, and learning about their needs. This helps them create technology that fits better into daily routines. In short, technology is made to be flexible and adapt to real life, instead of forcing people to follow strict rules.

Her work reminds us that good technology should work with people, not against them. It teaches us that by understanding real-life situations, we can design tools that are easier to use and more helpful to everyone.

Moreover, the influence of the Xerox Star didn’t stop at its immediate users. Its pioneering design and user-friendly concepts laid the groundwork for future computing systems. Companies like Apple and Microsoft saw the potential of the GUI and built upon the ideas introduced by the Star, leading to the development of the Macintosh and Windows operating systems. Although the Star itself was not a runaway commercial success, its legacy is undeniable because it reshaped the way we interact with computers and set the stage for the digital revolution that followed.

Looking back, it’s clear that the Xerox Star was much more than a piece of technology, it was a bold experiment in human-centered design.

Reading Fitts’s Law reminds me of one of my classes last semester, we redesigned the kiosk for Muni. If I had to design it again, I would do a much better job. Since they are touchscreens, the target areas should be as large and well-spaced as possible to prevent users from accidentally touching the wrong options. The “next step” should also be located not too far from the menu, so that the user can complete the goal more quickly and smoothly. Of course, it should not be too close as well, or users will need to be careful about clicking in that area.

The iconography of the “scan” looks like a gesture that people usually use to express measurements, to focus on observing something or to take a picture. And for the “like” thumbs-up, “dislike” thumbs-down are straightforward for people to get a sense of what they mean through the icons. Both they and Egyptian hieroglyphics were a visual language for all to understand, through the shapes of simple iconography. But the difference between them is that Egyptian hieroglyphics only expressed simple things and were all natural. The understanding of modern icons came through technological development and more information background. Especially the “scan” iconography, who would have known what it meant before the development of human technology.

In the graphic novel, Lovelace is described as a “HUMAN CALCULATING MACHINE,” and Babbage was working on a non-human calculating machine. I really like how the author describes the stubborn, rigid Babbage as hardware and mercurial, airy Lovelace is like software. This conveys how working the two together can create possibilities and an important relationship between technology and users that was present in early IXD. 

Lillian Gilbreth strongly supported the causes of the underprivileged and women’s groups, which is a great contribution in history that continues to work in modern society. She noticed the dedication of women and older workers and specializes in research and consideration for these users. She combined psychology and technology, in which she was the first.