Today Apple unveiled the much rumored iTablet called iPad. The abilities of the device (or lack of) have already caused lots of conversation out there. I naturally decided to concentrate just on user interface of the device. So, how does the Apple’s new toy go around the bends? I’ve made a quick analysis via Engadget’s hands-on video, and the pictures I’ve seen since the launch. The pictures in the article are also from that same video.

Now, granted, I do not have an iPhone here and do not possess the greatest of memories, so some of this stuff might have been already on current version of iPhone OS but, nevertheless, I’m addressing the issues still.

The Groundwork

The iPad is running new version of  iPhone OS, version 3.2, so for iPhone owner the basic UI should be rather simplistic experience: few desktops, side by side, full of icons and few “permanent” icons down at the tray. Tap any icon and the application launches, simple as apple pie. Since it has no multitasking, the application handling is also as easy as it gets – There simply is no such thing. You’re either in or out from the application.

The Basics

The basic navigation within applications is simple enough – if you drill down within an application (think of artist -> songs) by tapping the top left corner of the screen, the OS always takes you back one level, to the state where you were earlier. Simple enough. This is the basics of tried and true iPhone OS. However, it’s after this foundation where the things start to get hairier.

Continue reading “Quick analysis of Apple iPad’s User Interface”

This article goes about to paint a hypothetical future where megacorporations rule the world, plus just how that might happen. Today’s subject is Apple (includes some speculation of new product release).

First things first, what is a Megacorporation?

According Wikipedia,

“It refers to a fictional corporation that is a massive conglomerate, holding monopolistic or near-monopolistic control over multiple markets (thus exhibiting both a horizontal and a vertical monopoly). Megacorps are so powerful that they can ignore the law, possess their own heavily-armed (often military-sized) private armies, hold ’sovereign’ territory, and possibly even act as outright governments. They often exercise a large degree of control over their employees, taking the idea of ‘corporate culture’ to an extreme.”

While the private armies are bit of a stretch still, the rest of it just could be possible.

Why Apple?

For all of you haters out there, even though I tend to criticize Apple a lot, this isn’t personal. The whole thing started when I was thinking about a product concept and came to conclusion that there are couple of things that are vital to the concept, and all of those Apple has a stranglehold. Thus, the idea was scrapped and morphed to Megacorporations article.

First of all, Apple has bunch of special traits that tend to tint it towards possible Megacorporation:

Continue reading “Cyberpunk Megacorporations – Apple”

Note: Also includes a reply to PC Magazine’s article “The Google vs. Apple War Begins“

It’s always sad how the big players don’t seem to realize that user experience and usability matters. Specially when you want to have user created content on your website. I just spent some minutes reading an article from PC Magazine and decided to comment about the speculations in the post. After scrolling some time downwards I eventually found the (quite easy to miss) “Add Your Comment” box:

Like the picture above would lead you to believe that you don’t actually need to register to post a comment, like in any clever web platform (there are other, better, ways of getting rid of the spam), so I happily typed down my reply and pressed post, only to bounce back from this:

Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot?! I still need to register, even though the form clearly said “Post”. So I let out a deep sigh, let my shoulders slump a bit and press “Create an Account”, here we go. And what do I find? A form long & complex enough (PC Magazine – Member Registration), and full of Dreaded Red Dots *, that it could be a registration form for a bank loan. Needless to say that all it took was few quick glances up and down the form, decide it’s not worth the effort and then just forget the whole thing.

One can only wonder how much more content and discussions there would be if the posting wouldn’t require a process equal to launching a nuclear missile (… Note to self: I hope that it’s not THAT easy, or rather more complicated than that), thus bringing more traffic and revenue for the magazine. Take heed PC Magazine. Take heed.

* Dreaded Red Dot means a field that is required for the registration. Usually not a good thing if you want to have a fluid user experience.

To those who still are interested, here is the reply I wanted to post

“I personally don’t think that this whole FCC commotion is specifically about the Google Voice app being pulled, rather than the fact that Apple just yanked a “random app” from the store and is making the developer to pay all of the refunds for the app, even the 30% part that they are taking from the transactions. In my books, FCC just wants to make clear what are the rules of the app store, so that developers might defend themselves when next time Apple decides to pull apps from the App Store and make the developer pay the refunds.

-Mikko Tikkanen”

Some months ago I was questioning if Apple was becoming evil (Is Apple becoming evil?), and at least with some parts, it seems to me it’s steadily steaming towards that direction. In the end I quoted a somewhat famous movie:

“You either die as a hero or live long enough to see yourself to become the villain“

In case you’ve been living in a barrel (on under a rock, respectively) the last few weeks, here’s a brief collection of what’s going on at the moment

Chapter One: App refund policy

If you remember the road, that Apple has been going down with OS X, where they kept taking features from most popular OS X utilities and integrating them into their OS (good example would be dashboard widgets), making the original app obsolete. So, against this road taken, it’s not hard to imagine a situation where Apple is taking some popular apps and integrating their functionality to their iPhone OS. However, the behavior itself is quite everyday business in software world but the situation changes when you look at Apples contribution back to the community. Practically zero. Then you look how insanely aggressively the silver apple has been defending any of it’s IP against anyone, the situation gets bad to worse. Practically this would mean that they just keep taking IP from small developers, not giving anything back to the community and, in worst case scenario, going after the same small developer. Though, this is just nitpicking, and rather just a minor sidetrack.

Couple of days ago, this all took a step towards the dark side: Apple is expecting the developers to pay full refunds in the case any app is removed from the App Store (as Gizmodo reports). This would mean that even if magically you would end up saving all the money that you got from your app sales, you would still end up owing money. How? Remember how Apple takes 30% off from the transactions? That would be the part you’d end up owing since they are expecting you to cough up the full refund, while Apple is keeping it’s part of the sales. Sound like a bad deal yet?

So, imagine yourself as an iPhone developer who got new app out there and it’s making money. Some months later Apple comes up with iPhone OS update which has the exact same functionality, which in Apples books would be a reason enough (not like they need one, see next chapter) to remove your app from the store. Boomf! Within less than a second you went from having a successful career in iPhone development, to a guy who clearly doesn’t have enough money if the refunds start rolling in.

Continue reading “Apple taking steps towards the dark side, hatred, anger”

Today I stumbled upon an article (Apple vs. Palm) in Engadget, where they analyze the rather blunt patent infringement threat that Apple made towards Palm (and Android) when asked what do they think of ‘em. Now, I’ve never been a particular fan of software related patents, just because you basically seem to be able to patent anything, be it simple or complicated. However, now I’ve got new pet peeve: user interface patents. (I try to keep this short, as I have tendency to rant…)

Patents, bad!

Patents started as a way to protect something that was basically expensive and time consuming invention to develop, and could be copied by competitors thus earning unfair edge; gaining new tech without the resources spent for actual research. In those golden ages patents were good, in fact, in many cases they were essential for upstarts and thus healthy market. The problem comes when they are applied directly to the fuzzy world of IT; they just don’t work. In fact, they start to work against the market, restricting the possibilities of upstarts and fortifying the big companies. Basically, patents have become a stick that you keep beating your competitors with, by patenting everything and all you absolutely can. *wham* *bam*

Continue reading “Is Apple becoming evil?”

A while ago I stumbled upon this article (Smashing magazine) about Mac OS X usability highlights, after reading it for a while I couldn’t take it anymore. It was a classic case of cherrypicking things to make A look better than B, and all this in the name of usability, my favourite issue. So, after a month (started the post then moved to another country, started a school etc. and now, finally, finished it), here we go; Debunking Mac OS X usability highs.

One of the problems with the article – alongside others, is that it gives very limited set of examples for given area and via that extremely filtered results makes the assumption that OS X does the whole thing better. Someone would say that the whole list is just cherrypicked to make the OS X look better than it really is. Like claiming that OS X is more intuitive than the rest of the competition because it is apparently easier to install software in it, which even isn’t the case.

Claim no. 1

“1. Consistency
The whole OS and almost every application looks and feels the same, as if a single team developed the whole thing, thanks to Apple HI Guidelines. Official guidelines for user interface design made it possible for users to actually use most Mac-applications in a very same way, creating a seamless and comfortable experience in the end. Users are able to anticipate how system behaves and what to expect from its applications. In fact, consistency dramatically improves learnability and usability of interacting with the system.”

Like the text says, almost every application. Then and there the very point is shot down and morphed to, “OS X is more consistent than Windows because parts of it’s software are consistent“. And still, I’m not convinced it’s more consistent UI than, say Microsoft Vista, as I have seen no evidence of such as i.e. iTunes changes it’s colours etc. Not to mention that every big HMI project/team project has some sort style guide, as it is one of the key parts of UI design, and I have absolutely no doubts that the Windows UI dev team has one.

Not to mention the writer hasn’t even bothered to look if Microsoft has published any comparable guidelines, whatsoever. He just makes assumptions that only Apple could have such things, and proceeds to make his claims. Quick Google and fourth hit revealed this: MSDN: Windows Vista User Experience Guidelines.

He is right on one thing though; consistency improves learnability and usability.

Continue reading “Top 10 Usability highs of the Mac OS – Debunked”