Why Most Product Design Is Failing The Common Sense Test

Aesthetics are cheap, but usability is apparently expensive

I think we have reached a point where the average industrial designer is more concerned with how a product looks on a filtered social media feed than how it actually functions in a human hand. The prevailing misconception is that MINIMALISM is synonymous with GOOD DESIGN. It is not. True minimalism is the removal of the unnecessary. What we have now is the removal of the FUNCTIONAL.

Modern design has become obsessed with hiding the AFFORDANCE of an object. In design terms, an affordance is a visual or physical cue that tells you how to interact with something. A handle "affords" pulling. A button "affords" pushing. When you replace a tactile, physical knob with a flat, capacitive touch surface hidden under a layer of glossy polycarbonate, you have not simplified the design. You have killed the affordance and replaced it with a guessing game.

The Technical Reality: Capacitive touch is a cost-cutting measure disguised as "The Future"

Why are we seeing screens and touch-sensitive surfaces on everything from washing machines to car dashboards? It is not because it is better for the user. It is because it is CHEAPER for the manufacturer.

From a manufacturing standpoint, a physical switchgear assembly requires mechanical engineering, specialized tooling for injection molding multiple small parts, and complex assembly labor. A capacitive touch PCB (Printed Circuit Board) is a single component. By moving controls to a screen or a flat panel, companies reduce their Bill of Materials (BOM) and simplify their assembly lines.

The technical cost of this "efficiency" is a massive increase in COGNITIVE LOAD. Cognitive load refers to the amount of mental effort being used in the working memory.

• Physical controls rely on PROPRIOCEPTION: the sense of self-movement and body position. I can reach for a volume knob in my car without taking my eyes off the road because my brain knows where my hand is in space and can feel the mechanical detents of the knob.
• Digital controls require VISUAL CONFIRMATION. You cannot feel a digital slider. You have to look at it, which means you are no longer looking at what you are doing.

When a designer replaces a physical rotary encoder with a touch-screen menu, they are effectively demanding more of the user's finite processing power for a task that should be autonomous. This is a failure of technical precision.

The Psychology of Frustration and the Bottom Line

Why does this matter? Because design that ignores the "Common Sense Test" creates friction. Friction leads to product abandonment and brand erosion.

In terms of MANUFACTURING ECONOMICS, the short-term savings gained by removing physical buttons are often offset by long-term costs in customer support and returns. If a user cannot figure out how to set the timer on their "smart" toaster because the UI is buried three layers deep in a sub-menu, they will return the product.

Furthermore, we are seeing a total disregard for FITT'S LAW. This is a predictive model used in human-computer interaction that states the time required to rapidly move to a target area is a function of the ratio between the distance to the target and the width of the target. By making buttons smaller and removing their physical borders, designers are making it MATHEMATICALLY HARDER for users to succeed.

Practical Application: How to pass the Common Sense Test

If you are designing a product, stop trying to make it look like a prop from a sci-fi movie and start looking at how humans actually move. Follow these rules:

• IDENTIFY HIGH-FREQUENCY TASKS: If a user has to do it more than three times a day, it MUST be a physical control.
• RESPECT HAPTIC MEMORY: Use mechanical switches with distinct tactile feedback. The "click" is a confirmation signal that requires zero visual attention.
• ELIMINATE THE "SMART" BLOAT: Ask yourself if adding a Wi-Fi chip actually improves the core function of the object. If the answer is "maybe," the answer is NO.
• PRIORITIZE CONTRAST OVER COHESION: Controls should stand out from the body of the product. Making everything the same color and texture is great for a museum, but it is USELESS for a tool.
• TEST WITH GLOVES ON: If you cannot operate your design while wearing gloves, you have failed to account for a massive range of real-world use cases.

Related Fields

industrial design - ergonomics - cognitive psychology - manufacturing economics - human-computer interaction - systems engineering - haptic feedback - bill of materials - user experience - product development - mechanical engineering - affordance - fitts law - sensory perception - injection molding - pcb design - usability testing - physical computing - design thinking - prototype development