top of page

Desiging digital products through the wrong reality

  • mariepilot
  • 8 hours ago
  • 2 min read











Monday thoughts.

Yes, I do sometimes think on a Monday evening. ๐Ÿ˜ โœ ๐Ÿ‘ป ย 


๐—ช๐—ต๐—ฎ๐˜ ๐—ถ๐—ณ ๐˜„๐—ฒโ€™๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐˜€๐—ถ๐—ด๐—ป๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐—ด๐—ถ๐˜๐—ฎ๐—น ๐—ฝ๐—ฟ๐—ผ๐—ฑ๐˜‚๐—ฐ๐˜๐˜€ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฟ๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—ด๐—ต ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐˜„๐—ฟ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—น๐—ถ๐˜๐˜†?


Something has been bothering me for a long time when I look at how we design digital experiences.

We often try to ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฝ๐—ฟ๐—ผ๐—ฑ๐˜‚๐—ฐ๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ฝ๐—ต๐˜†๐˜€๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ฎ๐—น ๐˜„๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐—น๐—ฑ.

We map familiar gestures onto interfaces.

๐—ช๐—ฒ ๐—ฐ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ฒ ๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐—ด๐—ถ๐˜๐—ฎ๐—น ๐˜ƒ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐˜€๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป๐˜€ ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐—ฝ๐—ต๐˜†๐˜€๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ฎ๐—น ๐—ผ๐—ฏ๐—ท๐—ฒ๐—ฐ๐˜๐˜€.

We use metaphors from the real world to explain how a product works.

  • A folder.

  • A bin.

  • A book.

  • A shopping cart.

  • A page we turn.


And it makes sense, I think. ๐Ÿค”

When digital was new, we needed familiar references to help people build mental models.


๐—˜๐˜ƒ๐—ฒ๐—ป ๐—ก๐—ถ๐—ฒ๐—น๐˜€๐—ฒ๐—ป'๐˜€ ๐—ต๐—ฒ๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐—ถ๐˜€๐˜๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐˜€ ๐˜๐—ฒ๐—น๐—น ๐˜‚๐˜€ ๐˜๐—ผ "๐—บ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ฐ๐—ต ๐—ฏ๐—ฒ๐˜๐˜„๐—ฒ๐—ฒ๐—ป ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐˜€๐˜†๐˜€๐˜๐—ฒ๐—บ ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—น ๐˜„๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐—น๐—ฑ."

But I sometimes wonder if we have interpreted this too literally.

Matching the real world doesn't necessarily mean reproducing it. A digital product doesn't have to behave like a physical object just because the metaphor is familiar.

  • A screen has no physical constraints.

  • It can search instantly.

  • It can remember.

  • It can adapt.

  • It can predict.

  • It can generate.

  • It can respond to context.


I feel digital has its own physics. ๐Ÿ˜… And yet, we sometimes design it through the lens of the physical world. This is where I think we can limit ourselves as designers.

Instead of asking:"What physical gesture can we reproduce?"

Maybe we should also ask:"What would a human naturally do in this environment?"


That's a subtle but important difference.The first question is about mapping reality onto digital.The second is about understanding human behaviour within a digital reality.

And with AI, this becomes even more interesting.I feel that a lot of product team & designers don't think about it. They don't challenge the experience.


For years, we designed around:

๐—”๐—ฐ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป โ†’ ๐—œ๐—ป๐˜๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐—ณ๐—ฎ๐—ฐ๐—ฒ โ†’ ๐—ข๐˜‚๐˜๐—ฐ๐—ผ๐—บ๐—ฒ

Now we're increasingly moving towards:

๐—œ๐—ป๐˜๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜ โ†’ ๐—ฆ๐˜†๐˜€๐˜๐—ฒ๐—บ โ†’ ๐—ข๐˜‚๐˜๐—ฐ๐—ผ๐—บ๐—ฒ


If I can simply express what I want, why should I necessarily reproduce the sequence of actions I would have taken in the physical world?Maybe the next step in experience design isn't to make digital feel more like the real world.Maybe it's to understand that digital is a world of its own.And design for the behaviours that emerge there.That's probably one of the reasons I find Behavioral Design so fascinating.What do you think?Are we sometimes too focused on making digital familiar, when we should be making it natural?#experienceย #conceptionย #experiencedesignย #heuristique

Afficher la traduction

ย 
ย 
ย 

Recent Posts

See All
Thank you Yayoi

Last week, the world lost ๐˜๐š๐ฒ๐จ๐ข ๐Š๐ฎ๐ฌ๐š๐ฆ๐š. I lost a companion in painting. ๐Ÿ˜ฅ Some will remember her as crazy. Others as an extraordinary artist. ๐…๐จ๐ซ ๐ฆ๐ž, ๐ฌ๐ก๐ž ๐ฐ๐š๐ฌ ๐š๐ง ๐ž๐ง๐œ๐จ๐ฎ๐ง๐ญ

ย 
ย 
ย 
How AI changed our way of designing

Three years ago, I wrote an article about the importance of gestures in interface design. At the time, my conviction was simple: ๐‘ป๐’‰๐’† ๐’ˆ๐’†๐’”๐’•๐’–๐’“๐’†๐’” ๐’˜๐’† ๐’…๐’†๐’”๐’Š๐’ˆ๐’ ๐’”๐’‰๐’‚๐’‘๐’† ๐’‰๐’๐’˜ ๐’‘๐’†๐’๐’‘๐’๏ฟฝ

ย 
ย 
ย 

Comments


© 2026 by Marie Pilot

bottom of page