No, for nontrivial software you can't, not without putting a manual in the UI, which is infeasible for advanced software and complex UI.

You can max out on discoverability and consistently, but the user ultimately will have to learn, through reading or experimentation, how to use the program.

Yes that's exactly what you do. You effectively put the manual in the UI in the form of tooltips, "WhatsThis", first-use popups etc.

Why would you think that is infeasible? Blender has even started improving on that front - after like 10 years of waiting it finally has tooltips!

In what way are tooltips "infeasible for advanced software"?

> In what way are tooltips "infeasible for advanced software"?

They aren't, and Blender has them. I think it's had them since I started using it, about three years ago I guess. Although they've definitely improved in that time.

Yes I mentioned they have finally added them. I've been using Blender a lot longer than 3 years and it is quite an embarrassment that it took them so long to add them.

Looks like proper tooltips were added in 2014. Blender was first released in 1998! 1998! 16 years to add tooltips!

A manual can be part of the UI. If the manual is well-written, why fault a program for using it?

This is an extraordinary claim, and is contrary to much of the UI theory I have read. Can you provide an example of a UI for a tool with the complexity of Blender which doesn't require a manual?

Solidworks is very easy to use and that is a professional CAD program.

I find it hard to believe that any UI theory says you can't have complex software that is intuitive, usable and discoverable without a manual. Link?