Predictably, some argue the iPad doesn’t do enough. It needs a keyboard or a removable battery or multitasking ability or whatever.
But there’s an interesting backlash to that backlash. (Meta-backlash!) The discussion has people openly discussing an ugly truth that doesn’t typically get a lot of play among tech geeks: People don’t know how to use computers. And not just stupid people. Millions of people. People who are adults. And that’s pretty damn lame.
(Bold emphasis in the following excerpts is mine.)
Fraser Speirs writes this in “Future Shock”:
I’m often saddened by the infantilising effect of high technology on adults. From being in control of their world, they’re thrust back to a childish, mediaeval world in which gremlins appear to torment them and disappear at will and against which magic, spells, and the local witch doctor are their only refuges…
The Real Work is not formatting the margins, installing the printer driver, uploading the document, finishing the PowerPoint slides, running the software update or reinstalling the OS.
The Real Work is teaching the child, healing the patient, selling the house, logging the road defects, fixing the car at the roadside, capturing the table’s order, designing the house and organising the party.
Steven Frank says:
Since the days of the Apple ][, C64, and Atari 400, all we’ve done is add, add, add. Add more features to sell more computers. We’ve never stopped to take anything away.
I’m weary of this notion (even when presented as satire) that anyone who can’t master a computer must clearly be mentally retarded.
So while we trump up our skills at designing “easy to use” interfaces for our applications, millions of people are still trying to figure out how to get our beautifully designed application out of its zip file or disk image. Or where in fact the Downloads folder is. Or what, exactly, a folder is. If we hadn’t been there for every step of the personal computer evolution since the days of DOS and AppleSoft, I wager we’d find it pretty bloody confusing as well.
Rob Foster “On iPads, Grandmas and Game-changing”:
My mother-in-law walked in the door the day of the keynote and the first thing out of her mouth was “Did you see that new Apple iPad? That looks like it would work for me. Would that work for me?”
I was utterly flabbergasted. She NEVER talks about computers or technology. She tolerates them at best. Her attitude is typical of most baby boomers I’ve talked to regarding computers. She wants to benefit from them but is frustrated by the wall she must climb in order to do so. She’s learned how to use email and a couple of other things on the Internet and that’s about it…
I’ve long felt that computers were too hard to use, that the filesystem should NEVER be seen by the user. That human-computer interaction should favor the “human” side.
That these conversations are even going on is a good sign. For those of us surrounded by the minutiae of computers all day, it’s easy to forget there’s a world of people out there who just don’t get it. And it’s not their fault. It’s ours.
Apple has decided it’s worth throwing out advanced features in order to get these people onboard. Anyone who builds apps would be wise to consider taking a similar path. (Note: It’s not just about making a computer or an app more accessible for people who don’t get it. It’s also for people who do get it because this way is better.)
You can spend so much effort tweaking code or a specific part of the UI or adding a new pet feature that you forget the most important thing of all: People need to be able to START using your product. If they can’t do that, who cares about the rest?
You can crank up the snow machine. You can set up the slalom course perfectly. You can shape all the moguls so they’re just right. But if people can’t ever get on the ski lift, there ain’t gonna be any race.
Kawika Holbrook
on 04 Feb 10I’ll be buying two iPads, one for myself and one for my technophobic father—even though the iPhone OS currently requires a “real” computer for software updates. Perhaps Apple will consider implementing automatic updates in the future to further reduce the mental overhead. Every step (or each unnecessary step omitted) counts.
Jimmy Chan
on 04 Feb 10Change is always happens, and who don’t, will be vanished.
G.Irish
on 04 Feb 10I agree that simplifying the computing experience is a fantastic idea and will be a boon to millions of less tech-savvy users. However, some of the complaints about what the iPad is missing are totally valid.
The iPad is being marketing as a web browsing advice yet Flash and Silverlight are not supported. This means that when your tech-illiterate relative gets a link to Hulu or a vid on ESPN they’re going to be confused and SOL. The iPad would be a great device for watching streaming Netflix but alas it won’t be able to do it, even though some phones already can.
The lack of a USB port might not be too big of a problem, but when a users wants to plug in a camera or printer now they’ve got to use an adapter. Rather inelegant if you ask me.
Then there’s iTunes. While the interface is not horrendous it still needs to be simpler and more intuitive if it is to work well for the technically-challenged.
All in all the shortcomings of the 1st gen iPad would not be too difficult to fix. But as a ‘simpler’ computing device those holes in functionality/UX are signficant.
Peter Hentges
on 04 Feb 10The Macintosh Bible used to start with it’s 10 Commandments, the first of which was “It’s Not Your Fault You’re Confused.”
Still true today. User confusion is a sign of programming failure.
Mike Woodhouse
on 04 Feb 10I think I agree with the premise, but I think Apple may to some extent at least, have missed: I’m guessing that any non-geek purchaser who’s used something with an OS more sophisticated than an iPhone is going to feel really dumb when they can’t keep listening to an MP3 when they open their email. But I’m usually wrong, so perhaps that won’t happen.
Jason Lynes
on 04 Feb 10Love it. Most people hate computers and abhor using them. Most geeks design/code sites for themselves, not for their mothers. Finally someone with some guts is starting to change that.
(FYI that “On iPads, Grandmas and Game-changing” article should be attributed to Rob Foster)
brad
on 04 Feb 10I think the bigger picture that people are missing is that Apple is one of the very few companies that takes an “ecosystem” approach to product development: it understands the context in which people will be using its products. Most software and hardware developers design their products as if it’s the only thing that their customers are going to use in their lives, with the assumption that they’ll have plenty of time to learn how to use it.
Apple understands that most of us have many devices in our lives already, from cellphones to cameras to televisions, DVD players, microwave ovens, cars, etc., all of which we have to spend some time learning how to use. The more of this stuff we have already, the more resistant we are to adding more, because it’s one more thing we have to learn how to use.
In order for a new product to be appealing within this context, it has to be something that has an extremely short learning curve. One of the reasons for Apple’s success is that they realize that most of us - if we’re lucky - have less than 30 minutes a week available to learn how to use new software or a new product, and for many of us it’s more like 30 minutes a month.
Jeff
on 04 Feb 10Stop Being an Idiot http://orderedlist.com/our-writing/blog/articles/stop-being-an-idiot/
Chad
on 04 Feb 10Apple is making a move with the iPad which is in complete disagreement with the way computers have been segmented as acceptable, good, great, etc. They are abandoning the processor speed, amt of RAM, and number of peripheral ports as the scorecard for how a computer rates (See how much work it takes to find out how much RAM is in the iPad and you’ll realize how little Apple cares whether you know or not).
Instead, they are focusing on usability. While this is a much more qualitative strategy, as previous posters have mentioned, it is what matters to the many millions of users who don’t happen to be anywhere near the competency level of the tech writers who are covering and reviewing the iPad. For too many people, too much work is required to learn an OS or software program before they can actually work on the task or idea they want to accomplish.
WalterSear
on 04 Feb 10In my experience, it’s just as likely to be about avoiding being made to feel stupid as it is about being just plain too lazy to think.
Jon Gretar Borgthorsson
on 04 Feb 10I don’t know what makes someone a computer expert but I’m confident that manage to make it into that club. I am however thrilled about the iPad and plan to get myself one. (After trying it out of course I will not buy it blindly)
The thing is that I don’t feel the need for everything I own to be complicated. I have my iMac and my gaming PC and I enjoy fiddling with them and tuning up. I enjoy setting up my linux servers and trying out new services. But for some things I just want them to be simple, easy and…... foreseeable. I don’t want my camera or my watch to be loaded with features and have 30 menus. That is why I love my Flip. A red button that you press to record. I don’t care that the iPad doesn’t have USB. I agree with taking from the iPhone as I believe a touchscreen devices should use a touchscreen OS. I don’t care if it lacks this feature or that chip. I just care if it does what it does well.
It’s the same with most of my friends that love cars. They love hacking away at them and fiddling with the car computer and whatnot I don’t really understand. Still most of them have a trusty little Toyota to pick up the kids from school.
Eric
on 04 Feb 10All I can say is, “Word.” Most people have no use for all the “features” today’s modern systems have. In fact most people would probably be more productive, more creative, and happier with less feature rich systems.
The Mac Mini I gave my parents runs like a charm because I used parental controls to lock it down on them. That’s perverse! Then when things still go awry or they simply are confused I use iChat with screen sharing to correct things remotely.The iPad might even suit them better but if only I could still login to it remotely.
Apreche
on 04 Feb 10That’s well and good, but tell me something. How does allowing side-loading interfere with that in any way? The mother-in-laws experience will be no different, because she will never side load. In fact it will be better. The ability to side load will attract more developer attention to the platform, and mother-in-law will have a lot more room for growth.
Nobody is complaining that the user interface should be worse. We are complaining that we are forced to choose between a world with lots of features and bad ui vs. a world with no features and good ui. Lots of features and good UI is possible, but non-existent.
brad
on 04 Feb 10It’s funny to see Eric and Apreche’s comments right next to each other because Eric points to Microsoft Word as an example of feature bloat, while Apreche complains that “lots of features and good UI is possible but non-existent.”
In fact Word 2007 does a pretty good job of achieving the balance between lots of features and good UI. Long-time Word users hated Word 2007 for the most part because they couldn’t find anything, but people who’d never seen Word before found it pretty intuitive. And for people who need more features, they’re there and not too hard to find once you understand the logic behind the interface.
Word does have way more features than 90% of its users need, but everyone needs a slightly different set of features and tools. I’ve never once used Word’s envelope-formatting tool, for example, but I know people who use it every day. Having those features is good, but the trick is to offer all that stuff without creating an intimidating and cluttered interface. Word 2007 doesn’t quite succeed, but it comes much closer than, say, Word 2003 and all previous versions.
Steve Pilon
on 04 Feb 10True, but the iPad was presented to us as being “far better” at certain things than either a MacBook or an iPhone. Far better for whom? Grandma and Grandpa? OK. But then the iPad is to computers what the Jitterbug is to cell phones. Nothing wrong with that, but for some reason, I just don’t feel like that’s the target that Apple is trying to hit. Although, Steve Jobs was sitting in a barcalounger for about half of the keynote, so….
Daniel
on 04 Feb 10Most people who didn’t grow up with computers and the internet as a pervasive part of their life will be dead in under 60 years. I don’t know a single person who doesn’t both own a computer and use it every day.
Do you?
Anyway, you’re calling out the wrong problem. There’s nothing wrong with feature bloat if your interface intuits the most common actions correctly. Suggesting that iPad-like devices are the correct way to make a product is kind of narrow minded. You’re just trading the 80% of your users who need a feature rich application for the 20% who can’t figure out how to use your competitor’s.
Good Web Work
on 04 Feb 10I sure agree that computers should not be so difficult to use. But I also think most people who just want to read email and browse the web and watch videos have figured out how to do that stuff pretty well.
Sure they have problems with tons of other stuff, but I don’t ever get people asking me how to watch YouTube videos or read their email or browse the NYTimes online.
The iPad may make some things easy, but aren’t the things that it’s going to make easy things that are already easy?
If the iPad solves the problems of not installing printer drivers by not allowing printing, then couldn’t the problem be solved by just not bothering to hook up a printer to your laptop?
I’m not trying to be sarcastic – I may be missing something there.
I don’t see the iPad as not doing enough. I see it as being redundant and therefore nearly useless.
http://www.goodwebwork.com/2010/01/the-ipad-completely-useless-or-just-impractical/
Jon Gretar Borgthorsson
on 04 Feb 10I think the problem many here are having is that they were expecting a computer. For a computer this is not very feature rich.
If you were, like me, expecting a device however then it has unusual amount of features. Unprecedented even.
And I’m glad it’s a tablet device. Because I have worked with 2 different kinds of tablet computers and I barely know what to call that experience though “unusable piece of crap” comes first to mind.
Tony
on 04 Feb 10Well said. The longer you have to explain to someone how to use something, generally the less well designed it is.
Although, things like folders were meant to be easy to understand, as they have a physical analogue. I think it is all the clutter these days of the interface around folders (and sub-folders, and sub-sub-folders) that is the problem.
I think the next large, successful computing wave will be a computing device that focuses on easing the most common things ‘normal’ people want to do, and to do so in a natural human way (speech, touch, visual feedback).
Why are iphone apps so popular? Because its fun for people to squint at a small screen? I think it is because the limitations of a small device force simplistic, self-evident interfaces that people can pick up quickly and therefore are fun to use.
Some interface design choices these days are made because we have larger monitors now. That’s a really bad reason to add buttons.
234ja
on 04 Feb 10A slalom course with moguls? That would be seriously hard! I don’t think even Olympic racers could ski it without crashing or going really slow…
:-)
Mike Abner
on 04 Feb 10Jimmy Chan said “Their fault as well. They fear learn something new and try a different hat”.
Tell that to the to the single mom with 3 kids. Or the over worked doctor. Or the plumber or electrician who is trying to run a business. Or the guy working construction who is exhausted after working 12 hour days and just wants to send an e-mail to his family in Mexico. Or grandma who just wants to know how her 37 grandchildren are doing.
We’re geeks. We love to learn. The fact is we’re in a pretty small minority and the rest of the world just doesn’t have the time or desire to invest in learning about something as complex as a computer. And why should they be forced to do so?
The car analogy is overused, but here we go again.
I’m a pretty smart guy. I have no idea how to fix my car. I could learn, sure. I have a basic understanding of what happens in an engine, and i’m a pretty quick study. But it offers no benefit for me to spend the many many hours necessary tinkering and rebuilding, etc. to figure out how to fix things. I can pay someone to do it for me and it’ll be done better and in a shorter amount of time…and I’ll have all that time back so that I can do the things I need to get done.
People want to use computers to communicate with one another, get a job done, or relax with a little entertainment. But the current state of affairs is that they have to fight with wireless configurations, drivers, incompatible software, a zillion different anti-virus apps, etc. They shouldn’t have to do that. They don’t want, nor should need, to have to think about those things.
We should think about those things for them, because we are in the best position to know, and the best position to implement.
I’m envious of all those who get to work on the iPad. Sure, it’s first revision is pretty basic. But man are the possibilities huge for what it, and the ecosystem supporting it, can be.
Brandon Medenwald
on 04 Feb 10Yes, Yes, Yes!
Jonathan Lehr
on 04 Feb 10I’ve been developing software and teaching software development approximately forever, and just speaking for myself, the last thing I want to waste my time doing is tinkering around with the operating system just to get ordinary everyday things to work.
The problem some of us face as geeks is not so much that we know how to do a lot of things with computers that other folks don’t, but that we tend to take that for granted. Most consumers buy computers in order to get things done, not to learn how computers work.
To borrow Brandon’s analogy, but well do you suppose the auto industry would be doing if consumers couldn’t get a brand new car to start without knowing how to tune its engine?
Anonymous Coward
on 04 Feb 10I couldn’t agree more but I think you need to practice what you preach.
Using the Basecamp message window makes me feel stupid. A large part of Project Management in many industries is sharing media (images, video, audio etc) and when I want to do that in Basecamp I am forced to do things that are complex and unfriendly.
Typing underscores, asterixes and pipes to format text makes me feel stupid because I can never remember the rules.
Having to copy embed codes from youtube then paste the code into basecamp to show a video inline makes me feel stupid.
Reading text only email updates from Basecamp with missing links, formatting and inline media and then having my email signature show up in Basecamp when I reply via email makes me feel stupid.
Using the Basecamp message window is like using the internet in 1999, it’s just outdated. A smart programmer implementing media sharing and viewing in a smart way would save me time and make me feel smart which seems to be a tenet of 37signals. Don’t get this confused with things being more complicated, it’s not.
Gmail opening office documents in the browser so I don’t have to download the file, find the file on my computer, install an app to view the file and then wait for the file to open is smart and makes me feel clever.
Posting an article to Digg and have it automatically grab a choice of thumbnails to accompany it is smart and makes me feel clever.
OSX quicklook instantly showing me almost any kind of file in an instant without needing to install a dedicated app is smart and makes me feel clever.
Apps tying into other APIs so I can do full text search in online documents, have my youtube, flickr and delicious favorites aggregated in a single place and automatically embed a google map if I add an address is smart and makes me feel clever.
Adding a youtube URL to SocialWok (and Campfire for that matter!) and have it automatically embed the video inline is smart and makes me feel clever.
Apps like Friendfeed, SocialWok and others automatically identify media and can show it inline in a smart way that doesn’t make you feel stupid for not understanding embed codes, iFrames and magic textile code.
This rant started after trying to embed an MP3 in Basecamp and then noticing that your embedded podcast player uses Amazon S3 to store the file and show the player. It annoyed me that the feature wasn’t available in Basecamp.
Uploading an MP3 to Basecamp and have it show an embedded player inline as well as letting me download the file would be smart and make me feel clever.
Here endeth this rant
Rob
on 04 Feb 10The ‘Anonymous Coward’ above is called Rob and he feels stupid that he forgot to enter his name and then wasn’t given the chance to rectify it before having the message posted.
Patcito
on 04 Feb 10What I find weird is that mac fans used to say that macs just work even for real non computer literate people because the UI is so intuitive (which by my experience is totally untrue).
Now they say, iPad is great because people don’t know how to use computers anyway so it’s ok to dumb down the experience.
What happened to “macs just work” then? :P
Anyway, the problem with the iPada is that you still need to connect it to a real computer with itunes to sync and update it which is not good for real people. This is why ChromeOS looks better to me, it updates and syncs automatically.
Alex
on 04 Feb 10I don’t think it’s nearly as big or as important a problem as it’s being made out to be. In 50 years time, most people will have grown up with computers and have no trouble understanding them.
Also, the other side of the coin is that computer professionals should not be completely ignored for the non-professionals. People in IT need advanced functionality and work with computers all day. Where is the tablet for them?
If apple had released a Tablet Pro that was not locked down and and simplified to the point of the iPad, I don’t think there would be any complaints at all. Everyone would be happy. It doesn’t have to be an either or situation. Just make hardware for both types of people.
In reality, Apple has told all the professionals that if they want a tablet, they better get used to simple features and no control over their device. Naturally that has a lot of people pretty upset.
Jim Jones
on 04 Feb 10I see your premise and generally agree that we should all strive to make technology simpler for users.
But, I have to say, the first time technophobe Joe User uses their iPad to view a Hulu clip, a Facebook video, ESPN Games, or any of the other countless Flash video sites – my guess is that their first reaction won’t be “wow this is so easy to use”.
mikemcc
on 04 Feb 10Mike Woodhouse, in criticizing the alleged “no multi-tasking” flaw, you’re in danger of propagating a mis-conception. You suggest that the hypothetical customer ”... is going to feel really dumb when they can’t keep listening to an MP3 when they open their email.”
I have just confirmed that the iPod app runs in the background of my iPhone. That is to say, I continued listening to music while I browsed the web, read my mail, opened OmniFocus… every other app on my iPhone ran while I continued to listen to music in the background, and none of my installed apps caused music playback to cease.
As indicated by the iPod app, the OS does permit background processes. Apple’s App Store editors currently reject third party apps that try to run a background process. This is a valid topic for criticism because it suggests a lack of trust in the developer community, but it is an editorial constraint, not a technical limitation of the OS.
My understanding of this editorial constraint is that Apple wants no confusion about what app is draining your battery. While this constraint, enforced through the App Store, provides ammunition for the “Jobs is a control freak” argument, it also means that I, as a hypothetical novice iPhone developer, cannot write a poorly optimized background process that significantly reduces your battery life. Otherwise, you might only launch my novice app once, and it may take you some time to make the connection between “app I never click on” and “my battery life used to be OK, but it’s been really poor for awhile now…”
Professional Lier
on 04 Feb 10iPad is an appliance, it’s not a general purpose computer. True, it does not come with a built-in punched card reader or a floppy disc drive, but boo hoo, who cares?
My TV is the same—it doesn’t have a floppy disc drive built in, and yet I’ve never heard anyone complain about that (btw, the same goes for my refrigerator).
People need to grow up and realize that the age of dicking around with general purpose computers is now finally behind us. None of us will ever spend money on buying yet another general purpose computer ever again, so it’s time to give it a decent burial.
Berserk
on 04 Feb 10@PL:
No, but you might complain if the company that built the TV decided what you can watch on it.. Or the refrigerator manufacturer decides what you are allowed to put in it.
But maybe that’s just me.
Eric
on 04 Feb 10The “who cares, the stupid people will all be dead in 50 or 60 years” comments are awfully arrogant.
I predict that in 30 years, you’ll be struggling with your iLevitator devices because you won’t have the background required to “get” the concepts upon which the interface is based. And the snot-nosed designers will be making snide comments like “anybody who can’t grasp the Patcito-Medenwald transform (discovered in 2020) will be dead soon anyway, so what’s the problem…”.
Dan
on 04 Feb 10Perhaps the iPad will be what the Wiimote was to so many people whom were previously daunted by video games: something that feels natural, and only needs the briefest of demonstrations.
Jimmy Chan
on 04 Feb 10We provide a simple way to do with computer, They provide a willing and some time to learn how.
It’s a balance. Blame is not only ours.
Mathew Patterson
on 04 Feb 10@Alex If apple had released a Tablet Pro that was not locked down and and simplified to the point of the iPad, I don’t think there would be any complaints at all. Everyone would be happy
Ha!
carlivar
on 04 Feb 10But it’s not either/or. Why can’t Apple run more than one app at once? How does that affect the usability? Same clean interface, but what if I don’t want my IM application to close when I go over to the Mail button?
The criticism is not the fact that Apple is using iPhoneOS—I think most people get that for the reasons stated in the post. The problem is the limitations in the iPhoneOS itself are arbitrary and not related to usability (maybe battery related, but why not allow the power users to do just a bit more while still leaving the “default mode” limited?).
Tom
on 04 Feb 10@carlivar: What’ll the user interface be for managing running applications? How can you tell what applications are currently running? How do you actually quit your IM application when you’re done, rather than just switch away from it? When you’ve launched enough apps to fill the available RAM, which of those apps gets shut down to free up some memory? Have you thought about this at all?
fab
on 05 Feb 10@Mike:
You (surely) will be able to listen to MP3s in the background when you leave iTunes to go use another app on the iPad, just as you can currently on any iPhone or iPod touch running any version of iPhone OS. In fact, from any app, a double-click of the home buttom brings up a pause/play/ff/volume control box for the iPod functions.
So you might be right about your wrongness. ;)
Peter Gerdes
on 05 Feb 10Unfortunately the reason computers make people like idiots isn’t the sort of thing you can fix with UI design. UI design can minimize frustration like a good math teacher can ease the pain of math class for many people but can’t eliminate it.
The reason math and computers make people feel dumb is that they present a constant opportunity for objective valuation of their skill against those of others. I mean just think how stressful physically weak nerds would find gym class if they were constantly told how much it mattered for their future careers.
Unless you shut the computer down so completely that everyone is capped at the same level (no one can write a quick little script to fix something or use regular expressions or..) some people will be on the bottom half of the distribution and more will fear they are in that half. Of course currently this effect is magnified as many managers and professionals who didn’t grow up with computers are asked to use them. That creates the opportunity for some young face to outperform them and that makes everyone defensive. Of course the problem feeds on itself as it does in math education since no one likes feeling stupid so they stop trying to learn and just want to get it over with.
Susan
on 05 Feb 10I’m reminded of an article I read many moons ago in the Wall Street Journal about the Yugo (at the risk of identifying myself in the category of “she’ll be dead soon”). Yugo’s had been being sold in the US for a couple years, and you might recall the dreadful quality – you got what you paid for. The author of this article interviewed a mechanic at a plant somewhere in what was then Yugoslavia, who said (paraphrase) “Why are people complaining about the quality of the car? No one should own a car who does not know how to clean-the-spark-plugs / reset-the-carburetor / or-something.” At the time it was laughable – I am firmly in the camp of “All I need to know about my car is where the key goes in the ignition.”
I like the idea that @Tony proposes, that the future is in devices, rather than general purpose computers. My husband is one of the smartest people I know and is always my user-interface tester – he’ll tell me when I’ve loaded too much crap in that gets in the way of the job. I hope that the iPad is the start of something, and that new devices for new purposes and new audiences and with ridiculously short learning curves start to proliferate.
Chad
on 05 Feb 10Running one application at a time (save for your alarm clock or music player) is a design decision that affects usability. A well designed interface is not just a pretty face.
RE the Tablet Pro: A system probably could be designed that supports advanced functionality yet is easy to use, but it would require an order of magnitude more effort. Truly advanced users, developers, and IT professionals should be using the time-tested command line interface.
I’ll do software development on my Mac because it has a command line interface. When I come home and want to create a shopping list or read the news in the morning I’d gladly use an iPad.
The one thing I think the iPad gets wrong is that a lot of effort is going to get poured into development on the iPhone OS. I’d rather Apple exposed some multi-touch events via browser events so that everything could be designed as a web app with HTML 5. A combination of the ChromeOS and iPad approaches would be awesome.
MattH
on 05 Feb 10Bravo, bravo! The best blog post I’ve seen in a long, long time.
Although I think the iPad is a tweener computer that won’t be nearly as popular as the hype I applaud the efforts Apple has made. Regardless of popularity iPad will be a wake-up call to Dell, Microsoft, etc. I don’t think they will even wait to gauge it’s popularity – they will follow – like drones.
Dave
on 05 Feb 10Computers shouldn’t make people feel like idiots, but on the other hand giving users computers that “just do” things without requiring any incentive to learn, puts users in a dangerous position as the perfect targets of all the malicious people out there who prey on ignorance.
A user who expects everything while learning nothing is exactly the kind of person who borrows a friend’s laptop and viruses it up to the hilt.
Wicher Minnaard
on 05 Feb 10No it isn’t. There’s only so much you can improve on interfaces before you have to start dumbing it down. Dumbing it down involves removing those abstractions that require a deeper understanding of what’s going on. Those abstractions may take effort to master, but in the long run, the right kind of abstraction will let you do more stuff quicker.
Consider reading & writing. These skills are not inherently simple. They’re not something you ‘get’ by fooling around. And yet we as a society put our children through years of hard labor to master that abstraction. Why? Kids can draw horses and cakes and trees. Why not work from there? Well, it appears that Pictionary is just not that convenient as a form of communication. We don’t take ‘drawing up contracts’ literally.
I’m not saying Granny should learn how to use the Bash shell. I’m refuting your stance that throwing out ‘advanced’ features benefits even those who do get it.
Markus
on 05 Feb 10All those “users are not intelligent enough” arguments are (besides utterly arrogant) missing one point. If “we” can use today’s computers better than “they”, it’s not because “we” are more intelligent than “they”, but because “we” have invested a lot of time to get used to how todays computers work.
For example, understanding multitasking is trivial (my 60-year old mom had no problem with the concept, in fact, she expected it!); using a window system that sends all keystrokes to a foreground process that is only marked by a subtle differences in the shading of a window border, takes getting used to (“I am typing and the characters don’t appear”).
Lots of practical problems with computers are cognitive, not intellectual.
Michael S.
on 05 Feb 10Yes, those are learned skills, but they are, for the people learning them, living life. When you have children, that is your life, it’s what you want to spend your time doing. When you have a career you love, you dive in and it is a part of your life. Likewise for hobbies. Using an appliance like a computer is, for most people, not a central part of their lives.
It is for many of us because our careers or hobbies are centered around computers, so it’s natural to put time into learning them. But I won’t assume this of anyone else.
Michael
on 05 Feb 10The easiest thing in the world is to sit and criticise Apple for doing this… that or the other. Why don’t they have “advanced mode” o0r why don’t they allow multitasking etc etc. If they sat down and tried to cater to everyone we would end up with a monster not dissimilar to Windows. Trying to be all things to all people has never worked for anyone or anything…period.
It’s also worth thinking about some history. The highest penetration achieved by any device in the home has been by the telephone and electricity. In both cases this was achieved because of the perceived value… but also because “complexity” was hidden by “simplicity”. People don’t give a flying f@%# how the local exchange works… they just dial a number and Bingo ! With electricity they care even less how the reticulation of the grid works. All they want is to flick a switch and Bingo again. That’s all there is to it.
Complexity hidden or surrounded by simplicity is not new… the old masters did it centuries ago. Kai Krause did it to great affect and Apple are doing it now.
Michelangelo said : ” I saw the angel in the marble and carved it till I set him free”. Perhaps Mr Jobs and his people are doing the same…
Steve
on 05 Feb 10Apple is making a move away from a computer, and towards an appliance for browsing the web. That’s fine, it addresses the serious problem that there are hundreds of millions of people in the world who have bought a computer, and who consequently end up trying to use a computer, but who don’t need one. That’s why they feel like idiots.
iPad is not the future of computers, even if in the long run it’s the death of them from the user POV. Powerful computers (by the standards of those DOS days) are now cheap enough that we can buy a dozen of them: one to use to make phone calls, a few to play games, one to check our email, one to read electronic documents, and so on. All those people who never needed a computer, but used one because it was the only way to do all those things, can now buy appliances. Those appliances might have computers inside them, but that’s an implementation detail – you can’t use them as computers.
That’s why Rob Foster’s grandma should never see the filesystem, in fact should not use a computer at all. Rob’s grandma doesn’t have any files: she has emails and photos and maybe some videos. In contrast I will not use a so-called computer if I can’t see the filesystem, because over the years I have built up a lot of files, which are mine, and I value them.
The iPad seems to be profoundly uninteresting if what you need is a computer, in much the same way that a well-designed adjustable wrench is a great and noble thing, and covers 90% of what people use a socket set for, but is not a replacement for a socket set. Of course most people who own a socket set also own an adjustable wrench.
Brett
on 05 Feb 10I haven’t really read up on the iPad yet, but this discussion sounds vaguely familiar. Kind of like the ridicule Nintendo faced from the hard core gaming community when the Wii came out, and Nintendo’s focus on “casual” games for both the Wii and the DS.
It’s not for everyone, but it definitely opened things up to a lot of people who otherwise would not have given video games a second thought.
Anonymous Coward
on 05 Feb 10Jimmy Chan
on 05 Feb 10Anonymous Coward above is me.
Justin Bell
on 05 Feb 10Jimmy Chan said:
That’s naive. People have better things to do with their life. Why should a doctor have to waste time learning how to use a new computer or a new app when that time could be spent with a patient, or more time at home with the family, etc.
Jimmy Chan
on 06 Feb 10Jason Powell
on 06 Feb 10Ironically, three of us at our web development firm were having this exact conversation the day before the post hit SVN. We agreed that Windows is a user’s worst nightmare, Macs are a thousand times closer to user friendly, and that perhaps the iPad will just be the computer for “everybody else” because it only does what your average user needs, and nothing more.
It does seem ridiculous that there are still many intelligent people that are required to be challenged by an operating system just because of its design. Average people don’t think like software developers. A primary role of a software developer is to think like an average user, and most are incapable of doing so. I consider that more of a dilemma than the masses being incapable of using their products.
Tathagata
on 08 Feb 10I noted pretty much the same thing the day iPad was launched – iPad – A computer for non-developers
cecil
on 09 Feb 10Hi Excellent post.
Gizmodo also have a couple of blog posts saying why iPad is for Senior and for chicks. Actually iPad is just for everybody. Everybody but Geeks.
I guess there are 2 things with iPad.
1) that’s the end of the love story between Apple and Geeks because Steve Jobs vision has completely hidden the technology behind the usability in the innovation definition. In Hard Core Geeks law, this is sacrilege.
2) This is the first computer device for everyone. In terms of positionning in reminds me the Wii choice : rather than doing the best technical platform for hard core gamers, Nintendo created the best gaming platform for everybody. Hard core gamers laughed about it but hey they only are a minority and Wii has been purchased by everybody else.
More here : On Geeks and Apple and Why iPad seals their divorce.
Gazman
on 09 Feb 10Surely it’s to do with training. By the criteria above, we should all just be able to do everything. I reckon brain surgery should be more user friendly.
This discussion is closed.