Why Can’t PCs Work More Like iPhones?(bits.blogs.nytimes.com)
bits.blogs.nytimes.com
Why Can’t PCs Work More Like iPhones?
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/why-cant-pcs-work-more-like-iphones/
9 comments
The iPhone's OS is feature-poor and anemic, hence the lack of controls. It has a very, very limited set of things that it needs to perform when you compare it to a real computer. "math is hard, let's go shopping!"
This is true, but if most people don't use all the features of a real OS anyway then you're better off removing them in favor of a really good implementation of the few features people do use. And then you're right back to iPhone OS: it does little, but it does that really well.
I guess I don't see the point. Windows isn't hard to learn, neither is OS X. Heck, even Ubuntu isn't too bad, if you only want to do three things with any of them: mail, word processing, web surfing, for example. I've taught numerous seniors how to do these things on a computer.
I don't get questions until they want to know how to do more with their computer than they already knew. Using the iPwn model, I'd have to say "you're shit out of luck, that's all this system can do." and I really don't see how that's good for anyone.
I don't get questions until they want to know how to do more with their computer than they already knew. Using the iPwn model, I'd have to say "you're shit out of luck, that's all this system can do." and I really don't see how that's good for anyone.
I really think this kind of approach, 'I've shown them how to send an email and they can manage it,' is missing most of the point.
They don't have a grasp of what they're doing. They know this. It intimidates them. They're afraid of breaking something and need to ask for help all the time. They hate it. It's disempowering.
These are not some small minority. These are a lot of people.
An iphone can be picked up, used, and give a larger number of people a feeling that they can understand how it works. They are in control. They don't need any help. If they can keep that and replace more of the the desktop, they'll want it.
They don't have a grasp of what they're doing. They know this. It intimidates them. They're afraid of breaking something and need to ask for help all the time. They hate it. It's disempowering.
These are not some small minority. These are a lot of people.
An iphone can be picked up, used, and give a larger number of people a feeling that they can understand how it works. They are in control. They don't need any help. If they can keep that and replace more of the the desktop, they'll want it.
Exactly. I see this all the time. This constant fear of breaking something, the lack of confidence.
Good iPhone apps can feel as though you can understand them completely, even to non-technical users. (It’s not automatic, though. Everyone who has ever used Stanza knows that.)
The Browser (especially ones like Chrome and Safari) is pretty much the only desktop app which can feel that way, too – at the moment.
Good iPhone apps can feel as though you can understand them completely, even to non-technical users. (It’s not automatic, though. Everyone who has ever used Stanza knows that.)
The Browser (especially ones like Chrome and Safari) is pretty much the only desktop app which can feel that way, too – at the moment.
I have to wonder how much of this is due to the limited capabilities of the iPhone, and how much is just the psychology of "physically" interacting with your apps.
I don't think it is primarily about the touch screen. It's probably a combination of things many of them related to limited capabilities.
For example, the app store. Sure, they could allow some other channel for installing apps that isn't restricted. Some apps would be available only for this alternative channel because it's easier or freeier or better somehow. They give instructions on how to install it. It's complicated. A user might try to get something running on her iphone and fail. She might get her daughter to help. The app has some quirks (that's why it isn't allowed in the app store) When she uses someone else' iphone it's complicated and difficult because it belongs to a"power user".
This adds up to the feeling that the iphone is complicated and hard and breakable and you need to know what you're doing with it.
It's naive to say "don't install unapproved apps" or stay in the non-power user world. If it exists, people will be exposed to it.
Think of the early days of GUI. Lots of non computer people where shown how to do something until it stopped working for whatever reason. At that point they asked for help. The helper immediately opens up the command line and demonstrates how you really need to know a little bit about the command line to get some things done.
For example, the app store. Sure, they could allow some other channel for installing apps that isn't restricted. Some apps would be available only for this alternative channel because it's easier or freeier or better somehow. They give instructions on how to install it. It's complicated. A user might try to get something running on her iphone and fail. She might get her daughter to help. The app has some quirks (that's why it isn't allowed in the app store) When she uses someone else' iphone it's complicated and difficult because it belongs to a"power user".
This adds up to the feeling that the iphone is complicated and hard and breakable and you need to know what you're doing with it.
It's naive to say "don't install unapproved apps" or stay in the non-power user world. If it exists, people will be exposed to it.
Think of the early days of GUI. Lots of non computer people where shown how to do something until it stopped working for whatever reason. At that point they asked for help. The helper immediately opens up the command line and demonstrates how you really need to know a little bit about the command line to get some things done.
I used the word "teach" pretty loosely. "move the pointer on top of the Mail picture and press the button on the mouse twice."
Do you really think that's hard? Do you take the majority of humans to be complete and total simpletons?
Give my grandma an iPhone that's powered up but with nothing on the screen and tell her "This is a telephone. Go ahead and call your neighbor on it." without any help. She won't get it. I guarantee it. Someone will have to demonstrate it. And as you said, people like her are not a small minority. And the iPhone doesn't solve any problems.
It's just a different UI. Then you start getting into gestures. Hey grandma if you have trouble seeing that picture, just do a "spread" or "pinch" on the screen. Do you know what her reply would be? It's go something like "lolwut?"
She'd eventually chuck it across the room, because while it's not HARD, people learn by demonstration. People have been learning by demonstration for tens of thousands of years. Why do you think trade skills such as carpentry needed to be handed down?
Do you really think that's hard? Do you take the majority of humans to be complete and total simpletons?
Give my grandma an iPhone that's powered up but with nothing on the screen and tell her "This is a telephone. Go ahead and call your neighbor on it." without any help. She won't get it. I guarantee it. Someone will have to demonstrate it. And as you said, people like her are not a small minority. And the iPhone doesn't solve any problems.
It's just a different UI. Then you start getting into gestures. Hey grandma if you have trouble seeing that picture, just do a "spread" or "pinch" on the screen. Do you know what her reply would be? It's go something like "lolwut?"
She'd eventually chuck it across the room, because while it's not HARD, people learn by demonstration. People have been learning by demonstration for tens of thousands of years. Why do you think trade skills such as carpentry needed to be handed down?
I guess I don't see the point. Windows isn't hard to learn, neither is OS X.
Exactly. Apple fanboys have gone from "Macs are easy to use", which is largely true, to "all existing computers are unusable unless you're a total loser geek", which is rather less so.
And to the extent that the iPad is easier to use, that's not because it denies control to advanced users. Mac OS X wouldn't be easier for novices if Terminal.app were removed and Apple prevented all other access to the Unix shell.
Exactly. Apple fanboys have gone from "Macs are easy to use", which is largely true, to "all existing computers are unusable unless you're a total loser geek", which is rather less so.
And to the extent that the iPad is easier to use, that's not because it denies control to advanced users. Mac OS X wouldn't be easier for novices if Terminal.app were removed and Apple prevented all other access to the Unix shell.
you dont see the point because you're an outlier. most people are retarded when it comes to computers. most people actually want to do THOSE three things with a computer: mail, word processing, and web. (throw in media watching/playing games somewhere there too). what % of computer owners you think fire up emacs and terminal? a small amount. Geeks != mass market.
No, the author is saying that it's hard to use a modern computer. It's not. In fact, with shakes, gestures, and other non-obvious input methods, I'd say the iPhone is anything BUT a perfect UI for "retards"
got any evidence on that one?
Evidence that shake, pinch, spread and multi-touch are non-obvious UI features that average folks would not discover quickly on their own and likely need help understanding? Please. At the very least, they'd need a short video clip or a getting started guide to explain these features. They're cool and valuable, but not intuitive.
I'm a relatively smart guy, and the first time I picked up a new iPod shuffle (with the controls on the headphones) it took me quite a while to figure out that: 1) The area between the volume up/down buttons was a separate button 2) How to use that center button.
Apple has gotten very good at forcing people to learn new, unfamiliar interfaces. To say that these interfaces are better is a matter of opinion, and to say they're easier than a mouse puck on the desk with a corresponding screen cursor and a "start" menu or icons on a dock is laughable.
I'm a relatively smart guy, and the first time I picked up a new iPod shuffle (with the controls on the headphones) it took me quite a while to figure out that: 1) The area between the volume up/down buttons was a separate button 2) How to use that center button.
Apple has gotten very good at forcing people to learn new, unfamiliar interfaces. To say that these interfaces are better is a matter of opinion, and to say they're easier than a mouse puck on the desk with a corresponding screen cursor and a "start" menu or icons on a dock is laughable.
Even the most computer-illiterate people I know need, on a daily basis, the ability to switch between multiple running applications.
What a surprise: A media outlet looking to stay afloat lauds the unreleased platform they hope to monetize.
The New York Times?
(Maybe, just maybe... there's not a conspiracy here, and the author just happened to write about something he found interesting. Nah... that could never happen...)
(Maybe, just maybe... there's not a conspiracy here, and the author just happened to write about something he found interesting. Nah... that could never happen...)
It's not a conspiracy if they're right in the open about it. They're praising a platform that does not exist yet, and what do you know, they have an app that will be available (for $$$) at launch.
I don't mean to imply it some Big Evil Conspiracy. NYTimes is a business like any other and they need to make money. NYT has a vested interest in the iPad's success.
I don't mean to imply it some Big Evil Conspiracy. NYTimes is a business like any other and they need to make money. NYT has a vested interest in the iPad's success.
the ubuntu netbook remix interface is absolutely simple and easy to use. i have it on my HTPC and it's best described as: "a big ass iPhone". My roommate who has NO computer knowledge (she doesnt even own a computer anymore) uses it with ease to browse the web, watch shows, use boxee, google earth, play music,etc.
I use it on my netbook, which goes more or less everywhere with me. It's not only far simpler for, say, my dad (who is still slightly unsure whether computers fall under the realm of science or witchcraft - both being bad), but it also makes things easier for me. You can read that as "one less click to get into emacs" if you want.
But on a serious note, the actual interface of the OS seems to be far less important for tech-savvy people. I'm using Windows 7 right now, alt-tabbing between a web-browser and emacs (finally getting around to exploring Clojure, if you're interested), and would be doing exactly the same if I'd booted into Linux this evening instead. 'Computer people' know what they want to do on their machines and do it; and cross-platform is king for 'their sort of app', these days.
My dad, on the other hand, thinks that computers are largely operated by shout-recognition. He'd love an iPad. He can point at the thing, it does the thing - he's not prepared to learn, to know or to think about it. That's the market Apple will be aiming for; people who view computers as being more like toasters than toolboxes - that thing they use to do that thing. And people love toasters.
However, I genuinely believe that the likes of UNR offer a far better compromise over-all, because most people start out with flailing and shouting - it would be an awful shame to deny them the tools to move beyond that, should they be so inclined.
But on a serious note, the actual interface of the OS seems to be far less important for tech-savvy people. I'm using Windows 7 right now, alt-tabbing between a web-browser and emacs (finally getting around to exploring Clojure, if you're interested), and would be doing exactly the same if I'd booted into Linux this evening instead. 'Computer people' know what they want to do on their machines and do it; and cross-platform is king for 'their sort of app', these days.
My dad, on the other hand, thinks that computers are largely operated by shout-recognition. He'd love an iPad. He can point at the thing, it does the thing - he's not prepared to learn, to know or to think about it. That's the market Apple will be aiming for; people who view computers as being more like toasters than toolboxes - that thing they use to do that thing. And people love toasters.
However, I genuinely believe that the likes of UNR offer a far better compromise over-all, because most people start out with flailing and shouting - it would be an awful shame to deny them the tools to move beyond that, should they be so inclined.
When I first heard about it, Ihought it was a great idea. But where are all the preinstalled NBR sales?
fyi: here's a pic of how it looks- http://i48.tinypic.com/1z677lj.jpg
probably not the best, but it's absolutely thrilling to use. controlling google earth in 1080p using multi-touch gestures on your iPhone on a 47 inch HDTV is tons of fun.
probably not the best, but it's absolutely thrilling to use. controlling google earth in 1080p using multi-touch gestures on your iPhone on a 47 inch HDTV is tons of fun.
Sure they can. But they're called iPads.
In a lot of ways this would work for a goodly chunk of people. I think if Apple did this, they should allow for alternate app stores and IT managed deploys on an App Store model (all organization computers hook to the local app store which hooks to various commercial app stores)
It's actually surprising that more innovation hasn't happened already, considering how much of computing has moved into the browser.
Get a browser going on a machine and you have already crossed that barrier new OS' once saw as the insurmountable.
Get a browser going on a machine and you have already crossed that barrier new OS' once saw as the insurmountable.
i think they're right. even though they're much less customizable, most people (read: people who don't read HN), prefer simple operating systems that abstract away as much as possible.
The Linux netbooks were/are very much like iPhones. There is a button you press to view the web. There is a button to press to play music. That's it.
There's also things that are already shipping, like Ubuntu's Netbook Remix and the Litl netbook.
These products are all daggers aimed at killing traditional desktops in one way or another. They've got a good shot, too: I've been using UNR as my primary OS for over a year now, and it's met all my needs both as a user and as a developer. I still keep around a MacBook for photo work, but it's been almost entirely replaced by a netbook + phone.
We'll see who the winners eventually are. However, it seems pretty obvious that Windows and OS X in their current form are doomed.