In windows, common tasks can be accomplished in many different ways. One can use the method that one prefers.
One can right click, or use a pulldown menu, or an icon in a toolbar.
Indeed, it takes less thought, because it just works, pretty much no matter what method you prefer. Cryptic memorized "One-method" ways of doing things are inferior, IMO.
The fact that you use Windows as your example of good UI design explains a great deal.
In fact, Windows uses about the worst possible UI design. If one started from the presumption that doing it the Windows way is always wrong, they wouldn't be too far off.
Ignoring that, saying that something is right just because someone else does it that way is a silly circular argument. Apple consistently pushes for simple, clean solutions -- and their incredible user satisfaction scores support that. It doesn't mean that it's better for everyone, but it does support the contention that it's a very viable strategy. Given that, it only makes sense to continue that strategy rather than simply abandon it every time a small group of whiners suggests something different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
Ignoring that startlingly bad UI design for a moment ... why exactly would you want such instant and direct access to Bluetooth/3G/WiFi/GPS settings?
I've never met or heard of anyone who wants this (which is why it will never be in the OS), but I'm curious why whatever tiny group of individuals that *do* want it, do so.
The wireless networking features are all automatic, as they are in most phones. Why does anyone want to take a feature that pretty much works flawlessly in an automatic way, and manage it themselves? Not only that, why would it be so damned important to manage these automatic services that you'd want to have it on your main screen like that with a system wide gesture to implement it?
The only possible reason I can see is paranoia or trying to save battery life, but given the battery of the iPhone is probably the best in the industry, I'm leaning towards the reason being simple paranoia (like turning off GPS so "Big Brother" can't track you or whatever).
It just seems incredibly weird to me that you want this feature so badly.
Not weird at all - you're just not getting the mentality.
There are 3 groups of users who are adamantly opposed to Apple's way of doing things:
1. People who just oppose everything Apple does on general principles. They may not have any logic or reasoning on their side, but they'll completely oppose ANYTHING that is done Apple's way.
2. People who have a vested interest in doing things the Windows (or Blackberry) way and can't accept anything different. They may be users who are scared to death to learn something new or IT people who make their livings because the complexity of other systems gives them a demi-God role. Either way, they are opposed to change.
3. A much smaller, but more vocal number of people who are pure geeks. They want 100% access to every item of the hardware and software so they can tweak away. Apple's system is designed for the average user and tweakability is a little more hidden. I don't have any problem with people in this group. The problem I DO have is their belief that their group is large enough to matter to Apple - and their belief that their wishes are more important than the millions of non-geeks.
Ignoring that startlingly bad UI design for a moment ... why exactly would you want such instant and direct access to Bluetooth/3G/WiFi/GPS settings?
I've never met or heard of anyone who wants this (which is why it will never be in the OS), but I'm curious why whatever tiny group of individuals that *do* want it, do so.
The wireless networking features are all automatic, as they are in most phones. Why does anyone want to take a feature that pretty much works flawlessly in an automatic way, and manage it themselves? Not only that, why would it be so damned important to manage these automatic services that you'd want to have it on your main screen like that with a system wide gesture to implement it?
The only possible reason I can see is paranoia or trying to save battery life, but given the battery of the iPhone is probably the best in the industry, I'm leaning towards the reason being simple paranoia (like turning off GPS so "Big Brother" can't track you or whatever).
It just seems incredibly weird to me that you want this feature so badly.
Tethering is really bad. Most iPhone users don't really know about how clumsy it is since they have AT&T and don't even have that option, or simply don't need it. When tethering is enabled, your iPhone tethers whenever you plug it in to your computer, even if you just want to sync your device. Because of this you would want to keep tethering off until you want want to use it. Unfortunately turning tethering on and off is rather time consuming and requires you to navigate multiple levels of settings before getting the option to turn it off or on. I would much appreciate a quicker way of doing it.
Funny that people who desperately want their computer to be able to achieve the same thing a thousand different ways are happy to be able to sit in a car that will have a steering wheel to pick direction, push the pedal on the right to make it go, the one in the middle to make it stop and the one on the left to change gear!
I dread the day that you become allowed to pick which pedal makes a car stop
Well I think there's a difference between customizing a phone and a car. There aren't federal standards on how a UI on a phone should work. I must say though, and I know you didn't do it, but today is the first time I have been quoted so much. Oh well. After all, the point of these boards are to share opinions.
All this means is that Jobs knows what Fanbois want. MS market share is much higher than Apple's so it would seem that MS knows more about what the average consumer wants.
Although Apple seems to have the market cornered when it comes to MP3 players, so yes, Apple knows what consumers want when it comes to an MP3 player. Computers and phones? not so much.
Looks to me like Apple knows MORE about what consumers want than Microsoft, as evidenced by the fact that people spend more money buying Apple stuff than they do Microsoft stuff.
As for phones: dude, open your eyes and look around. Everybody and their brother is chasing the iPhone in terms of look-and-feel, the App store, etc. Every new phone release is the new "iPhone killer" - except that the iPhone isn't dead yet. More people want the iPhone OS on their phones than any other smartphone OS ( http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic..._market_share/ ). To say that Apple doesn't know what consumers want in their phones is to ignore every single relevant fact about what phones actual consumers really buy.
Yes, there are more Windows computers sold than Macs, by a lot. But we all know why - Macs aren't cheap (interestingly, Microsoft's net and gross profit margins are both higher than Apple's). Of course, MS doesn't sell computers, just the OS. But Apple gets 91% of all sales of computers over $1,000 - dude, 91%! - which covers just about all of Apple's line. When you spend more than $1,000 on a computer, you are 10 times more likely to buy an Apple! That's too many sales to be brainwashing, that's recognition that value is different from price. That's people choosing to spend more money to get an Apple machine. And Apple has the highest customer satisfaction in the industry, which means people are not only spending more money but are happy with what they get for their money.
All this means is that Jobs knows what Fanbois want. MS market share is much higher than Apple's so it would seem that MS knows more about what the average consumer wants.
Although Apple seems to have the market cornered when it comes to MP3 players, so yes, Apple knows what consumers want when it comes to an MP3 player. Computers and phones? not so much.
Apple has a higher market share than Microsoft in several areas, the biggest of which would be MP3 players and phones. However, there are software areas where Apple leads despite have a lower market share for the platform (Final Cut).
However there's a difference between knowing what the average consumer wants and having market share as a goal.
A great example that people seem to forget is that it was Apple with a GUI OS versus Microsoft with a command-line OS, where Microsoft had much higher market share, but consumers *wanted* a GUI OS. Thus, Microsoft adopted a GUI approach.
PCs with Windows may sell more in volume than the Mac today, but is volume really the right measurement? Do consumers not want a BMW or other premium automobile? Take a look at Apple and its profit as a computer maker and compare that to others. Compare the satisfaction ratings. Read the surveys on why people have PCs instead of Macs...IT policy, price, software lock-in, are all higher on the list than personal preference of OS.
Also, it's funny you used the word "consumer". Microsoft does much better in enterprise markets than consumer markets. They've traditionally lost money in areas that are consumer only. Their record here is quite poor indeed. It's not a coincidence that they've been focusing so much on consumer products and services during this past decade while their market cap has fallen from $590 billion to a little over $250 billion.
Meanwhile, Apple, who has been focused on consumer products and services, has had their market cap go from $16 billion to over $215 billion during the same time period.
In the past decade, what has Microsoft produced that's been a hit or at least desirable by consumers (as opposed to enterprise) other than the Xbox? (and even the Xbox still has a net loss overall).
Ignoring that startlingly bad UI design for a moment ... why exactly would you want such instant and direct access to Bluetooth/3G/WiFi/GPS settings?
I don't need fast access to data signaling, but I would like quick access to brightness controls. Auto really doesn't do a good job, at night I don't need anything more than the lowest setting, and in daylight, it needs to be at 50% or so to be useful.
The topic of this thread is OS4, and not what is wrong with a particular poster.
Stop trying to hijack the thread, Troll.
Good job backseat moderating. Also, I understand "troll" is an amazing new word you learnt recently, how about you stop calling everyone that disagrees with you one?
Well I think there's a difference between customizing a phone and a car. There aren't federal standards on how a UI on a phone should work. I must say though, and I know you didn't do it, but today is the first time I have been quoted so much. Oh well. After all, the point of these boards are to share opinions.
Is there a federal standard for the car controls? I thought they were a de facto standard as opposed to de juro.
To me this is matter of convention - the thing with computer UI's is that people have got used to having a lot of ways to do things, that's different to whether or not they need different ways to do things.
One of the good things about Android, iPhone, Win Mobile etc. all existing side by side is that it gives us, the consumers, the chance to pick the type we like the most.
I don't need fast access to data signaling, but I would like quick access to brightness controls. Auto really doesn't do a good job, at night I don't need anything more than the lowest setting, and in daylight, it needs to be at 50% or so to be useful.
The problem that you don't get is that YOU might want an easy way to change the brightness.
Someone else might want an easy way to change the Bluetooth settings.
Someone else might want an easy way to turn email accounts on and off.
Someone else might want an easy way to enable or disable airplane mode.
And so on.
There are an infinite number of choices. Apple has an enormous UI research group that studies large numbers of users and comes up with what they perceive is the best balance between simplicity and usability. It won't be optimum for any one person, but on balance, it is designed as an optimum.
As soon as you start adding and removing features, you go away from the optimum - very quickly. Apple's history is very, very good - as shown by their exceptional customer service experience.
isaidso has been given an infraction point for overstepping the line with his earlier post. The offending post has been edited to tone it down a bit. I've deleted various posts "debating" whether or not he is a "troll" (he isn't) and should be banned.
Please do not accuse people of being trolls in the middle of a thread. Report the post (small red exclamation mark at bottom-left of the post in question) if you think it's that bad, but please just stick to the subject of the thread in your posts.
How would an iPhone user manage multiple running apps?
To will keeps it consistent with the current GUI, an easy way to manage multiple running apps is to press the home screen then swipe left (currently the spotlight screen) to see a screen of all running apps (shaking but no "x"). To close an app, press-hold the icon until an "x" next to the icon appears then click to close or move them around to prioritize them.
For managing pages of apps... it would be simple to just to allow for more than 16 apps to fit on each screen. User simply scroll up to see additional apps. No limit (only by memory) on number of apps per screen.
Comments
In windows, common tasks can be accomplished in many different ways. One can use the method that one prefers.
One can right click, or use a pulldown menu, or an icon in a toolbar.
Indeed, it takes less thought, because it just works, pretty much no matter what method you prefer. Cryptic memorized "One-method" ways of doing things are inferior, IMO.
The fact that you use Windows as your example of good UI design explains a great deal.
In fact, Windows uses about the worst possible UI design. If one started from the presumption that doing it the Windows way is always wrong, they wouldn't be too far off.
Ignoring that, saying that something is right just because someone else does it that way is a silly circular argument. Apple consistently pushes for simple, clean solutions -- and their incredible user satisfaction scores support that. It doesn't mean that it's better for everyone, but it does support the contention that it's a very viable strategy. Given that, it only makes sense to continue that strategy rather than simply abandon it every time a small group of whiners suggests something different.
Ignoring that startlingly bad UI design for a moment ... why exactly would you want such instant and direct access to Bluetooth/3G/WiFi/GPS settings?
I've never met or heard of anyone who wants this (which is why it will never be in the OS), but I'm curious why whatever tiny group of individuals that *do* want it, do so.
The wireless networking features are all automatic, as they are in most phones. Why does anyone want to take a feature that pretty much works flawlessly in an automatic way, and manage it themselves? Not only that, why would it be so damned important to manage these automatic services that you'd want to have it on your main screen like that with a system wide gesture to implement it?
The only possible reason I can see is paranoia or trying to save battery life, but given the battery of the iPhone is probably the best in the industry, I'm leaning towards the reason being simple paranoia (like turning off GPS so "Big Brother" can't track you or whatever).
It just seems incredibly weird to me that you want this feature so badly.
Not weird at all - you're just not getting the mentality.
There are 3 groups of users who are adamantly opposed to Apple's way of doing things:
1. People who just oppose everything Apple does on general principles. They may not have any logic or reasoning on their side, but they'll completely oppose ANYTHING that is done Apple's way.
2. People who have a vested interest in doing things the Windows (or Blackberry) way and can't accept anything different. They may be users who are scared to death to learn something new or IT people who make their livings because the complexity of other systems gives them a demi-God role. Either way, they are opposed to change.
3. A much smaller, but more vocal number of people who are pure geeks. They want 100% access to every item of the hardware and software so they can tweak away. Apple's system is designed for the average user and tweakability is a little more hidden. I don't have any problem with people in this group. The problem I DO have is their belief that their group is large enough to matter to Apple - and their belief that their wishes are more important than the millions of non-geeks.
Ignoring that startlingly bad UI design for a moment ... why exactly would you want such instant and direct access to Bluetooth/3G/WiFi/GPS settings?
I've never met or heard of anyone who wants this (which is why it will never be in the OS), but I'm curious why whatever tiny group of individuals that *do* want it, do so.
The wireless networking features are all automatic, as they are in most phones. Why does anyone want to take a feature that pretty much works flawlessly in an automatic way, and manage it themselves? Not only that, why would it be so damned important to manage these automatic services that you'd want to have it on your main screen like that with a system wide gesture to implement it?
The only possible reason I can see is paranoia or trying to save battery life, but given the battery of the iPhone is probably the best in the industry, I'm leaning towards the reason being simple paranoia (like turning off GPS so "Big Brother" can't track you or whatever).
It just seems incredibly weird to me that you want this feature so badly.
Tethering is really bad. Most iPhone users don't really know about how clumsy it is since they have AT&T and don't even have that option, or simply don't need it. When tethering is enabled, your iPhone tethers whenever you plug it in to your computer, even if you just want to sync your device. Because of this you would want to keep tethering off until you want want to use it. Unfortunately turning tethering on and off is rather time consuming and requires you to navigate multiple levels of settings before getting the option to turn it off or on. I would much appreciate a quicker way of doing it.
Posters like this should be banned immediately.
To be fair you are more than annoying - maybe you should be banned ?
And therein lies the argument.
Funny that people who desperately want their computer to be able to achieve the same thing a thousand different ways are happy to be able to sit in a car that will have a steering wheel to pick direction, push the pedal on the right to make it go, the one in the middle to make it stop and the one on the left to change gear!
I dread the day that you become allowed to pick which pedal makes a car stop
Well I think there's a difference between customizing a phone and a car. There aren't federal standards on how a UI on a phone should work. I must say though, and I know you didn't do it, but today is the first time I have been quoted so much. Oh well. After all, the point of these boards are to share opinions.
All this means is that Jobs knows what Fanbois want. MS market share is much higher than Apple's so it would seem that MS knows more about what the average consumer wants.
Although Apple seems to have the market cornered when it comes to MP3 players, so yes, Apple knows what consumers want when it comes to an MP3 player. Computers and phones? not so much.
http://247wallst.com/2010/04/06/appl...crosofts-soon/
Apple's market cap is $208B, one place behind Microsoft's $257B and Exxon Mobil's $322B.
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/02/08/micro...ments-for-now/
Apple has $39.8B CASH in the bank; Microsoft has $40.4B.
http://ycharts.com/search?q=MSFT%20v...APL&c=revenues
and Apple appears to have more revenue.
Looks to me like Apple knows MORE about what consumers want than Microsoft, as evidenced by the fact that people spend more money buying Apple stuff than they do Microsoft stuff.
As for phones: dude, open your eyes and look around. Everybody and their brother is chasing the iPhone in terms of look-and-feel, the App store, etc. Every new phone release is the new "iPhone killer" - except that the iPhone isn't dead yet. More people want the iPhone OS on their phones than any other smartphone OS ( http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic..._market_share/ ). To say that Apple doesn't know what consumers want in their phones is to ignore every single relevant fact about what phones actual consumers really buy.
Yes, there are more Windows computers sold than Macs, by a lot. But we all know why - Macs aren't cheap (interestingly, Microsoft's net and gross profit margins are both higher than Apple's). Of course, MS doesn't sell computers, just the OS. But Apple gets 91% of all sales of computers over $1,000 - dude, 91%! - which covers just about all of Apple's line. When you spend more than $1,000 on a computer, you are 10 times more likely to buy an Apple! That's too many sales to be brainwashing, that's recognition that value is different from price. That's people choosing to spend more money to get an Apple machine. And Apple has the highest customer satisfaction in the industry, which means people are not only spending more money but are happy with what they get for their money.
All this means is that Jobs knows what Fanbois want. MS market share is much higher than Apple's so it would seem that MS knows more about what the average consumer wants.
Although Apple seems to have the market cornered when it comes to MP3 players, so yes, Apple knows what consumers want when it comes to an MP3 player. Computers and phones? not so much.
Apple has a higher market share than Microsoft in several areas, the biggest of which would be MP3 players and phones. However, there are software areas where Apple leads despite have a lower market share for the platform (Final Cut).
However there's a difference between knowing what the average consumer wants and having market share as a goal.
A great example that people seem to forget is that it was Apple with a GUI OS versus Microsoft with a command-line OS, where Microsoft had much higher market share, but consumers *wanted* a GUI OS. Thus, Microsoft adopted a GUI approach.
PCs with Windows may sell more in volume than the Mac today, but is volume really the right measurement? Do consumers not want a BMW or other premium automobile? Take a look at Apple and its profit as a computer maker and compare that to others. Compare the satisfaction ratings. Read the surveys on why people have PCs instead of Macs...IT policy, price, software lock-in, are all higher on the list than personal preference of OS.
Also, it's funny you used the word "consumer". Microsoft does much better in enterprise markets than consumer markets. They've traditionally lost money in areas that are consumer only. Their record here is quite poor indeed. It's not a coincidence that they've been focusing so much on consumer products and services during this past decade while their market cap has fallen from $590 billion to a little over $250 billion.
Meanwhile, Apple, who has been focused on consumer products and services, has had their market cap go from $16 billion to over $215 billion during the same time period.
In the past decade, what has Microsoft produced that's been a hit or at least desirable by consumers (as opposed to enterprise) other than the Xbox? (and even the Xbox still has a net loss overall).
Ignoring that startlingly bad UI design for a moment ... why exactly would you want such instant and direct access to Bluetooth/3G/WiFi/GPS settings?
I don't need fast access to data signaling, but I would like quick access to brightness controls. Auto really doesn't do a good job, at night I don't need anything more than the lowest setting, and in daylight, it needs to be at 50% or so to be useful.
Posters like this should be banned immediately.
Posters like you are ignored immediately.
The topic of this thread is OS4, and not what is wrong with a particular poster.
Stop trying to hijack the thread, Troll.
Good job backseat moderating. Also, I understand "troll" is an amazing new word you learnt recently, how about you stop calling everyone that disagrees with you one?
I dread the day that you become allowed to pick which pedal makes a car stop
I dread the day when you will not be able to use presets, or scan, or seek, or specifically tune into a radio station.
Get real.
Well I think there's a difference between customizing a phone and a car. There aren't federal standards on how a UI on a phone should work. I must say though, and I know you didn't do it, but today is the first time I have been quoted so much. Oh well. After all, the point of these boards are to share opinions.
Is there a federal standard for the car controls? I thought they were a de facto standard as opposed to de juro.
To me this is matter of convention - the thing with computer UI's is that people have got used to having a lot of ways to do things, that's different to whether or not they need different ways to do things.
One of the good things about Android, iPhone, Win Mobile etc. all existing side by side is that it gives us, the consumers, the chance to pick the type we like the most.
I dread the day when you will not be able to use presets, or scan, or seek, or specifically tune into a radio station.
Get real.
Whilst I get real, maybe you should focus on getting a sense of humor.
The fact that you use Windows as your example of good UI design explains a great deal.
I did not use Windows a an example of good ui design.
Ignoring that, saying that something is right just because someone else does it that way is a silly circular argument.
I did not say that something is right just because someone else does it.
I did not use Windows a an example of good ui design. Go away, Troll.
I did not say that something is right just because someone else does it.
Go away, Troll.
How old are you.....12 ?
I don't need fast access to data signaling, but I would like quick access to brightness controls. Auto really doesn't do a good job, at night I don't need anything more than the lowest setting, and in daylight, it needs to be at 50% or so to be useful.
The problem that you don't get is that YOU might want an easy way to change the brightness.
Someone else might want an easy way to change the Bluetooth settings.
Someone else might want an easy way to turn email accounts on and off.
Someone else might want an easy way to enable or disable airplane mode.
And so on.
There are an infinite number of choices. Apple has an enormous UI research group that studies large numbers of users and comes up with what they perceive is the best balance between simplicity and usability. It won't be optimum for any one person, but on balance, it is designed as an optimum.
As soon as you start adding and removing features, you go away from the optimum - very quickly. Apple's history is very, very good - as shown by their exceptional customer service experience.
Please do not accuse people of being trolls in the middle of a thread. Report the post (small red exclamation mark at bottom-left of the post in question) if you think it's that bad, but please just stick to the subject of the thread in your posts.
Enjoy!
How old are you.....12 ?
I am not the topic of this thread. If you would like to start a new thread concerning that subject, have at it.
Personal insults make this place less user friendly.
I did not use Windows a an example of good ui design.
Actually, you did. See post #76.
Josh. B. is not behaving well at the moment, but let's not descend to his level shall we?
Everyone: cut out the petty name calling. Now.
To will keeps it consistent with the current GUI, an easy way to manage multiple running apps is to press the home screen then swipe left (currently the spotlight screen) to see a screen of all running apps (shaking but no "x"). To close an app, press-hold the icon until an "x" next to the icon appears then click to close or move them around to prioritize them.
For managing pages of apps... it would be simple to just to allow for more than 16 apps to fit on each screen. User simply scroll up to see additional apps. No limit (only by memory) on number of apps per screen.