This past week, Apple demonstrated new versions of OS X and iOS at WWDC. As a developer, I could download the new versions and try them out, although I admit to being reluctant to try software that is very much beta. I have too much work to do, as it is. So, I rely on the publicly available information to fuel my initial impressions.
I like what I have seen of Mavericks, the new OS X. It doesn't try to get closer to iOS in function, and doesn't add more fad driven options, such as buttons linking directly to Facebook.
It has a number of improvements in the OS and apps such as iBooks, but I tend to focus on improvements under the hood, and Mavericks should make me happy. There are improvements to memory handling and multitasking, making older Macs run quicker. Based on fleeting words at the WWDC keynote, these ideas may have some intelligent software behind them, knowing, for example, when to reduce processing for apps in the background.
I find it interesting that Apple had just one 3rd party company come to the stage during the keynote. Aika is a startup defined as an AI (Artificial Intelligence) company with a simple product to begin, race cars toys controlled by sensors and AI software running on iOS devices.
A simple product with a simple demo that did not highlight any Apple products. So, is Apple actually signaling they are beginning to fold rudimentary AI capabilities into the OSes? Or, am I reading too much into this?
iOS 7 has similar improvements under the hood. I think there are many improvements we will see in iOS 7, including greater consistency across the interface. Lots of good stuff under the hood. I don't expect to see this consistency in full bloom from an early beta, like some bloggers. I am not concerned with the inconsistencies of the icons and controls; this is a beta, and Apple will likely address those concerns before release. I am, however, an engineer, and the danger of being an engineer is seeing the problems, and immediately trying to fix them. If I am not in a position to fix them, I point the problems out.
This early iOS 7 beta has some problems that can be fixed before the release. Maybe Apple doesn't see these ideas as problems, but I think they are. The visible part of iOS has problems that can be divided into aesthetics and mechanics.
The general aesthetics left me feeling a little underwhelmed. It's a simple white interface with minimalist interface elements. It has a new thin font that can be difficult to read with icons that provide little information. It uses weird color schemes to try and provide interest.
Leo Laporte said in a podcast the color palette seems to be inspired by Nicki Minaj's stage wardrobe. Sarah Lane chimed in saying the interface lacks sophistication. I agree with both. The color palette reminds me of a teenager's stripped down, used car painted bright purple.
Don't get me wrong. I am glad the blatant skeuomorphism of earlier versions (stitched leather look) is gone, but I am not one of those who defines skeuomorphism as *anything* that even seems to be taken from the real world. In the article "A closer look: iOS 7 Control and Notification Centers" by Sanjiv Sathiah if Electronista said the semi-transparent panel of the Control Center is skeuomorphic because it resembles semi-transparent glass. He could not be more wrong; this is not skeuomorphism. Nor is a calendar that looks like a calendar as I pointed out in a previous post. This is mimicry that provides context.
I have read that iOS 7 has greatly improved fontography, and those thin fonts can be adjusted for those with eyesight problems. So, I am relieved about this one interface element, and no longer believe the this font will be a problem.
But, I am bothered by this new design that seems to be more about selling iOS devices in Apple stores than providing people with good usability.
Now for mechanics, which I believe contains problems more important to users. I define mechanics as the actual elements of human-computer interface, and how those elements contribute to or detract from the task being performed by the user.
I have never been in favor of hiding information from the user. I do not like the hidden scroll bars found in either iOS or OS X. The user must take focus away from the task at hand to discover the position of the information shown on the screen in a long document.
A similar problem occurs with these simplified icons. Even after learning the meaning of an icon, the user will still pause on occasion from the task at hand, and think "Does that icon represent what I need to do?" People who defend stripped down interface often say that users are now so much more sophisticated. If this is true, shouldn't they be presented with icons conveying significant information? The same can be said of other interface elements.
Among many comments on iOS 7, Josh Topolsky of the Verge said "again Apple seems to ignore the utility of glanceable information"
One more example of iOS 7 detail I question; many buttons now comprise the label for the button without any graphic depicting a button. Somewhere in the interface you may see the word "Done" or "OK" and when first encountered wonder if it's a button. Yes, this can be learned, but should it be necessary, especially for those who will never be fully comfortable with computer interfaces? And, I wonder if they provide poor targets for touch?
If I interpret Bruce Tognazinni's writing correctly, the elimination of the standard button graphic will slow the user's use of the interface, according to Fitt's Law.
So, I am seeing a number of things in the new iOS interface design I do not like. I don't think Apple should be chasing Windows mobile or Android designs for sales in their stores. They should be applying solid human interface design principles and *lead* the way to a better touch interface.
No comments:
Post a Comment