Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How Apple Is Giving Design A Bad Name
- Thread starter grahamperrin
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There is thought, but it seems to me that an excess is prejudiced (Apple's final judgement – that a software design will be acceptably usable by customers – precedes the opportunity to seed test with customers).
Such thoughts are imposed by Apple. Closed source.
Consider Matthew D. Fuller's thoughtful rant, User Friendly? (undated, probably October 2010).
Loyalty is fragile. https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=default&q=from:gerrymcgovern loyalty – the October 2015 article in Harvard Business Review, and so on.
(Disclosure: there's a connection between Gerry, and some of my colleagues at the Centre for Research in Innovation Management.)
Excessive control by shareholders. Money, money, money.
Yeah, it's unfair to blame any individual. On the other hand: neither is it right for some of the design direction of the software to suck, so massively. My natural response a year ago was to blame a specific individual. See the struck-through last paragraph at https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...f-the-old-school.1638762/page-2#post-20279855
If no leading individual is to blame for the direction, and if the company does not respond appropriately to feedback, then criticism must fall upon leadership as a whole – including the Board of Directors.
It's only one level back, and disappears if you go to another app on your own.
Plus it's in the totally wrong place, like all the other back buttons in iOS... way upper left... especially if you have a bigger screen.
Listen to the Talk Show podcast with John Gruber and Jason Snell. They didn't discount everything in this piece but we're pretty dismissive of it, especially since at least one of the authors has been critical of Apple software for a long time, well before Steve Jobs died. The headline was good for clicks the article itself was just tedious.
The back button was there far before iOS9. I remember it there at least as far back as iOS6.
The issue is the same today as it was back then: not all apps use a back button, not all apps understand the back swipe gesture, and Apple does not do anything to universalize this key function. Sometimes it's there, sometimes it's not. Sometimes the swipe works, sometimes not. In Android, the back button is always there in the same spot and always works in the same way, regardless of app or screen. I almost never praise Android, but they got this right.
I think the main take-away is that discoverability used to be easier. Today, UI elements are less clear and what is possible is more difficult to find. Thus, over time, iOS has become harder to use. The trend should be the other way.
Neither author needed clicks, and Fast Company could have got clicks in any number of ways. How was the article tedious?
If they had good reasons for doing so, I don't see why that would invalidate or make you dismiss their current complaints.
If Apple is giving design a bad name, then maybe they should also be looking out the right window, since every other manufactures brings follows Apple in design...
Why are there so many thin ultrabooks outs? It's not because of they just all decided at the same time as Apple... it's because they didn't know how to do it.. and needed Apple to show them how to make a laptop.... This is why keyboards/trackpad's on PC laptops, (to some extent still are) are shocking to use unless u pay a hefty price tag (again Apple showing how it's done)
U can try and sugar-coat it and "well. we just all decided one day..."
no u didn't
if u had u would of been out the gate before the Apple Macbook line...
Unless you are mean, It's giving Apple a bad name, because more non-Apple laptops are becoming disposable.. than yes. (but then this was controlled by Apple too)... so whichever way u look at it. its not really bad..
Why are there so many thin ultrabooks outs? It's not because of they just all decided at the same time as Apple... it's because they didn't know how to do it.. and needed Apple to show them how to make a laptop.... This is why keyboards/trackpad's on PC laptops, (to some extent still are) are shocking to use unless u pay a hefty price tag (again Apple showing how it's done)
U can try and sugar-coat it and "well. we just all decided one day..."
no u didn't
if u had u would of been out the gate before the Apple Macbook line...Unless you are mean, It's giving Apple a bad name, because more non-Apple laptops are becoming disposable.. than yes. (but then this was controlled by Apple too)... so whichever way u look at it. its not really bad..
That's because Apple designs are popular, not necessarily because they are good.
I'm not saying the rMBP is a crappy machine, mind you, but at this point Apple could sell more or less any POS and people would still buy it because of the momentum, like Sony in the '80s.
I wouldn't discount the fact that the technology to make them is there, for example affordable SSDs which weren't there in, uh, 2008.
Apple has got a lot of things right, there's no denying that.
On the other hand, surely you will have noticed that it wasn't Apple that started, for example, the glossy screen fad.
And that Dell has yet to put out a cylindrical workstation with no drive bays, thank God.
Dude, of course a $299 laptop will have the cheapest trackpad available, but laptops in the price range of the MBP have decent input devices.
In fact, I believe Lenovo and, to a lesser extend, HP to be way ahead of Apple in this respect, if nothing else because they include a pointing stick, hence making their laptops actually usable while sitting on your lap.
All of this doesn't change that the UI design at Apple is pretty broken these days.
If you actually take the time to read the article you'll see it isn't about touchpads.
I've not seen any PC (regardless of price) have a better trackpad then Apple. I've heard on various podcasts people like Paul Thurrott, also complain about trackpads and why is it so hard to produce a decent one like apple.
It was one of the podcasts whee he was talking about the SurfaceBook's trackpad and how good it is, compared to other PC trackpads, but even so, its not quite the same as apple's.
You may be stuck in 1999 and not realize it.
While you are absolutely entitled to prefer the Mac (I mean... that's what this forum is about
Windows 7 is rock solid (it is also annoying by design in many respects, but those are not bugs),
Ubuntu is just as easy to install and operate as the Mac, if less polished.
No configuration files, no hacking around, apps are mature and are installed from the Ubuntu App Store or whatever it's called.
In fact, critics of Ubuntu among old school Linux folks tend to bring up the accusation of it being too similar to the Mac.
I wouldn't necessarily blame Cook.
If I really really had to blame someone, I'd blame Ive and whoever let him go beyond designing pretty plastic cases (which he is great at), since his takeover of the software side of things was immediately followed by massive suckage.
But then maybe no-one is specifically to blame.
Even if you reinstated the Apple board from 2001 these are different times and different circumstances.
They seem to be pleasing today's customers well enough, you can't ignore that.
And we change as well.
Maybe you are <ominous music; thunderclap> a Dell person now
No that's not why we criticize Ubuntu
Since when has John Gruber EVER criticized Apple? Did you really expect him to just because there is another new article doing so? And what has the article being tedious have anything to do with it? Your debate confuses me.
Well, some of them. Some have other reasons, e.g. KDE or - ugh - GNOME3 fans.
Point being "Ubuntu in 2015 is not Slackware in 1995".
You don't have to vi /etc/X11R6/XF86Config and CTRL+ALT+Backspace to death just to have a working X session, if you get my gist.
The problem with such a statement is that "better" is ill-defined.
In this context it can only possibly mean "a touchpad I liked better".
Fair enough, enjoy your MBP's trackpad, as for me, Synaptics never let me down.
Note that I think that the lack of a pointing stick is a far bigger issue for mobile users than an artsy-fartsy touchpad.
However, that's, uh, not what the thread was about
firstly if u even read my post i wasn't even hinting a connection between trackpad's and the article... I was merely point out the fact.. u pay more, u get better gear.
Are u saying that even if Apple were producing crap people would still buy because it's Apple ? I would hope users are smarter than that.
For a while, yes. It would backfire a year or two later. See: Samsung Galaxy S III.
I'd argue this a bit. I'm currently typing this up in Ubuntu Gnome 15.10, and while Linux has improved GREATLY over the last 7-8 years I've been dabbling in it, it's still not to the point where your average mom 'n pop can sit in front of it and feel comfortable after a couple hours of use.
For one thing, installing applications is still far, far, FAR more convoluted than it should be. For instance, I grabbed a game off GOG last night. It came in three self contained .sh scrips, which meant I had to go in, chmod +x all three, then type out ./gog_game_blah_blah_blah_and_so_on_3.5.7.9.sh just to get to the installer splash. Why couldn't I just double click it? Then, when I wanted to run the game, it wouldn't start, so I had to go into the terminal, launch it there, find out what libraries were missing, then install each one.
Granted, installing things through Steam or the Ubuntu Software Center (soon to be replaced with the far superior Gnome Software) is cake. You click it, it installs, it runs. They're about as easy as using the iOS App Store. The problem is, not all my games are on Steam, and the built in app stores are primarily concerned with open source applications, and aren't always the most up to date. At some point, you WILL have to go outside the services to get your applications, and that's when it becomes something of a pain.
If a few people in the community get their way you will be able to double click to install...
Linux isn't for everyone and I don't think it should be sold to everyone having said that most people don't go to GOG and buy games.
====
After 10 years of being Linux only IME there are three basic types of Linux users 1) Stallmanites 2) Poor people 3) Folks who drive servers for a living. To use Linux you need to have a reason, a legit hard reason if you don't you'll forever be trying it and never use it. If I'm completely honest I really don't want everyone and their sister on Linux because it get old answering the same questions over and over that could be answered with a google search or perusing the documentation. The Linux world is fun, egotistical, full of scary smart people and not for everyone and they print such great books:
c'mon no starch press that's my life wash and wear!
No, it's not for everyone, and for much the same reasons you list below, I wouldn't recommend it as such. It really is an OS designed for people who know what they're doing, and are comfortable with computers. That said, it could be a little more user friendly.
And I'd say quite a few people hit up GOG. They're the second most popular distribution platform behind Steam after all.
This might've been true in the past, but there is a slow sea change going on that'll eventually lead to Linux being a compelling alternative to the Big Two. That is, if it keeps up at its current pace anyway.
Back when I first started goofing around with Linux to see what the fuss was about, there was absolutely no software available for it outside of dinky open source alternatives that really weren't nearly as good as their proprietary equivalents. It was, like you said, a place for the Stallmanites (who are probably flocking more towards HURD now), the poor, and the admins.
These days? I'd say a good 70% of the paid-for software I use regularly in Windows is available to me in Linux. Not only that, but some of those once dinky open source applications are getting pretty good. Barring Photoshop, I can use Linux the same way I use Windows. Sometimes even better, because I'm so slick 'n smooth with Gnome 3 these days.
Linux is becoming something more than what it was. But it still has some rough edges that'll, unless smoothed out, keep it primarily as the Geek's OS of choice.
How many people play games though? I know games are big business but with a few billion computers out there it'd be hard not to be big business.
You pretty much answered your own question. It's enough to be hugely profitable, which is all that matters.
Though there's still plenty more commercial support coming up in Linux than just games. I know 3D and rendering are seeing a huge surge on the platform, art and photo editing are slowly working their way into the scene. About the only thing that isn't represented in some shape, form, or fashion, is the sound and music industry, which probably has something to with Linux's audio architecture being a bit subpar (from what I hear anyway, that's not my scene).
I don't think Linux will ever have mass consumer appeal. There won't be a Year of the Linux Desktop as it was envisioned in the past. But I could see it very easily becoming the gamers and professionals platform in the not so distant future.
I'm just going to play Minecraft on Linux (though I still don't get the point of the game) with my daughter after getting my DO Ubuntu Minecraft server running and save the rest of the debate for another year
I'm just going to play Minecraft on Linux (though I still don't get the point of the game) with my daughter after getting my DO Ubuntu Minecraft server running and save the rest of the debate for another year
The point of Minecraft is that you build stuff, there are zombies and skeletons, and it's awesome.
It's like limitless, inexpensive Lego.
You'll have to blame that on GOG.
My point.
Only if the developers want it to be a pain.
Even if the software you are interested in is not on the USC nothing prevents the developer to provide a nice, easy to install .deb package on which you can double-click.
Really, this is the same argument people used against the Mac in 1999: the Mac sucks because X, where X is something dependent on developers and manufacturer of third party devices
Are they still relevant in 2015?
I thought we had SJWs to make the internet annoying now.
How so?
Poor people usually use a 2005 HP Pavillion with Windows XP.
And they usually don't overlap with #4, below.
...and,
4) Engineers, mathematicians, students, people in technical professions.
I believe those are make up the largest Linux user base.
Then again, lots and lots of them use Macs, some are Windows aficionados, but Linux systems are huge there.
And for a reason: industry standard tools come in a central repository, preconfigured with all of their extensions - all TeXLive packages, nearly every Python or Octave module is there, et cetera.
To use any system, after all
Last edited by a moderator: