I won't know for sure until I get to play with a few of these next month, but my initial reaction is that Microsoft has a superior UI on it's hands.
Their new commercials are dead on. Everyone has their faces stuck in their phones because it takes too long to get at the info you need.
For example...
On my iPhone 4, if I want to see my next appointment, I have to perform the following steps...
(1) Wake up my phone
(2) Unlock my phone
(3) Find my calendar
(4) Open my calendar
On WP7, all you have to do is wake up your phone and your next appt is on your lock screen.
And if I want to take a picture, I have to
(1) Wake up my phone
(2) Unlock my phone
(3) Find my camera app
(4) Open my camera app
But all WP7 phones have a dedicated camera button that bypasses security and gets you right where you need to be.
In many scenarios (like the ones above), WP7 provided 1-click solutions, which I think would be attractive to most people.
On paper, it would seems that the tiles/hubs metaphor is superior to the apps one, especially since the tiles deliver live updates, connecting me to my information faster.
I also liked the Windows Media Center and ATT u-verse integration. $10/mo gets me cable tv on my phone, which is much cheaper than Apple's iTunes a-la carte offerings.
I hate to say it, but for these reasons I think I may be selling my IP4 come November. Apple is way too restrictive with the content I can put on my device.
I think you are confusing (or combining) the WP7 lock screen with the home screen. Here are an Apple Lockscreen and a WP7 Lockscreen side by side.
There is a bit more information on the WP7 Lock Screen, but not much.
At about 1:25 you will see the comparison of home screens (after you've unlocked the phones or pressed the WP7 Start buttton).
If there has been a lot of activity, since you last hit the start button, there will be a noticeable delay while the WP7 badges/tiles are updated. I think that this is acceptable, and preferable to constantly updating while the phone is asleep.
Then you bring up the current information by scrolling and tapping the desired tile-- which may drill-down to 1 or more apps to display the actual detailed info.
If you have a lot of tiles, you need to do a bit of scrolling to get to the tile you want. Then, you tap a tile for more detail. When you exit the app/tile you are returned to the top of the tile list instead of where you were.
Based on this video I did a comparison of how you you navigate for apps/info on the iPhone 4 and WP7
platforms. The WP7 implementation is not quite as elegant as it appears at first glance.
That's why I don't drive. I can't possibly choose which car to buy!
I wish somebody made just one model. That would be the manufacturer for me.
C'mon. Don't be absurd.
That is an idiotic comment, there really isn't that much a need for 9 models with the same basic os, well there's a damn big need for small cars vs. estates vs. cargo ones vs. luxury ones etc. You differentiate for a purpose, not to segregate and balkanize your own market! And I am being absurd?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475
Sounds like you don't really understand advertising. That's cool, don't stress on it.
Sorry but you are a jackass, people write a few paragraphs of arguments against what you said, your response is basically you are idiots and you don't know s... Why bother posting in the first place man? Post in a blog you don't want people to reply.
Lol, I for a moment there I though ms did bring something to the table for a change, even a minor tweak, turns out the lock screen showa an almost exact replica of the apple model (which btw could use this addition, as we've said.). So basically whatever little ground in these interfaces is left for the time being, it's sure isn't ms who is going to cover it.
I'm in two minds about this. Some days I think that Apple will definitely start copying WP7 features into iOS then other days I think that since a lot of features would look like they are hacked-on there is no way Apple would attempt it.
Maybe features that can be copied in isolation will be added (like Game Center, the lock screen info would work as would a built in basic iWork app) and features that would require a complete iOS overhaul (information hubs, live tiles, 3rd party service integration etc) will be left out.
Exactly!
I want to grab my phone, awaken it, and see if anything needs my attention-- or back in my pocket it goes.
I don't really care who they copy, but Apple needs a customizable, activity-triggered lock screen!
I like the Live Tiles concept-- but it needs work (see my other post in this thread:
It is my understanding that what you show above is not the lock screen-- rather the start screen: after the screen has been unlocked, and/or the start button pressed.
.
Dick, I think apple will bring that functionality very soon and i think that's why certain iphone apple apps are conspicuously missing from the ipad. They are going to be widgets.
Btw, I admire apple's steady uncomplicated way of developing and adding ui features. I haven't read anyone say this before but it's not the interface itself for me that's so revolutionary, it's its INTRODUCTION and development so as to be very simple to use without being too technical and then gradually offering more options that won't confuse the users (as they would have had them been pilled on on top of the other from the beginning) and that they'l build on their knowledge of previous usage patterns.
I see nothing but sheer brilliance in their pacing of the releases and how they thought which point would be A and when they should go to B and C. I find the software itself just "great", but I find the vision of it's gradual evolution masterful.
I think most of us agree that iOS needs some improvement in the notifications area, and it makes sense that any such improvements would involve either the home screen or a current notifications screen no more than one swipe away (the screen above the home screen is available, for instance.
Apple's recent hire suggests they see room for improvement as well, and are working on it. Of course, no matter how they implement it there are some here who will claim that they are "copying" either MS or Android. You know, the same people who bristle at the idea that the fact that most every smart phone on the market now looks more or less like the iPhone is anything more than the inevitable working out of obvious progress.
A battery add can have flying freeking bunnies running on batteries but the point it's making, ie are batteries will last longer, is a valid one, ms's point their phone will save them from phonemania on the merits of the product itself is false for very logical reasons (and not by virtue of it even good or bad), the reason being that another smart phone CANT stop you from phone addiction. And people do look for the purpose of the add, and gauge if it could be true or not. If for example my underlying message is some preposterous claim for my product, my batteries will run forever on your devices, people will discard the add no matter how good.
Btw, I admire apple's steady uncomplicated way of developing and adding ui features. I haven't read anyone say this before but it's not the interface itself for me that's so revolutionary, it's its INTRODUCTION and development so as to be very simple to use without being too technical and then gradually offering more options that won't confuse the users (as they would have had them been pilled on on top of the other from the beginning) and that they'l build on their knowledge of previous usage patterns.
You may not mean it, but you make Apple customers sound like children at best, or idiots at worst. You characterize customers as easily confused by features and options, as if their limited intellects will be overwhelmed.
This is, I think, part of your beef against 9 models, which actually is not the case. Only certain phones will be on certain carriers, so the real choice is 2-3 phones, which you may still feel is overwhelming to people.
It is my understanding that what you show above is not the lock screen-- rather the start screen: after the screen has been unlocked, and/or the start button pressed.
I think you may be right.
Which means all this information is one level further down than I thought.
3. The OS itself is pretty great. It has the polish that Android lacks so far, and has the same kind of thoughtfulness and ease-of-use that we?ve come to expect from iOS. There are some glaring omissions -- multitasking and cut-and-paste come to mind -- but the team that built WP7 got lots of little details right, and it?s those details that go a long way towards an exceptional user experience. One caveat: WP7 requires plenty of swiping and scrolling to get around, and it?s conceivable that a lot of users might not love that about it.
Peter is enthusiastic about the attention to detail and the level of polish.
But seems less convinced about the speed of getting to stuff.
Yeah sure ms won't restrict you to the 20 apps they already have available.
Well, I have been thinking about this app issue, and MS is either brilliant, or way off course.
As a precursor, games are not apps.
Apple introduced us to the concept of "There's an app for that." But when you think about it, the job of some (not all) Apps is to cover holes that the OS itself cannot perform.
You want to find directions, there is an app for that, Google maps, because the iOS doesn't do mapping.
You want to share files, there is an App for that - drop box.
You want to take notes there is an app for that - Evernote
You want to collaborate on docs, there is an App for that - Google Docs
OTOH, MS is, in part, trying to design a system where some/many apps are not needed because they are built into the OS - e.g., Bing, Sharepoint, Onenote, Office, the whole MS Live services (which IMO are better than Google's).
So, this locks out certain segments of the developer population which may limit its appeal.
But in a way, WP7 offers a far more tightly integrated and unified ecosystem than Apple does.
Apple introduced us to the concept of "There's an app for that." But when you think about it, the job of some (not all) Apps is to cover holes that the OS itself cannot perform.
You want to find directions, there is an app for that, Google maps, because the iOS doesn't do mapping.
I think there is some imprecise thinking in your post.
iOS is rich in APIs which make the device location (and orientation) aware. And out of the box - Apple provides an application which exploits those APIs and presents them as the Google map application. But the exact same API is used by different apps. The map data in the Twitter App for example uses the OS to provide map data customised for that application.
Windows Phone 7 does exactly the same. An application is launched which displays map info and exploits the location services in the OS.
The only real difference is how the user finds and launches these. The Apple model presents a matrix of application icons - which can be organised by the user to suit their needs. Each icon equates to an application. While the Windows model presents a selection of activity centric hubs - off which are located applications which relate to the theme of the hub.
The two approaches are equivalent ways of doing the same thing. The only relevant question is which method gets you the answers faster, and which is the easiest to understand.
So while I like the tidiness of having this top-level hierarchy. I am not sure how beneficial it is. Because a lot of stuff just does not fit into hub-hierarchies. Is Email a social activity in the People Hub or an Office Hub activity? Would the Twitter app be in the People Hub - or if it a bought app, should I head to the marketplace hub? The WP7 user would have to learn and remember that stuff. The iPhone user has all the functionality presented at the top layer. The only hierarchies are user-created folders.
Some of the work on hubs is clearly a good idea. Having Facebook integration into contacts is smart. But I personally hate Facebook, and I use Twitter for everything. But MS is hardwired into Facebook, and my preference is not one that MS agrees with.
I do think MS deserves a lot of credit for doing something different. Just not convinced that it is a radically better way of solving these problems.
Having Facebook integration into contacts is smart. But I personally hate Facebook, and I use Twitter for everything. But MS is hardwired into Facebook, and my preference is not one that MS agrees with.
I do think MS deserves a lot of credit for doing something different. Just not convinced that it is a radically better way of solving these problems.
The OS has been designed from the ground up to be a data aggregation point. It's actually on the cutting edge of the next web evolution. That said I'm not entirely convinced that WP7 offers a radically better way of solving these problems either.
The concepts are certainly right (and I think other mobile OS's will follow) I'm just not sure the execution is correct.
In any case Facebook is just the first of many 3rd party services to come.
Look at Windows Live for a 3rd party service road map. (Facebook, Youtube, MySpace, WordPress, LinkedIn, Flickr, Photobucket, Hulu, Flixster, Digg, StumbleUpon, Blogger, Dailymotion, TypePad, Daum, Last.fm, LiveJournal, CNET, Break.com, SlideShare, Goodreads, BuddyTV.com, Multiply, iLike, Netlog, Yelp, wow.ya.ru, XING, Dada)
I've got no idea why they decided to snub Twitter though. It seems kind of stupid unless they have a damn good reason.
I've got no idea why they decided to snub Twitter though. It seems kind of stupid unless they have a damn good reason.
Twitter is not like Facebook. @DrSamuelJohnson is not an actual friend of mine. (While some other of my Twitter contacts are.) So the people database metaphor that MS has adopted does not map well to Twitter.
This is my concern about the hubs, there's an imposed top-level-heirarchy and am suspect that not everyone will agree that the WP7 hard-wired layout fits their usage patterns.
But I *am* happy that MS is trying to innovate.
My guess is that Apple's response will be technology from Siri. And things could get really interesting.
The OS has been designed from the ground up to be a data aggregation point. It's actually on the cutting edge of the next web evolution. That said I'm not entirely convinced that WP7 offers a radically better way of solving these problems either.
The concepts are certainly right (and I think other mobile OS's will follow) I'm just not sure the execution is correct.
In any case Facebook is just the first of many 3rd party services to come.
Look at Windows Live for a 3rd party service road map. (Facebook, Youtube, MySpace, WordPress, LinkedIn, Flickr, Photobucket, Hulu, Flixster, Digg, StumbleUpon, Blogger, Dailymotion, TypePad, Daum, Last.fm, LiveJournal, CNET, Break.com, SlideShare, Goodreads, BuddyTV.com, Multiply, iLike, Netlog, Yelp, wow.ya.ru, XING, Dada)
I've got no idea why they decided to snub Twitter though. It seems kind of stupid unless they have a damn good reason.
I agree with this!
The Active Tiles/hub concept is a good concept-- a step forward in usability.
It appears to be well implemented -- trading off "constant updates" for "update when awake" to conserve battery. As technology improves, or user needs dictate, MS can allow some degree of "constant updates".
It will be interesting to see how users setup their tiles-- how many tiles and content of each. I suspect. that a kind of "natural selection" will occur and most uses will evolve to 5-10 tiles -- with some tiles acting like folders (rather than notification aggregators).
In some ways, it's like the folders concept on iOS-- It's better than not having folders, but it's not quite right (the way it's implemented).
I also think MS will add some navigation improvements:
-- App Search
-- Folders
-- Return to where you were on app exit
-- fast app (task) switching
Some of my thoughts on UI elements:
-- it doesn't mater who invented it
-- it doesn't matter who copies who
-- it does matter how it is implemented
-- it does matter how it "fits in" with other elements
If a less than perfect execution of Active Tiles, Desktop, Folders, multitasking... moves the ball forward, I am in favor of trying it!
Twitter is not like Facebook. @DrSamuelJohnson is not an actual friend of mine. (While some other of my Twitter contacts are.) So the people database metaphor that MS has adopted does not map well to Twitter.
This is my concern about the hubs, there's an imposed top-level-heirarchy and am suspect that not everyone will agree that the WP7 hard-wired layout fits their usage patterns.
But I *am* happy that MS is trying to innovate.
My guess is that Apple's response will be technology from Siri. And things could get really interesting.
C.
I am not a big user of any of the social apps.
As a friend's father answered when she asked him why he wasn't "following" her -- "I'm just not inerested in everything you do!"
But, I do think the idea of an aggregator is useful if it can be tailored (filtered) to, say:
-- direct messages
-- certain people
-- certain types of activity e.g. Travel milestones
The way I use Twitter is like some people use RSS. It delivers a feed of reliably and consistently interesting information.
That's mostly how I use twitter. I almost don't post there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475
I only get single alerts. It might have something to do with being sync'd to Exchange?
I'd say probably yes, the protocol might be limited. You might find preferences somewhere in Exchange to change the alert lead time. The iPhone allows two alerts and you can set them at a wide range of lead time.
It would be nice if there was a way to make the lock screen today's event calendar.
It might be my age but I am Dick on this one. I understand Facebook but do not use it. Twitter I do not really get for 99% of he time. Yes it was great for Iran but for most of the time I do not see the point as I am no interested in the minutes of people's thoughts or lives. To me it just seems largely narcissistic of hey look at me.
If I need to let my friends and family know something I send an email text or god forbid I make a phone call. That is just me though
It might be my age but I am Dick on this one. I understand Facebook but do not use it. Twitter I do not really get for 99% of he time. Yes it was great for Iran but for most of the time I do not see the point as I am no interested in the minutes of people's thoughts or lives. To me it just seems largely narcissistic of hey look at me.
If I need to let my friends and family know something I send an email text or god forbid I make a phone call. That is just me though
Twitter is a tool that can reflect the needs of its users, but what you get depends on your choices. No one is asking if you put mustard on your hamburger. Yours is a popular perception, but what a person posts on Twitter varies based on the person, your description is but a subset of the types of people that post. Some people are like what you describe, but I don't know about most. I tend to follow people like Grant Imahara, he often posts funny or interesting photos on set of Mythbusters, or a news organization or web sites that post headlines the instant a story article is available (like Carniphage was saying, an RSS substitute). Some people just post funny things. I followed a trade show and an air show, to get up to the minute news approaching and during the event. Neil DeGrasse Tyson posts informative and interesting cosmological insights. AmazonMP3 has a feed telling you what MP3 albums are on sale.
Comments
I won't know for sure until I get to play with a few of these next month, but my initial reaction is that Microsoft has a superior UI on it's hands.
Their new commercials are dead on. Everyone has their faces stuck in their phones because it takes too long to get at the info you need.
For example...
On my iPhone 4, if I want to see my next appointment, I have to perform the following steps...
(1) Wake up my phone
(2) Unlock my phone
(3) Find my calendar
(4) Open my calendar
On WP7, all you have to do is wake up your phone and your next appt is on your lock screen.
And if I want to take a picture, I have to
(1) Wake up my phone
(2) Unlock my phone
(3) Find my camera app
(4) Open my camera app
But all WP7 phones have a dedicated camera button that bypasses security and gets you right where you need to be.
In many scenarios (like the ones above), WP7 provided 1-click solutions, which I think would be attractive to most people.
On paper, it would seems that the tiles/hubs metaphor is superior to the apps one, especially since the tiles deliver live updates, connecting me to my information faster.
I also liked the Windows Media Center and ATT u-verse integration. $10/mo gets me cable tv on my phone, which is much cheaper than Apple's iTunes a-la carte offerings.
I hate to say it, but for these reasons I think I may be selling my IP4 come November. Apple is way too restrictive with the content I can put on my device.
I think you are confusing (or combining) the WP7 lock screen with the home screen. Here are an Apple Lockscreen and a WP7 Lockscreen side by side.
There is a bit more information on the WP7 Lock Screen, but not much.
Go to the video at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gngr3...layer_embedded
At about 1:25 you will see the comparison of home screens (after you've unlocked the phones or pressed the WP7 Start buttton).
If there has been a lot of activity, since you last hit the start button, there will be a noticeable delay while the WP7 badges/tiles are updated. I think that this is acceptable, and preferable to constantly updating while the phone is asleep.
Then you bring up the current information by scrolling and tapping the desired tile-- which may drill-down to 1 or more apps to display the actual detailed info.
If you have a lot of tiles, you need to do a bit of scrolling to get to the tile you want. Then, you tap a tile for more detail. When you exit the app/tile you are returned to the top of the tile list instead of where you were.
Based on this video I did a comparison of how you you navigate for apps/info on the iPhone 4 and WP7
platforms. The WP7 implementation is not quite as elegant as it appears at first glance.
See the comparison here:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...&postcount=176
Finally, ATT U-Verse is available for the iPhone.
.
That's why I don't drive. I can't possibly choose which car to buy!
I wish somebody made just one model. That would be the manufacturer for me.
C'mon. Don't be absurd.
That is an idiotic comment, there really isn't that much a need for 9 models with the same basic os, well there's a damn big need for small cars vs. estates vs. cargo ones vs. luxury ones etc. You differentiate for a purpose, not to segregate and balkanize your own market! And I am being absurd?
Sounds like you don't really understand advertising. That's cool, don't stress on it.
Sorry but you are a jackass, people write a few paragraphs of arguments against what you said, your response is basically you are idiots and you don't know s... Why bother posting in the first place man? Post in a blog you don't want people to reply.
I think you are confusing (or combining) the WP7 lock screen with the home screen(...)
See the comparison here:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...&postcount=176
.
Lol, I for a moment there I though ms did bring something to the table for a change, even a minor tweak, turns out the lock screen showa an almost exact replica of the apple model (which btw could use this addition, as we've said.). So basically whatever little ground in these interfaces is left for the time being, it's sure isn't ms who is going to cover it.
Less stop and stare. More glance and go?
I'm in two minds about this. Some days I think that Apple will definitely start copying WP7 features into iOS then other days I think that since a lot of features would look like they are hacked-on there is no way Apple would attempt it.
Maybe features that can be copied in isolation will be added (like Game Center, the lock screen info would work as would a built in basic iWork app) and features that would require a complete iOS overhaul (information hubs, live tiles, 3rd party service integration etc) will be left out.
Exactly!
I want to grab my phone, awaken it, and see if anything needs my attention-- or back in my pocket it goes.
I don't really care who they copy, but Apple needs a customizable, activity-triggered lock screen!
I like the Live Tiles concept-- but it needs work (see my other post in this thread:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...&postcount=176
.
It is my understanding that what you show above is not the lock screen-- rather the start screen: after the screen has been unlocked, and/or the start button pressed.
.
Dick, I think apple will bring that functionality very soon and i think that's why certain iphone apple apps are conspicuously missing from the ipad. They are going to be widgets.
Btw, I admire apple's steady uncomplicated way of developing and adding ui features. I haven't read anyone say this before but it's not the interface itself for me that's so revolutionary, it's its INTRODUCTION and development so as to be very simple to use without being too technical and then gradually offering more options that won't confuse the users (as they would have had them been pilled on on top of the other from the beginning) and that they'l build on their knowledge of previous usage patterns.
I see nothing but sheer brilliance in their pacing of the releases and how they thought which point would be A and when they should go to B and C. I find the software itself just "great", but I find the vision of it's gradual evolution masterful.
I think most of us agree that iOS needs some improvement in the notifications area, and it makes sense that any such improvements would involve either the home screen or a current notifications screen no more than one swipe away (the screen above the home screen is available, for instance.
Apple's recent hire suggests they see room for improvement as well, and are working on it. Of course, no matter how they implement it there are some here who will claim that they are "copying" either MS or Android. You know, the same people who bristle at the idea that the fact that most every smart phone on the market now looks more or less like the iPhone is anything more than the inevitable working out of obvious progress.
A battery add can have flying freeking bunnies running on batteries but the point it's making, ie are batteries will last longer, is a valid one, ms's point their phone will save them from phonemania on the merits of the product itself is false for very logical reasons (and not by virtue of it even good or bad), the reason being that another smart phone CANT stop you from phone addiction. And people do look for the purpose of the add, and gauge if it could be true or not. If for example my underlying message is some preposterous claim for my product, my batteries will run forever on your devices, people will discard the add no matter how good.
These points were addressed in subsequent posts.
Btw, I admire apple's steady uncomplicated way of developing and adding ui features. I haven't read anyone say this before but it's not the interface itself for me that's so revolutionary, it's its INTRODUCTION and development so as to be very simple to use without being too technical and then gradually offering more options that won't confuse the users (as they would have had them been pilled on on top of the other from the beginning) and that they'l build on their knowledge of previous usage patterns.
You may not mean it, but you make Apple customers sound like children at best, or idiots at worst. You characterize customers as easily confused by features and options, as if their limited intellects will be overwhelmed.
This is, I think, part of your beef against 9 models, which actually is not the case. Only certain phones will be on certain carriers, so the real choice is 2-3 phones, which you may still feel is overwhelming to people.
It is my understanding that what you show above is not the lock screen-- rather the start screen: after the screen has been unlocked, and/or the start button pressed.
I think you may be right.
Which means all this information is one level further down than I thought.
C.
I thought point 3 was quite revealing.
3. The OS itself is pretty great. It has the polish that Android lacks so far, and has the same kind of thoughtfulness and ease-of-use that we?ve come to expect from iOS. There are some glaring omissions -- multitasking and cut-and-paste come to mind -- but the team that built WP7 got lots of little details right, and it?s those details that go a long way towards an exceptional user experience. One caveat: WP7 requires plenty of swiping and scrolling to get around, and it?s conceivable that a lot of users might not love that about it.
Peter is enthusiastic about the attention to detail and the level of polish.
But seems less convinced about the speed of getting to stuff.
C.
Yeah sure ms won't restrict you to the 20 apps they already have available.
Well, I have been thinking about this app issue, and MS is either brilliant, or way off course.
As a precursor, games are not apps.
Apple introduced us to the concept of "There's an app for that." But when you think about it, the job of some (not all) Apps is to cover holes that the OS itself cannot perform.
You want to find directions, there is an app for that, Google maps, because the iOS doesn't do mapping.
You want to share files, there is an App for that - drop box.
You want to take notes there is an app for that - Evernote
You want to collaborate on docs, there is an App for that - Google Docs
OTOH, MS is, in part, trying to design a system where some/many apps are not needed because they are built into the OS - e.g., Bing, Sharepoint, Onenote, Office, the whole MS Live services (which IMO are better than Google's).
So, this locks out certain segments of the developer population which may limit its appeal.
But in a way, WP7 offers a far more tightly integrated and unified ecosystem than Apple does.
Some may like this, and some may not.
Apple introduced us to the concept of "There's an app for that." But when you think about it, the job of some (not all) Apps is to cover holes that the OS itself cannot perform.
You want to find directions, there is an app for that, Google maps, because the iOS doesn't do mapping.
I think there is some imprecise thinking in your post.
iOS is rich in APIs which make the device location (and orientation) aware. And out of the box - Apple provides an application which exploits those APIs and presents them as the Google map application. But the exact same API is used by different apps. The map data in the Twitter App for example uses the OS to provide map data customised for that application.
Windows Phone 7 does exactly the same. An application is launched which displays map info and exploits the location services in the OS.
The only real difference is how the user finds and launches these. The Apple model presents a matrix of application icons - which can be organised by the user to suit their needs. Each icon equates to an application. While the Windows model presents a selection of activity centric hubs - off which are located applications which relate to the theme of the hub.
The two approaches are equivalent ways of doing the same thing. The only relevant question is which method gets you the answers faster, and which is the easiest to understand.
So while I like the tidiness of having this top-level hierarchy. I am not sure how beneficial it is. Because a lot of stuff just does not fit into hub-hierarchies. Is Email a social activity in the People Hub or an Office Hub activity? Would the Twitter app be in the People Hub - or if it a bought app, should I head to the marketplace hub? The WP7 user would have to learn and remember that stuff. The iPhone user has all the functionality presented at the top layer. The only hierarchies are user-created folders.
Some of the work on hubs is clearly a good idea. Having Facebook integration into contacts is smart. But I personally hate Facebook, and I use Twitter for everything. But MS is hardwired into Facebook, and my preference is not one that MS agrees with.
I do think MS deserves a lot of credit for doing something different. Just not convinced that it is a radically better way of solving these problems.
C.
Having Facebook integration into contacts is smart. But I personally hate Facebook, and I use Twitter for everything. But MS is hardwired into Facebook, and my preference is not one that MS agrees with.
I do think MS deserves a lot of credit for doing something different. Just not convinced that it is a radically better way of solving these problems.
The OS has been designed from the ground up to be a data aggregation point. It's actually on the cutting edge of the next web evolution. That said I'm not entirely convinced that WP7 offers a radically better way of solving these problems either.
The concepts are certainly right (and I think other mobile OS's will follow) I'm just not sure the execution is correct.
In any case Facebook is just the first of many 3rd party services to come.
Look at Windows Live for a 3rd party service road map. (Facebook, Youtube, MySpace, WordPress, LinkedIn, Flickr, Photobucket, Hulu, Flixster, Digg, StumbleUpon, Blogger, Dailymotion, TypePad, Daum, Last.fm, LiveJournal, CNET, Break.com, SlideShare, Goodreads, BuddyTV.com, Multiply, iLike, Netlog, Yelp, wow.ya.ru, XING, Dada)
I've got no idea why they decided to snub Twitter though. It seems kind of stupid unless they have a damn good reason.
I've got no idea why they decided to snub Twitter though. It seems kind of stupid unless they have a damn good reason.
Twitter is not like Facebook. @DrSamuelJohnson is not an actual friend of mine. (While some other of my Twitter contacts are.) So the people database metaphor that MS has adopted does not map well to Twitter.
This is my concern about the hubs, there's an imposed top-level-heirarchy and am suspect that not everyone will agree that the WP7 hard-wired layout fits their usage patterns.
But I *am* happy that MS is trying to innovate.
My guess is that Apple's response will be technology from Siri. And things could get really interesting.
C.
The OS has been designed from the ground up to be a data aggregation point. It's actually on the cutting edge of the next web evolution. That said I'm not entirely convinced that WP7 offers a radically better way of solving these problems either.
The concepts are certainly right (and I think other mobile OS's will follow) I'm just not sure the execution is correct.
In any case Facebook is just the first of many 3rd party services to come.
Look at Windows Live for a 3rd party service road map. (Facebook, Youtube, MySpace, WordPress, LinkedIn, Flickr, Photobucket, Hulu, Flixster, Digg, StumbleUpon, Blogger, Dailymotion, TypePad, Daum, Last.fm, LiveJournal, CNET, Break.com, SlideShare, Goodreads, BuddyTV.com, Multiply, iLike, Netlog, Yelp, wow.ya.ru, XING, Dada)
I've got no idea why they decided to snub Twitter though. It seems kind of stupid unless they have a damn good reason.
I agree with this!
The Active Tiles/hub concept is a good concept-- a step forward in usability.
It appears to be well implemented -- trading off "constant updates" for "update when awake" to conserve battery. As technology improves, or user needs dictate, MS can allow some degree of "constant updates".
It will be interesting to see how users setup their tiles-- how many tiles and content of each. I suspect. that a kind of "natural selection" will occur and most uses will evolve to 5-10 tiles -- with some tiles acting like folders (rather than notification aggregators).
In some ways, it's like the folders concept on iOS-- It's better than not having folders, but it's not quite right (the way it's implemented).
I also think MS will add some navigation improvements:
-- App Search
-- Folders
-- Return to where you were on app exit
-- fast app (task) switching
Some of my thoughts on UI elements:
-- it doesn't mater who invented it
-- it doesn't matter who copies who
-- it does matter how it is implemented
-- it does matter how it "fits in" with other elements
If a less than perfect execution of Active Tiles, Desktop, Folders, multitasking... moves the ball forward, I am in favor of trying it!
.
Twitter is not like Facebook. @DrSamuelJohnson is not an actual friend of mine. (While some other of my Twitter contacts are.) So the people database metaphor that MS has adopted does not map well to Twitter.
This is my concern about the hubs, there's an imposed top-level-heirarchy and am suspect that not everyone will agree that the WP7 hard-wired layout fits their usage patterns.
But I *am* happy that MS is trying to innovate.
My guess is that Apple's response will be technology from Siri. And things could get really interesting.
C.
I am not a big user of any of the social apps.
As a friend's father answered when she asked him why he wasn't "following" her -- "I'm just not inerested in everything you do!"
But, I do think the idea of an aggregator is useful if it can be tailored (filtered) to, say:
-- direct messages
-- certain people
-- certain types of activity e.g. Travel milestones
.
I am not a big user of any of the social apps.
.
The way I use Twitter is like some people use RSS. It delivers a feed of reliably and consistently interesting information.
For me it's more "News" than "Social". But there isn't a News hub on WP7. It's that rigidity I am skeptical about.
@carniphage
The way I use Twitter is like some people use RSS. It delivers a feed of reliably and consistently interesting information.
That's mostly how I use twitter. I almost don't post there.
I only get single alerts. It might have something to do with being sync'd to Exchange?
I'd say probably yes, the protocol might be limited. You might find preferences somewhere in Exchange to change the alert lead time. The iPhone allows two alerts and you can set them at a wide range of lead time.
It would be nice if there was a way to make the lock screen today's event calendar.
The way I use Twitter is like some people use RSS. It delivers a feed of reliably and consistently interesting information.
For me it's more "News" than "Social". But there isn't a News hub on WP7. It's that rigidity I am skeptical about.
@carniphage
It might be my age but I am Dick on this one. I understand Facebook but do not use it. Twitter I do not really get for 99% of he time. Yes it was great for Iran but for most of the time I do not see the point as I am no interested in the minutes of people's thoughts or lives. To me it just seems largely narcissistic of hey look at me.
If I need to let my friends and family know something I send an email text or god forbid I make a phone call. That is just me though
It might be my age but I am Dick on this one. I understand Facebook but do not use it. Twitter I do not really get for 99% of he time. Yes it was great for Iran but for most of the time I do not see the point as I am no interested in the minutes of people's thoughts or lives. To me it just seems largely narcissistic of hey look at me.
If I need to let my friends and family know something I send an email text or god forbid I make a phone call. That is just me though
Twitter is a tool that can reflect the needs of its users, but what you get depends on your choices. No one is asking if you put mustard on your hamburger. Yours is a popular perception, but what a person posts on Twitter varies based on the person, your description is but a subset of the types of people that post. Some people are like what you describe, but I don't know about most. I tend to follow people like Grant Imahara, he often posts funny or interesting photos on set of Mythbusters, or a news organization or web sites that post headlines the instant a story article is available (like Carniphage was saying, an RSS substitute). Some people just post funny things. I followed a trade show and an air show, to get up to the minute news approaching and during the event. Neil DeGrasse Tyson posts informative and interesting cosmological insights. AmazonMP3 has a feed telling you what MP3 albums are on sale.