SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
As Apple prepares to show off new features for the iPhone and other devices at its developer conference on Monday, the company is grappling with an uncomfortable issue: Many of its existing features are already too complicated for many users to figure out.
At last year’s conference, for example, Apple’s top software executive, Craig Federighi, demonstrated how users could order food, scribble doodles and send funny images known as stickers in chats on its Messages app. The idea was to make Messages, one of the most popular apps on the iPhone, into an all-purpose tool like China’s WeChat.
But the process of finding and installing other apps in Messages is so tricky that most users have no idea they can even do it, developers and analysts say.
Source: The New York Times
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 05 2017, @05:44AM (1 child)
I thought this was a news site, not a history lesson:
"Apple users too dumb to use most feature of their devices" seems right out of the 1 button mouse days.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 05 2017, @08:08AM
Apple users can't even hold the thing right.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Monday June 05 2017, @06:15AM (11 children)
This is a general problem with computing. Whether we're talking about smart phones or office applications.
- The developer and power users know the interface inside and out. Small tweaks seem like optimizations to them, but confuse the heck out of occasional users.
- UX designers make changes for no good reason.
As a minor example, consider the android button that takes you to the home screen. This was once (Android 3.x?) a house-shaped icon, which you could pretty easily associate with the "home" screen. They changed the symbol to a simple geometric shape. Don't peek: is it (a) a triagle, (b) a circle, or (c) a square? If we could do a fair test, I'll bet fewer than half really get that question right. Experience users know that it's the symbol in the middle. New and casual users? They will poke randomly at the three geometric shapes, and hope to get it right. This was, and remains a total brainfart: it made some UX designer feel all fuzzy and warm inside, but it makes life more difficult for users.
Never touch a running system. No change for the sake of change. Keep it simple, stupid.
Clichés. But with a lot of truth in them...
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 05 2017, @06:29AM
Someone once thought that ABCXYZ gamepads were too easy...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 05 2017, @06:52AM (3 children)
"- UX designers make changes for no good reason."
You have a good point there. I believe this occurs because the designers want to "make their mark" so they can point to something and say "I did that". Sadly, they don't seem to understand that often the best design choice is to leave something the fuck alone.
--
Here's an example : where is the turn signal stalk in a recently built car ? As we all know, it's on the left side of the steering wheel and it has been located there for many years in nearly all cars on earth. But a user interface designer might come along and say "hey, let's move that switch to the other side, I think it looks cooler over there". And then you might rent a car designed by this idiot and you wouldn't know where the goddamned switch was. Apple has been doing exactly this with iTunes for years. With each revision comes the need to learn how to use iTunes again. This is not good design, it is shit design and those responsible should be ashamed and demoted to some position which involves low pay and backbreaking work as a reward.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Monday June 05 2017, @08:00AM
Cars built for the right hand drive market usually/traditionally have the indicator stalk on the right, BUT the ignition (key or button) is also on the right of the wheel.
Some cars built for both right- and left-hand drive markets will usually have the wiper controls as a stalk, on the left hand side, with the "off" position at the top. The engineers just spin the whole thing around, swap the blinkers, and save $0.50 per car. Not all the cars in our household have the blinkers on the same side.
So, with masses of legislation, rules, and standards, and global drivers, we still don't have consisent layout for some of the fundamental controls for cars (who am I kidding- most people think blinkers are optional..)
With no legislation, rules or standards for phone (or web..) interfaces, it is amazing anyone can turn any two dirrerent phones on.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday June 05 2017, @12:36PM
Ummm... and in reality they make a stain and, dumb, are proud of their doing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday June 05 2017, @03:48PM
We have a winner. They simply want to mark their territory and do so much in the same way a dog does.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by FatPhil on Monday June 05 2017, @09:16AM (2 children)
For example, if you compare MS Word 2 from the early 90s, and the current MS Office offering, the number of features has probably increased by a factor of between 10 and 1000. And yet simple features like the tab-stops (customisable width, no less) which have been there right since the early days, are still not being used, with people just pressing the space bar until the cursor lines up with the line above. (My company works with documents from clients, we've seen that hundreds of times.)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Tuesday June 06 2017, @12:46AM (1 child)
A few decades ago, you could just specify something like DISPLAY=spinach:4 when you start X and the processs started would use display number 4 on the machine known as spinach. Windowing over the network was that easy. The program running would just send all its draw requests to the other machine just like it would otherwise sent them to the local machine. Quite usable.
But various security features have stopped that. Then you had to track down inscrutable sets of options before you can even start to do something like this.
Nowadays, we have to pipe it through ssh -X, which sets up an invisible X server on the first machine, maps everything into bitmaps and sends draw commands to the other machine when things change. It seems like a lot of overhead for just a pipe.
It has become impossible to run a program that puts multiple displays on multiple other machines over the net.
By impossible, of course I mean the feature is probably still there, but it has become hard to try and find out how to set everything up so as to use it.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday June 06 2017, @01:34PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by driverless on Monday June 05 2017, @10:28AM
There's a pretty straightforward explanation for that, Norm Gunston, the designer, was a major Playstation fan. He tried to slip the X in (there was even a prototype with four X's) but there was some problem with the sensor electronics so they could only add three pads, not all four.
(Score: 2) by dak664 on Monday June 05 2017, @11:45AM
It's not a problem with computing, it's a problem with documentation. Don't accept repository commits that don't include documentation changes. And show random bits of documentation on every startup.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Grishnakh on Monday June 05 2017, @03:13PM
The root of the problem is capitalism, I think. These devices and UIs are becoming mature, but instead of just focusing on making them more reliable and fixing the bugs and other things that users don't notice much unless they run into them, and which don't help sell new devices (since software updates can and should be done for existing devices) they're piling on more features to get consumers to buy a new phone every 2 years. And of course, throwing more features in means lots more bugs and more problems as we see here (people don't know how to use all this unnecessary crap).
We see less of this in the FOSS world, because for many projects, once it's feature-complete, the developers go do something else and the project goes into maintenance mode. How much new development is happening in busybox, for instance? Or nano (the editor)? Even the Linux kernel doesn't have *that* much new development; parts that are mature haven't changed in ages, though they are adding new parts to handle new hardware, or virtualization, etc. (Sadly, the desktop environments still haven't settled down, as seen with KDE5, shitty Gnome3, Cinnamon, MATE, etc. I wonder how it'd be different if the Gnome devs weren't employed full-time by Red Hat.)
The root of the problem is people needing to justify their existence, and companies wanting people to buy new versions of stuff they already have. With the latter, they make completely unnecessary UX changes and feature additions to get more sales, and with the former, you have people willing to do these jobs, and also people inside the company pushing for this stuff (new UXs etc.) because that gives them something to do and justifies their salary.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 05 2017, @06:39AM (7 children)
Some users want to use special features, but other users may simply have no desire to use them, and the ability to understand how to use the feature may not have any bearing on whether a user makes use of the feature.
*
*
However, it must be said that if the features were truly well designed, people of average intelligence would have no trouble figuring out how to use the features.
Apple lost its way with respect to simple elegant design years ago, and for years Apple has been creating bloated crap. iTunes is a good example : it's been a monstrous overly complex turd for years. Apple doesn't seem to understand that a lot of the stuff it does is neither interesting nor useful to a large percentage of people who use the products. Personally I think Apple's design department is in the grip of a sort of myopia. I remember trying to explain to an Apple rep that I wanted to sync my iPhone with my Mac without using iCloud, because I am often in a location where there is NO internet or cell phone service. The rep seemed to have trouble understanding that such a location was even possible !
*
*
I've been a fan of Apple stuff for a good while, but I think I have bought my last Apple product, because the stuff they are selling these days is not well designed
stuff. It is just stuff and worse than that Apple keeps removing things which are IMPORTANT to me and others ( headphone jack ...! ).
Tim Cook is leading Apple into the abyss of poorly designed crap. The last time Apple sucked this badly was when John Sculley was on board.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday June 05 2017, @08:28AM (3 children)
No security for you then.. or anyone else. I would expect when paying these sums that my equipment does what I tell it to do without any buts.
That was a total ass move. It's not like Bluetooth is the super secure thing or non-battery sucking.
Tim Cook actually have an engineering exam. But he also got an MBA to negate that. So death by MBA it is..
Seems they are right on the pre-Steve track as in 1985-1996. Have they designed and shipped anything as disruptive and profitable than what Steve did since he died?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday June 05 2017, @12:42PM (2 children)
Umm... exactly what Steve did disrupt or how he did profit since he died?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday June 05 2017, @01:00PM (1 child)
Doh. Rather has the Apple management succeeded with anything significant since Jobs went away?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday June 05 2017, @01:21PM
(no, I did get what you meant. Just found the structure of the phrase deliciously ambiguous re who was expected to deliver the disruption)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by SpockLogic on Monday June 05 2017, @12:49PM
So true, so true.
Overreacting is one thing, sticking your head up your ass hoping the problem goes away is another - edIII
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday June 05 2017, @03:29PM (1 child)
That's BS. Apple stuff is perfectly designed for people willing to do everything the Apple Way. You're using it wrong by not wanting to use iCloud, or being in places where there's no internet/cell service at all. Stop doing that. Don't go places where there's no cell service, and stop trying to do things differently. Otherwise, you're just not a suitable customer for Apple. All the other Apple followers love all this stuff, and do everything the Apple Way, so there's obviously something wrong with you. Same thing with the headphone jack: why can't you just buy a set of Apple or Beats bluetooth earbuds like everyone else? They only cost $70 apiece to replace if you lose one. If you start whining about regular earbuds being only $10, then you're obviously some stupid cheap-ass who has no business buying Apple products.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 05 2017, @03:55PM
"That's BS. Apple stuff is perfectly designed for people willing to do everything the Apple Way."
-
I hope you have access to a tongue extractor, because your tongue is rather firmly stuck in your cheek ;-)
(Score: 1) by What planet is this on Monday June 05 2017, @01:25PM (6 children)
Whatever happened to simple menus that are relevant to what you are looking for. That's why I am a KDE fan. I have to go on a click quest to find anything in Win10.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday June 05 2017, @01:59PM (5 children)
The purpose of an iDevice is to show off to people that you can afford to pay 3x as much as an android device to do the same thing.
Functionality has nothing to do with it.
Its like watching a fashion show and complaining that none of those dresses would be suitable for gardening work or taking the kids to soccer practice, you're kinda missing the point. The point is the owners have (had) money.
Its a peacocks tail feathers.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday June 05 2017, @03:22PM (4 children)
That's a bunch of BS; you're talking about two completely different things. You're sorta right about both of them, but you're wrong because you're trying to link them together and conflate them.
For iDevices, you're absolutely correct: the purpose is to show off that you can afford to pay 3x as much as an Android device to do the same thing. Also, that you're a dumb lemming happy to buy into Apple's walled garden and do everything the Apple way.
For fashion, that stuff exists because (some) women like to look pretty, just like some men like to wear tattoos or whatever. It's not really about money (you can buy pretty women's clothes dirt-cheap from places that copy the fashion designers), it's just like the peacock tail-feathers you mention: looking good for the opposite sex, even if it isn't all that practical. Obviously, pretty dresses aren't usefor for gardening, but how many younger women do any gardening these days? Or take kids to soccer practice? Once women are doing those things, all their dresses are in the closet and untouched for years, and they're 6 sizes too large for them anyway because they've gotten fat. Those dresses are worn by generally younger women (or older women who stayed in shape and have enough money to hire a gardener and a nanny) and are used for things where they are practical, like going out to clubs and getting picked up.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 05 2017, @04:07PM (3 children)
"For iDevices, you're absolutely correct: the purpose is to show off that you can afford to pay 3x as much as an Android device to do the same thing. Also, that you're a dumb lemming happy to buy into Apple's walled garden and do everything the Apple way."
-
-
Your above post was humorous in a heavy handed and unsophisticated way, but this post is ignorant and arrogant and willfully so.
The Apple "ecosystem" has advantages over Android. Apple stuff will be compatible with Apple stuff and for some of us this is worth the price of admission. If that advantage means nothing to YOU, that's fine for you, but it in no way negates the very real advantage the Apple ecosystem offers. Some of us don't want to root our phones or fuck around with settings. We want stuff that works that we don't have to fuck with, and Apple does offer that. Just because this is not your preference doesn't mean there is not real value in this case. The needs and preferences of others are possibly different from yours. I ride a motorcycle that does wheelies at 80mph in 3rd gear and I love the bike. Could you make use of such a bike ? Maybe not, but that doesn't negate its value to me.
Next time try having some empathy and don't be such a narcissist.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by urza9814 on Monday June 05 2017, @06:30PM
The Android "ecosystem" is the same way. Google stuff works pretty flawlessly with other Google stuff; the difference is Google doesn't try so hard to prevent you from using non-Google stuff...which doesn't always work as well...which people like you then blame on Google for no apparent reason. The fact that they give you the ABILITY to use crap software that doesn't integrate doesn't mean you have to. I mean FUCK Google and all, but you buy an Android phone and you put in your Google account and everything just works. Mail, social, chat, cloud backup, app/media purchases, all of it integrates pretty seamlessly and automatically. They're a terrible company but they still do write decent software.
And Apple stuff DOESN'T always "just work". My dad's got no real problems with his Galaxy, but my mom's iPhone is a constant source of tech support nightmares. Like when the Kindle app started displaying upside down for no apparent reason. Checked the iPhone orientation settings...no luck. Tried locking it in the correct orientation...nothing changed. Eventually I discovered that there were multiple independent screen rotation settings...and I'd been spending hours trying to configure the wrong one. What an amazing and intuitive interface! Ugh.
(Score: 2) by epitaxial on Monday June 05 2017, @11:46PM (1 child)
I've used Android for years and recently switched to an iPhone. I like iMessage and how smooth a lot of things run. However I can't fucking stand iTunes and how it manages mp3 files. Alright so I have a bunch of music on my phone but don't like Apple's built in player. I can download other players but they can't access any of the the files on the phone! I have to fire up iTunes and then grant permission to every single file on my computer so they can be re-copied to the phone. You can't add whole folders either, only individual files! So that option is out. I'd jailbreak the phone but that would require downgrading to iOS 9.something.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 06 2017, @12:30AM
That's when you install something like AutoHotKey and write a small script to automate granting file permissions for you.
~From one of the only Windows Phone fans
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 05 2017, @03:22PM
So now Apple, the 'masters of innovation and invention' are reduced to copying from the Chinese.
Did they run out of Android features to copy?