Top 10 Usability Film Bloopers

Web usability expert Jakob Nielsen has this wryly-humorous article on the technology gaffs we take for granted in movies and TV shows. I clipped the sum-up because it contains the

unintended consequence of accepting these gaffs as facts. To say nothing of the fact that his Top 10 list is funnier than Letterman has been in years.And the Jurassic Park catch with the teenage girl . . . that was brilliant.

Do the Usability Bloopers Matter?

Does it matter that most films offer such an unrealistic depiction of usability? Mainly, no. A movie’s purpose is entertainment, not task performance. So, go ahead and employ user interfaces and interaction techniques that are entertaining and would never work in the real world.

Films are littered with so many other unrealistic plot details: you’d imagine, for example, that the ability to shoot straight might actually be a primary job requirement of Imperial Stormtroopers [blogger's emphasis].

In the film context, unrealistic usability is only to be expected. Still, I see two real problems with it:

Research funding and management expectations are subtly biased by the incessant emphasis on unrealistic UI design such as voice, 3D, avatars, and AI. When you see something work as part of a coherent and exciting story, you start wanting it. You even start believing in it. After all, we’ve seen 3D and voice so often that we’ve developed an implicit belief in their usefulness.

Users blame themselves when they can’t use technology. This phenomenon is bad enough already; it’s made worse by the prevalence of scenes in which people walk up to random computers and start using them immediately. We need people to start demanding easier design and blaming the technology when it’s too hard to use. Movies make this change in attitudes more difficult.