地址
/dont-make-me-think-20-thoughts-on-usability-by-steve-krug/
翻譯：阿蚊子?
Design, as well as many other fields, is built upon the works and discoveries of the great professionals. Everyone who wants to be an expert in their craft often seeks for the guidance to learn how to do things right. Various books and articles written by gurus are now in a free access on the internet so those striving at knowledge can find the essential instruction without efforts.
設計，跟其他很多領域壹樣，是建立在偉大的專業人士的付出和發現上。每壹個想要在他們專業領域上成為專家的人，常常會去尋找法則來學習怎樣把事情做正確。由大師所寫的各種各樣的文章現在通過互聯網都可以自由獲取， 因此那些努力學習的人可以毫不費力地就找到基本的指導。
We often share quotes and wise thoughts from the best experts in the digital design field in Tubik blog. You can find the short insight into?Design Is a Job?by Mike Monteiro,?Designing for Emotion?by Aarron Walter, as well as the set of wise thoughts from typography master?Erik Spiekermann. Continuing Tubik Studio Quotes Collection, here’s a fresh set of quotes from the well-known book “Don’t Make Me Think” by Steve Krug.
?我們常常分享來自Tubik博客上那些數字設計領域最優秀專家的的名言和睿智的想法。妳可以從由麥克·蒙泰羅(Mike Monteiro)寫的《設計是壹份工作》，由Aarron Walter寫的 《情感化設計》，還有由印刷大師埃裏克·斯皮克爾曼(Erik Spiekermann)的智慧思想中找到簡短的見解。
我們繼續引用來自Tubik工作室的收藏，下面是來自著名的書“Donn't Make Me Think”的作者Steve Krug的最新引言。
The?first edition was published in 2000 and then it was revisited in 2014 making it relevant and useful nowadays. Steve Krug sets some basic principles on the usability of interfaces and shares them with?professionals working in this field which makes?the book one of the top essential resources recommended for UX designers. “Don’t Make Me Think” describes the key points, examples and insights which?are important to know about website usability. The major idea is to create designs with which users wouldn’t need to think too much how the interface works — this way it becomes not only problem-solving but also easy to use. Here are 20 quotes reflecting some key points from “Don’t Make Me Think”.
2000年，第壹次出版，在2014年，重新出版，《Donn't Make Me Think》在今天依然緊貼時代的發展和符合實際需要。Steve Krug 為交互設計定下了基本的可用性交互原則 並在書中分享了自己在專業領域的實際工作經驗，使得出版的書籍成為交互設計師首推的之壹。“Donn't Make Me Think”描述了那些對網頁可用性設計重要的原則，案例和觀點。它主要的想法是設計出那些用戶不需要在界面怎麽交互上思考過多的設計，這樣的設計不僅僅能解決問題並且很容易使用。?下面20句話， 反應了“Donn't Make Me think ”中關鍵的點。?
If something requires a large investment of time—or looks like it will—it’s less likely to be used.
如果有些事情看起來需要花費很多時間研究——或者它看起來是這樣，它很可能就不被使用
Making every page or screen self-evident is like having good lighting in a store: it just makes everything seem better.
讓網站每壹頁或每壹屏都不言自明就像在商店裏有好的照明:它會讓壹切看起來更好。
A lot of happy?talk?is the kind of self-congratulatory promotional writing that you find in badly written brochures. Unlike good promotional copy, it conveys no useful information, and it focuses on saying how great we are, as opposed to delineating what makes us great. Instruction must die.
很多愉快的談話像是那些書寫糟糕的小冊子裏發現的那種自我祝賀的宣傳寫作，但和好的廣告宣傳不壹樣，它傳遞無用的信息，並且它重點在說明我們是多麽的優秀，而不是去描述什麽讓我們優秀的。說明書必須消失。
Accessibility is the right thing to do. And not just the right thing; it’s profoundly the right thing to?do,?because the one argument for accessibility that doesn’t get made nearly often enough is how extraordinarily better it makes some people’s lives. How many opportunities do we have to dramatically improve people’s lives just by doing our job a little better?
可達性是應該要做的。而且不僅僅是應該去做，而且它是非常正確的事情，因為關於可達性沒有引起足夠的重視，其中壹個爭論是它能讓壹些人的生活多大程度上變更好。僅僅通過改善我們的工作，我們有多少機會可以顯著改善人們的生活?
Another needless source of question marks over people’s heads is links and buttons that aren’t obviously clickable. As a user, I should never have to devote a millisecond of thought to whether things are clickable—or not.
另外壹個 讓人們層出不窮的困惑是那些鏈接和按鈕沒有看起來是能點擊的。作為壹個用戶，我應該不需要花費絲毫時間在考慮按鈕是否可以點擊的。
In the last few years, making things more usable has become almost everybody’s responsibility. Visual designers and developers now often find themselves doing things like interaction design (deciding what happens next when the user clicks, taps, or swipes) and information architecture (figuring out how everything should be organized).
在最近幾年，讓壹切事物變得更易用，幾乎成為了每個人的責任。視覺設計師和開發者現在會發現自己是在做交互設計（決定下壹步發生什麽，當用戶點擊，輕擊或滑動）和組織信息架構（理解壹切是被怎麽組織發生的）。
A person of average (or even below average) ability and experience can figure out how to use the thing to accomplish something without it being more trouble than it’s worth. Take my word for it: It’s really that simple.
壹個普通人憑借他（或者能力比平均低壹點的人）的能力和經驗可以讓他在事情沒有比本身更復雜時去完成任務。相信我的話:這真的很簡單。
Usability is about people and how they understand and use things, not about technology.
可用性是關於人們和他們怎麽理解和使用物品，與技術並不相關
The main thing you need to know about instructions is that no one is going to read them—at least not until after repeated attempts at “muddling through” have failed.
關於使用說明，妳需要的知道的是至少在人們反復嘗試失敗之前沒有人會去閱讀它。
The more you watch users carefully and listen to them articulate their intentions, motivations, and thought processes, the more you realize that their individual reactions to Web pages are based on so many variables that?attempts?to describe users in terms of one-dimensional likes and dislikes are futile and counter-productive. Good design, on the other hand, takes this complexity into account.
在妳更認真觀察，和聆聽更多用戶清楚表達他們的意圖，動機，和思考過程後，妳更會發現
，他們個人在網頁的操作行為，是基於多種變量的。因此嘗試用像喜歡和不喜歡的單壹維度去描述 用戶，這些都是徒勞的，而且適得其反。好的設計，在另壹方面，應該是將復雜性考慮在內的。
The fact that the people who built the site didn’t care enough to make things obvious—and easy—can erode our confidence in the site and the organization behind it.
那些設計網站的人並不在乎考慮讓事情看起來更具有可見性和簡單，使我們對網站和背後的組織喪失信心。
In reality, though, most of the time we don’t choose the best option—we choose the first reasonable option, a strategy known as satisficing.
?雖然現實中大部分時間，我們沒有選擇最佳的選擇，我們選擇了第壹個最合理的選擇，即所謂的“滿意”策略。
The problem is there are no simple “right” answers for most Web design questions (at least not for the important ones). What works is good, integrated design that fills a need—carefully thought out, well executed, and tested.
?問題是，在大部分的網頁設計問題上，沒有簡單的對錯，至少對於那些重要的設計是這樣的。什麽的設計才是好的，就是經過壹個完整設計過程，它包括仔細需求分析，然後實施，然後測試。
Get rid of half the words on each page, then get rid of half of what’s left.
?將頁面上的內容刪除壹半，然後把剩下壹半也刪了。?
Designers love subtle?cues,?because subtlety is one of the traits of sophisticated design. But Web users are generally in such a hurry that they routinely miss subtle cues.
設計師喜歡埋下微妙的線索，因為線索是精細的設計特點之壹。但是網站的用戶壹般很匆忙，以至於他們壹向錯過了這些微妙的線索。
If there’s one thing you learn by working on a lot of different Web sites, it’s that almost any design idea—no matter how appallingly bad—can be made usable in the right circumstances, with enough effort.
如果有壹樣事情可以通過學習很多不同網站案例獲得，那幾乎就是所有設計理念本身想要傳達的——不管多麽難用的產品，只要通過足夠的努力，在正確的情況下，可以變得更易用。
Your primary role should be to share what you know, not to tell people how things should be done.
?妳主要的的職責應該是分享妳知道的東西，而不是告訴用戶怎麽去把事情完成。
Your objective should always be to eliminate instructions entirely by making everything self-explanatory, or as close to it as possible. When instructions are absolutely necessary, cut them back to a bare minimum.
?妳的目標應該是要完全刪掉說明手冊，通過設計將壹切變得更不解自明，或者盡可能接近這樣。當說明書是絕對必須的時候，那就盡量簡潔。
Faced with the prospect of following a convention, there’s a great temptation for designers to try reinventing the wheel instead, largely because they feel (not incorrectly) that they’ve been hired to do something new and different, not the same old thing. Not to mention the fact that praise from peers, awards, and high-profile job offers are rarely based on criteria like “best use of conventions.” Occasionally, time spent reinventing the wheel results in a revolutionary new rolling device. But usually it just amounts to time spent reinventing the wheel.
?面對追隨舊有設計的前景，對於設計師來說，去重復建造輪子反而是壹個抵擋不住的誘惑，很大程度上是因為他們覺得自己被雇傭去做壹些新的和不同的事情，而不是舊的東西。更不要說，現實中那些來自同齡人的贊美，獎賞和廣受關註的工作機會基本不是來自很像舊的設計”。有時，那些花在重復發明輪子的時候導致了新的革命。但是往往，它也只不過花費了重新發明輪子的時間而已。
If you want a great site, you’ve got to test. After you’ve worked on a site for even a few weeks, you can’t see it freshly anymore. You know too much. The only way to find out if it really works is to test it.
如果妳想要設計壹個很棒的網站，妳需要去測試這個網站。在妳使用網站超過幾個星期後，妳看不到任何的新的東西。因為妳知道太多了。只有通過真正的測試，妳才可能發現問題。