The article states that to ship iOS 7 on time they took engineers from OS X 10.9. Does that mean OS X 10.9 will be delayed then?
I understand from an Apple profit perspective it was the right thing to do but, from a personal perspective, I use my Mac every day but my iPad only once or twice a week.
Personally, I don't dislike the skeumorphic designs but don't love them. If Ive were smart (and I'm pretty positive he is a brilliant guy) he would critically look at the UI not from an aesthetic stand-point, but from a functional one first and foremost. Does the UI work as well as it could? Then, look at the aesthetics. Do these aesthetics convey to the user a smart, simple, intuitive, and friendly functionality? What must Apple do with their Apps to convince the customer to use their apps as the primary apps over some 3rd party?
Apple's Native/Standard Apps have always been the backbone of the Apple Ecosystem. They are the personality of OS X / iOS. Don't kid yourself into thinking Apple is/was always some perfect, vanilla interface. It's always been quirky, fun, familiar and friendly. It's the GUI for the "rest of us" not the GUI for the hipster computer geeks.
Yes, some designs are a bit overboard, but they serve their purpose. To familiarize the user with the App using design queues of real-world interfaces. Again, friendly and familiar GUI. Jobs always stressed this. "The intersection of Technology and the Liberal Arts".
Now, perhaps also some of the Skeumorphic elements are a bit dated now. Perhaps using the wood-grain in the Compass App is a bit much, considering when have you seen a compass that's embedded in wood? The Notes, Calendar are fine by me. Who doesn't have a desk calendar or at least has seen one before? We all still use notepads. Perhaps not yellow but you get the idea. Sure Game Center is a bit strange with the Casino style look, but What would you do to make it feel like a gaming center? 8-bit graphics? I didn't think so.
Yes, there will be a time when the majority of users will be living in a world where notepads, desk calendars, leather stitched notebooks are a thing of the past, and the GUI will eventually evolve into that. I think the iTunes App is a great example of how it started off as looking like something familiar, and then evolved into something more suited to it's functionality. And this app is one of the most criticized apps Apple develops. It can be argued that iTunes has improved lately, but for the majority of the time it's been bloated and over-complicated.
What everyone is suggesting Apple do (basically the Apple version of Microsoft Metro UI) is dumbing down what makes Apple's GUI so successful. by successful i mean easy to understand and operate over the competition (like Google and Microsoft etc...) You need to look beyond your own needs and see the bigger picture.
You need to look beyond what you think your own needs are and see the bigger picture, because how many times has Apple proven you wrong about what you thought you wanted in the past?
Great post, and that's what you mean, right? I mean, a specialized pro user could know exactly what he needs from either hardware or a piece of software (from a ground-level standpoint), but think he doesn't care how it's presented until he's shown the Better from Apple.
The further away from that you go on the consumer scale, the less a person really knows what he wants from either hardware or software.
What's "on time?" If it's ready then it's ready. If it's buggy, or not optimized, it's not ready. It could be another year for all I care about timetables, so long as they optimize it and make it faster and more efficient than the last two versions!
Apple's Native/Standard Apps have always been the backbone of the Apple Ecosystem. They are the personality of OS X / iOS. Don't kid yourself into thinking Apple is/was always some perfect, vanilla interface. It's always been quirky, fun, familiar and friendly. It's the GUI for the "rest of us" not the GUI for the hipster computer geeks.
Yep. I think part of the reason for that, is Apple often does things first, so they have to explain the very concept to the user, necessitating real world analogues in the interface. Imitators who come along later benefit from the fact that the idea has already sunk in to the culture.
Not true. Good skeuomorphs have a function. The function of making the UI more intuitive. They can include a lot of things including using a plus sign for creating a new entry, or a notepad and pen like icon.
Bad skeuomorphs have zero function. Like Forstall's shifting shadows on the knobs. It was done merely to look nifty
I was referring to actual application function.
And no, adding a plus sign to a button isn't skeuomorphism. A plus sign isn't a skeuomorph. A pen icon isn't a skeumorph either, it's just an icon. And a skeuomorph can't be an icon.
Comments
The article states that to ship iOS 7 on time they took engineers from OS X 10.9. Does that mean OS X 10.9 will be delayed then?
I understand from an Apple profit perspective it was the right thing to do but, from a personal perspective, I use my Mac every day but my iPad only once or twice a week.
Personally, I don't dislike the skeumorphic designs but don't love them. If Ive were smart (and I'm pretty positive he is a brilliant guy) he would critically look at the UI not from an aesthetic stand-point, but from a functional one first and foremost. Does the UI work as well as it could? Then, look at the aesthetics. Do these aesthetics convey to the user a smart, simple, intuitive, and friendly functionality? What must Apple do with their Apps to convince the customer to use their apps as the primary apps over some 3rd party?
Apple's Native/Standard Apps have always been the backbone of the Apple Ecosystem. They are the personality of OS X / iOS. Don't kid yourself into thinking Apple is/was always some perfect, vanilla interface. It's always been quirky, fun, familiar and friendly. It's the GUI for the "rest of us" not the GUI for the hipster computer geeks.
Yes, some designs are a bit overboard, but they serve their purpose. To familiarize the user with the App using design queues of real-world interfaces. Again, friendly and familiar GUI. Jobs always stressed this. "The intersection of Technology and the Liberal Arts".
Now, perhaps also some of the Skeumorphic elements are a bit dated now. Perhaps using the wood-grain in the Compass App is a bit much, considering when have you seen a compass that's embedded in wood? The Notes, Calendar are fine by me. Who doesn't have a desk calendar or at least has seen one before? We all still use notepads. Perhaps not yellow but you get the idea. Sure Game Center is a bit strange with the Casino style look, but What would you do to make it feel like a gaming center? 8-bit graphics? I didn't think so.
Yes, there will be a time when the majority of users will be living in a world where notepads, desk calendars, leather stitched notebooks are a thing of the past, and the GUI will eventually evolve into that. I think the iTunes App is a great example of how it started off as looking like something familiar, and then evolved into something more suited to it's functionality. And this app is one of the most criticized apps Apple develops. It can be argued that iTunes has improved lately, but for the majority of the time it's been bloated and over-complicated.
What everyone is suggesting Apple do (basically the Apple version of Microsoft Metro UI) is dumbing down what makes Apple's GUI so successful. by successful i mean easy to understand and operate over the competition (like Google and Microsoft etc...) You need to look beyond your own needs and see the bigger picture.
Originally Posted by antkm1
You need to look beyond what you think your own needs are and see the bigger picture, because how many times has Apple proven you wrong about what you thought you wanted in the past?
Great post, and that's what you mean, right? I mean, a specialized pro user could know exactly what he needs from either hardware or a piece of software (from a ground-level standpoint), but think he doesn't care how it's presented until he's shown the Better from Apple.
The further away from that you go on the consumer scale, the less a person really knows what he wants from either hardware or software.
Just give me back the decent WiFi and battery life that the last update I used hosed and I'll be happy.
No according to the inside source responsible for the information in this post
they won't ship until it's right, that's what good companies do
Originally Posted by Darran
No according to the inside source responsible for the information in this post
"Inside" "information".
Despite "of" it? Aghhh, irregardless ....
If only ... Most good and great companies ship products before their time; even wine companies.
Then why are you calling them good or great??
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1
Apple's Native/Standard Apps have always been the backbone of the Apple Ecosystem. They are the personality of OS X / iOS. Don't kid yourself into thinking Apple is/was always some perfect, vanilla interface. It's always been quirky, fun, familiar and friendly. It's the GUI for the "rest of us" not the GUI for the hipster computer geeks.
Yep. I think part of the reason for that, is Apple often does things first, so they have to explain the very concept to the user, necessitating real world analogues in the interface. Imitators who come along later benefit from the fact that the idea has already sunk in to the culture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Not true. Good skeuomorphs have a function. The function of making the UI more intuitive. They can include a lot of things including using a plus sign for creating a new entry, or a notepad and pen like icon.
Bad skeuomorphs have zero function. Like Forstall's shifting shadows on the knobs. It was done merely to look nifty
I was referring to actual application function.
And no, adding a plus sign to a button isn't skeuomorphism. A plus sign isn't a skeuomorph. A pen icon isn't a skeumorph either, it's just an icon. And a skeuomorph can't be an icon.
Shadows on knobs, that's skeuomorphism.
Because they are