One thing that Apple's got generally right is that the user interface isn't the guts of the machine. Microsoft tries redoing their user interface with each release, and each time people like me get pissed because it doesn't look the way that it used to. Granted, there are likely times, maybe even a lot of times, when it just can't; an old function has been removed, or changed significantly, so, sorry, it works differently now. Ditto, a new function, unlike anything before. But I'm of the opinion that even there, its possible to emulate the old look and feel, if you want to. This is what the directory structure looked like before, here you go. You like clustering apps by type? Here's something that will do it for you -- just tell it what to put in there. It's possible. Microsoft just doesn't want to. The new interface is Fun! Kicky! Outrageously wonderful! Sux! whoops.....
Why, yes, I did just come from trying to figure out where the fleeping hell a file went to on my daughter's Vista PC -- how did you know?
9 comments:
My hubby has vista and I HATE using his machine or trying to help him find something! My next PC will probably be an apple although I have never used one.
I lost my belief in the user-friendliness of Apple once my wife started using iTunes. I do hear that it is intuitive, but I think you have to be willing to learn how it wants to work. I'm sure there are systems and objects that truly are intuitively obvious, but for most of us - including most definitely me - a computer isn't one of them. It's like the old joke about the man being shown Google for the first time, and being told 'Go ahead, ask it something'. And he enters ' How is Aunt Mary?'
I am sure that it isn't as easy as I like to pretend. The problem is that the interface has to work for everyone -- the guy asking about Aunt Jane and the person who's seen ten zillion computer systems and can touch-type in the dark. When I worked on one mainframe system that had multiple options, the screens were set up that you made one choice per screen, and if you decided that wasn't right, you could easily go back. Once you'd developed competence, you could change them to allow multiple selections at once. Surely PC interface designers can have that level of insight?
You might find this page of interest.
That link doesn't seem to want to work. Ironic. I bet it's something to do with the kind of page it is.
Anyway - http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/web/expert/bowman_vistapreview.mspx
I have no doubt that the problem is entirely on the marketing directors office. The yearly agony, the time, money, expense, late nights, overtime and breakdowns of, say, automobile designer's families all have to do with changing the subtle lines of the fenders, not in making sure the shocks will be more responsive to load changes. The changes we have been seeing in 'puters seem to be much the same. And you know...all that money they pour into marketing is clearly working. PC sales were up last year, and everybody is looking forward (possibly sometimes with trepidation) to Windows 7.
But it can work against you too. K cars, for instance, were marketed as a simple reliable mid sized car without all the bells and whistles. No pure leather seats with massage vibrators in them, just a good basic car that will get you from here to there without too much expense. That marketing strategy saved the company, if you remember. OTOH, they don't make K-cars any more. But they always seem to come back to the leather seats.... hmmmm...
Fred Kawasaki (Software on Demand) points out that there is a remarkable amount of resistance to change of any kind in company management, regardless of what they actually say. Most common comment every year was "What the heck is THIS? We only just now figured out how to get last year's operating system working and now I have to send my IT guy out on another course?" When he was marketing Macs, he heard that squawk a lot, and he pushed for "invisible" changes as much as possible, and fought hard to keep backwards compatibility in place. This helped give the impression that PCs were always re-inventing themselves because they had to, and Macs were old reliables, so reliable that the PC's had to work like crazy just to stay even. Not true of course, Mac had to hustle just like everybody else, but that is the feeling people got. And it is "feelings" that sell cars, computers and hamburgers.
I wish I could see how it will shake out in 50 years or so.
I guess I want it both ways -- comfortably familiar yet not the same old thing!
I just love my Mac!
I don't miss the technical challenges of Windows; nor do I miss trying to explain how to do something that should be obvious.
Apps that conform to the Apple UI guidelines tend to just be instantly usable.
Let me put it this way: I don't feel a need to buy a book on how to use some program on a Mac. And I can always tell when a firm has done a "port" of a Windows app to the Mac: the interface is just so much more complex!
I haven't seen or used Vista, though. But I am looking forward to the new OS X (Snow Leopard); Apple is promising performance improvements.
UI's are all about trade-offs. The Linux ones are great technical accomplishments, but tend to be a bit antique in style. And if something goes wrong? Don't ask a newbie question on the support forum...
Carolyn Ann
Ah, CA, you Mac bigot, you.
I wonder if Apple would sell more Macs to Windows users if they had an 'intro rental' program? Sixty days of Mac rental at a low rate?
Yeah!
Windows: the proof that design is inferior to evolution... Erm, hang on. That didn't quite work... :-D
(Hat tip to you, Bill, for the inspiration I needed for that, well, inadequate bit of frippery! :-) )
Carolyn Ann
Would Windows be evolution and Mac Intelligent Design? Perhaps that's stretching the metaphor....
Post a Comment