The iPad’s Design Utopia vs. the Internet at Large
Not long ago I was having a conversation with a web designer about the iPad, which had not yet been released. He was discussing how much he hated it, because he didn't feel its closed and proprietary nature was a step in the right direction for future innovation. I agreed with him, but countered that the iPad's design and user experience was very good for technological novices, possibly attracting an entire new demographic of the technologically illiterate. To which he said something along these lines:
"But see, I don't see the point of designing my websites for ease of use. Browsing the Internet, or using just any computer in general, is a difficult experience. I don't care if it's hard for consumers to use my websites, they'll work to figure it out. How else are they going to gain computing experience?"
Now, I should say that this is a sentiment I generally disagree with. When I'm figuring out whether or not I should purchase an electronic device, I usually prioritize good user experience over mere functionality, and I'd imagine that anyone who likes Apple's products feels the same way. If a given product has more features than its competitor, but those extra features are poorly designed and miserable to use on a daily basis, I'm going to go with the competitor's product. But as I thought more about the conversation, I began to believe there was some truth to it, and for proof, one need look no further than the iPad itself.
As many have said before, the iPad represents nothing less than Apple's attempt to reimagine the personal computer, and that vision included jettisoning the outdated interaction models and metaphors of the past. Gone is the notion of the "filesystem": instead of allowing users to manually organize their data, Apple does it for them automatically and invisibly. Instead of requiring the user to master the mouse, and the double-clicks and hold-to-drag actions that accompany it, the iPad makes your finger its primary input peripheral. (As I've found that the biggest pain point in teaching newcomers how to use a computer is the nuances of mouse actions, this is a very welcome change.) But by necessity, some vestigial remnants of the old archaic structures of decades gone by remain within the device, impossible to purge from Apple's pristine vision.
I'm speaking, of course, about the Internet. While most people reading this have no problem casually browsing the Web, the notion of URLs are difficult for a lot of people to understand! You may remember the Facebook login incident from a few months ago - ReadWriteWeb posted an article about a partnership between Facebook and AIM, and shortly afterwards the post appeared on the Google results page for Facebook, embedded within a section that listed recent news stories about the website. Apparently, since the post was at the top of the results page, people got confused and left hundreds of comments through Facebook Connect demanding to gain access to their news feeds. Many spectators found this to be hilarious proof of the stupidity of humankind - but I would argue that if those people had so much trouble navigating the Web, if they were really confused enough to mistake ReadWriteWeb for Facebook even though Facebook has a blue color scheme and ReadWriteWeb is red, and they have completely different URLs, that doesn't seem like a symptom of stupidity so much as a lack of education and awareness.
So I still believe that user experience is essential, but I do agree that we need a way to reconcile the capabilities of today's technologies with the legacy standards and protocols we still cling on to. The iPad has the potential to attract a whole new demographic of the technologically illiterate, but even Apple's best designers can't fully eliminate the need for computer training and education - they can only reduce it.
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
“But see, I don’t see the point of designing my websites for ease of use. Browsing the Internet, or using just any computer in general, is a difficult experience. I don’t care if it’s hard for consumers to use my websites, they’ll work to figure it out. How else are they going to gain computing experience?”
Pray tell me your friend’s name… so I never employ him to design a website for me. I have bought an iPad (Bloody thing’s held up in Korean Customs; another story, another time). The last thing I want is a computing experience. I want a reading experience, a gaming experience, a browsing experience and most of all a relaxing experience. The whole idea is to make “computing” transparent. Take away the computing layer from between the content and the device. I just pick up the device and I have content, with none of the cruft in between.
Your friend needs to take a sip (a scull) of reality. If he thinks most people want to learn computing through difficult experiences, he’s delusional; in fact most people don’t want to learn computing. It is just something they have to do in there day to day life. Make something difficult and most people walk away. How many people opt to drive manual transmission cars, even though they a cheaper? Very few. People have enough to worry about without learning things they don’t perceive they need to know. Give your friend some advice; KiSS.
“the iPad represents nothing less than Apple’s attempt to reimagine the personal computer”
I don’t think anyone really sees it that way, not even Apple. We can say a lot about what the ipad is, but one thing is sure: it’s not a computer, in the same way that my mobile phone or my cable box are not.
The ‘made for computer illiterate’ people argument is silly. Can you really speak in 2010 about ‘mastering a mouse’...
ediedi: Your mobile phone and cable box aren’t capable of running desktop-class applications.
Here’s a link I wanted to include in this post but didn’t end up making the final cut: http://pro.benjaminste.in/post/330685151/explaining-urls-is-surprisingly-hard
“But see, I don’t see the point of designing my websites for ease of use. Browsing the Internet, or using just any computer in general, is a difficult experience. I don’t care if it’s hard for consumers to use my websites, they’ll work to figure it out. How else are they going to gain computing experience?”
In 1976, Steve Wozniak designed the Apple Computer kit (BYO keyboard, monitor, and case). Steve Jobs suggested that more people would buy it if it was complete. Imagine if Wozniak said, “But see, I don’t see the point of designing for ease of use. Using any computer is a difficult experience. I don’t care if it’s hard for consumers, they’ll work to figure it out. How else are they going to gain computing experience?”
In 1988, Al Gore told Congress that the Internet could be an Information Superhighway if the public were given access. Imagine if Congress said, “But see, I don’t see the point.”
In 1984, Apple introduced the Macintosh; in 2001, Apple introduced the iPod; in 2007, Apple introduced the iPhone; and in 2010, Apple introduced the iPad. In each case there were many critics that did not “see the point”.
To some people, Freedom is the right to be wrong.
Sorry to be harsh, but the web designer is an idiot.
That web designer displayed the height of technological arrogance; he wanted technology to be “hard-ro-use” so he could feel superior to other people. People have various temperaments or personalities. Each temperament displays their own competence and skills. This is not about intelligence as he would surmise; the point is that only a small percentage of people are technologically capable and enjoy decoding complex puzzles which that web designer would erect. It is about 12% of humanity.
If the computer had remained as hard-to-use as they were back in the 1970s then computers would be a niche of only a few million. Fortunately, Apple pursued the easy-to-use path and Microsoft stole most of their ideas to mass market them.
Just imagine if we still had a priesthood of computing like they had back in the IBM 360 era. We would be forced to put up with many more arrogant snobs like that web designer. We would never have enjoyable devices like the iPad. And people who rightly fear and hate computers, because they are unsuited to their temperaments, would never have their needs met.