- The keyboard design isn’t as slick as the iPhone keyboard design
It’s not quite a MacBook keyboard layout and it’s not an iPhone keyboard layout either. Commit actions like, done, go, search aren’t colored like on the iPhone. The dashes, dots, commas are hard to distinguish. On the iPhone a typewriter like key pops out so you can visually confirm that you hit the right key. On the iPad there is no feature to deal with occlusion. - How you hold the device really alters the user experience and how apps should be designed.
On the iPhone the design is done in such a way to accommodate the way you hold the device. For example in mobile Safari and in email the command buttons are along the bottom of the screen. This puts many buttons in thumbs reach. On the iPad key buttons in both email and Safari are across the top. This means that if you’re holding the device along the bottom you can’t reach many of the buttons without moving your hands. Since the home button tends to be along the bottom there’s no comfortable rest-state. - About my laptop
It starts out with just email and some web-browsing but pretty soon you realize that most of the things you do can be done on an iPad. Not all, and this gap is closing. In particular heavy typing tasks (blogging for me) and heavy editing, especially visual and graphics editing is still better with a laptop. That being said I am much happier bringing a light iPad to a meeting then a heavy laptop. - You don’t use this device like a giant iPod.
I’ve never read a book or a magazine before on either my laptop or iPod. I’ve never played a four person multi-touch game on either of these devices. The experience is different and fun. In a new way. Magazines and books are key here. This is the future of digital content. - Certain people could use this as a replacement computer but I can’t.
Email and web browsing without compromise. (Well maybe the Flash thing) Other then that you have a pretty nice device for doing the core things my mom uses her computer to do. For technical users the iPad doesn’t do enough to replace their laptop. - Screen orientation is flipping me out
When you hold the screen in vertical orientation you get 4 icons across and 5 icons down. When you flip the screen you get 5 across and 4 down. The annoying part is that the icons re-positions so you can’t use spacial memory to find an icon. Was that icon on the top right? Ohh, sorry now it’s in the middle left. - The web is not ready for the iPad (yet).
There are still plenty of sites with embedded video/flash and when I hit these sites I am likely to move on. I almost never stop what I’m doing to go grab my laptop. As the iPad sails past the 1M mark the tech-savvy sites will transition over to H264 video. The issue is primarily video although other flash goodness will still be missing.
Flash sucks but HTML5 is worse then Flash on many things, more on that in another post.
Subscribe to this blog to hear more on that.
- The battery lasts a freakishly long time
It’s nothing like a Kindle but compared to other bright-screen electronics. Wow. That’s all I have to say about that.
- A different user experience is fundamental to touch computing
I remember a program manager from Microsoft talking about the Tablet PC back in 2000. He said, in the history of computing there has never been a product category that has failed as often as tablet based computing. From the Alan Kay to the Apple Newton and even Windows for Pen Computing. The history books are filled with these ‘slate’ computers that have failed. He then went on to explain how the Tablet PC would be different because it focused on the input experience.The truth is that the tablet/slate experiences of the past were not that different. It was Windows with a great input editor. It’s too early to tell if the iPad will succeed or fail but the iPad user experience is so different in a fundamental way that it will change how people interact with computers.
How do I know? My two year old is now reached out and trying to scroll the screen on my laptop. If that’s not the future I don’t know what is.
Archive for the ‘Design’ Category
9 Things I didn’t know about the iPad
May 10
14
Mobile On-Screen Keyboards
Mar 10
15
It’s interesting to look at several mobile on-screen keyboards side by side to compare various design decisions. I’ve shown screenshots of the iPhone, Android and Windows Mobile phones.
- The iPhone is the only keyboard that always displays characters in upper-case. I believe this may help legibility as well as being consistent with desktop keyboards.
- All three make use of the entire region for hit-testing but the iPhone makes the buttons appear smaller giving the illusion of white-space between the letters. This may help users target toward the center of the button when typing.
- The iPhone is also the only keyboard to use color to both offset the modifier keys and the completion keys. This gives the keyboard a funnel style appearance.
- The Windows Mobile keyboard extends the A and L keys to use all available space.
- Android and Windows Mobile both tend to use the classic keyboard “Enter” key rather then the task centric command. This can be confusing when using the arrow symbol right next to a delete arrow symbol.
On a positive note the keyboard all use almost identical spacing so if you learn to “touch type” you’ll be mostly OK as you move between devices.
Bad Standards
Mar 10
14
Firefox has it’s own layout language called XUL that is used to style and design much of the UI inside Firefox. If HTML is so great why did Firefox need XUL? The reason is that HTML and CSS are inneficient at describing user itnerfaces, designer intent and basic design. Google Chrome’s UI? Nope. Safari UI? Nope. Internet Explorer? Yeah Right.
Standards people, it’s all about standards! Sure.
If the standards are so great and the browser makers claim great performance why aren’t the core bits of browser user interfaces built using the very same tools?
Apple’s Tablet, Slate, Canvas, Taplet
Jan 10
24
Tablet style computing has been one of the most failed technologies ever. History is full of examples of similar devices that have crashed and burned.
1950′s Styalator electronic tablet, 1960′s RAND Tablet and Dynabook. Various generations of Apple Newton devices, Microsoft Slate’s and Windows for Pen based computers. Even the Kindle that has sold about 1.5 million units total could be viewed as a failure when compared to numbers like 40-60 million iPhone’s and iPod Touch devices.
Why have so many companies tried and so many failed? Perhaps more importantly what does Apple think it can do to succeed? Here’s what I predict:
- Best overall device for consuming content. Books, Magazines, Music, DVD’s.
Devices of the past focused on creating content (usually with a pen) only the Kindle was good at reading content and only book form at that. - Best mobile web-browser. Sure you can pinch and zoom on your phone but if you really want to surf you need something larger. This middle ground is great for a tablet sized device. You can finally read a website on a bus or train without trying to balance a laptop or looking too conspicuous.
- Interface based on the iPhone. Clearly Apple has nailed the iPhone UI. They will take this base and extend it to a larger device. Not as big as a laptop but somewhere in between. The touch based interface will be enhanced with a two hand multi-touch predictive keyboard. Everyone will hate it at first. Three months later everyone will call it brilliant.
- It’ll look like a flat iPhone. 90% screen, a little edge. Thin as hell. It’ll be priced so that people perceive it as being expensive and premium compared to everything else. $799, maybe more. Expect people to say… Why would I get that when I can get a Kindle for $259. That sort of thing just makes people desire it even more.
- App developers will flock to it.
- Magazines will be the killer content.
- Social games will be the killer app.
Mobile Ergonomics for those with two thumbs
Nov 09
23
You can’t easily tap every region of the phone with equal ease. Your hand isn’t designed for this. Yes your thumb is opposable but unless it’s double jointed there will still be parts of your phone that will be harder to tap.
When designing an application consider how it’s going to be held. In one hand, sometimes in the other, perhaps in your pocket? That’s why it’s so important to get the app out of the simulator and actually into your hand. The mechanics of how you hold your phone make it much harder to grip the device in certain orientations. It makes it particularly difficult to reach the lower corners by your thumb.
Consider the built in Camera application that Apple provides. The application is simple and attractive but the buttons for the application are in exactly the wrong place. To take a proper picture you need to hold the phone perfectly vertical (unless you’re taking a picture of the floor.) The slippery edges of the phone require you to either grip the phone firmly with your hand making it difficult to tap the camera or alternatively balance the camera precariously on your pinkie finger.
I have dropped my phone at least twice attempting this and know of at least one person who has smashed their phone into little bits because of this.
There’s a principal called “Fitts’s law” that describes how clickable items are on screen. Said simply:
Items that are larger and closer to the mouse cursor are easier to click.
The mathematical details then explain that traditional screen edges are infinitely click-able since they have a virtually unlimited size. On a mobile device the same assumptions don’t hold true. The mechanics of your hand play a significant role. Not only do items have to be larger to be easier to click but they have to be easily reachable when holding a phone in one hand.
Quick Calendar UI Review – Google
Nov 09
19
This is a simple UI critique of a simple feature burried in Google Calendar. Here’s the original:
It’s a relatively simple form. It’s certainly not bad but I think it could be better. Here’s a quick mock up:
Here are the key design points:
- The body of the form has “What, When, Where” but doesn’t have “Who” if you’re having a meeting it stands to reason that the people attending are pretty important. I always felt that having guests hidden in the right didn’t make sense.
- The majority of meetings are measured in duration. 30 min, 45 min, 1 hour, 2 hour, all day, etc. It’s much easier to pick a common duration and allow “custom end time.” as a fall-back rather then making users select end times.
- Most meetings don’t repeat. Logically this is a secondary consideration. This can be moved to the secondary area on the right.
- Checking availability should be a secondary area action as well. Plus over on the right there’s more space to present availability in-line.
- It should be really easy to preview a location with a map.
- The current UI makes it difficult to add people to a meeting without the system automatically emailing them. You have to place names into the description area. Having a simple checkbox to email guests could solve this.
- There are a lot of simple UI 101 alignment things that can make the UI look cleaner and simpler just by lining fields up.
- The right hand side could be extensible with new modules, plug-ins, ala Google Labs.
5 Email Problems not Solved by Google Wave
Nov 09
10
Google wave is an interesting new technology for communication. In concept it’s supposed to fix many of the issues associated with email. While it solved some of the back & forth in traditional email threads it fails to solve a number key email issues and instead introduces it’s own set of problems by radicly changing how people work.
- It’s still not possible to easily tell if your message was received, read or even opened. Just like email you will never know if the important proposal made it.
- Information overload. The problem is finding what’s important. New things move to the top regardless of how important they are. Compare this to how you organize papers on your desk, important things move to the top.
- If you say something stupid you can’t take it back. Just like email once it’s out there you’re done. Even if the other person hasn’t seen it yet. They will now play it back in it’s full glory.
- Privacy. You can’t send something and keep the recipient from forwarding it on.
- Transfer of large files or collections. You can still attach things but if you want to share 50 wedding photos or a large home movie Wave won’t help you much. It’s a communication pipe but files are secondary citizens.
- Bonus #6. Spam. You’ll can still get it and you’ll still be expected to flag it. So there will be false positives. An extensive social network reputation doesn’t help. A lack of a social network doesn’t keep you from sending 1000′s of messages. It’s still early so there is little spam but this will change if this catches on.
Free iPhone Designer Icons
Oct 09
16
Designing icons is hard. Designing quality icons is harder. That’s why it’s great when a free resource pops up that provides over 100 free icons for your use in iPhone application designs. These icons are perfect for tab bars or toolbar use.
Often times we don’t use these icons verbetam but they provide a valuable design language and starting point that offers some level of predictability and consistency across apps.
Get them over at http://www.glyphish.com/
Interface List Design – Drupal
Oct 09
1
This is a quick UI critique on a list design pattern that’s in a proposed stages for Drupal7. The UI being critiqued is not final, as such the feedback is meant to be helpful to both the Drupal team and anyone else designing list based design patterns.
Before:
Example image from drupal 7 content list
Key points with this screen:
- The title areas don’t tell you what you’re supposed to do on this screen. In fact there are at least three competing title areas. “Content” as a title, “Content” as a tab, “Add new content” as a secondary title and two group boxes that cover filtering and updating. The actual title of the screen doesn’t reflect the modal nature of dialog. You’re actually adding content to something else and it’s not clear what that is.
- The information is presented in the wrong reading order. The content table should be first. You first have to read the list to see what you’re dealing with before you decide to either filter it or update it.
- An empty list is a dead-end. It tells you there is no content but doesn’t direct you on how or where you should go to create some.
- The X in the upper doesn’t make it clear what it would close. The tab? The dialog? A simple cancel button or a standard cancel button or a close button in the upper right would be more obvious.
After
Key points
- Title should say what you’re doing.
- Filters should sit above column headers whenever possible. No additional button action should be needed and multiple filters can be applied at the same time.
- It should be easy to reset the filters and hide them. Hidden should be the default. The filters should give you a clue as to the number of items in each filter bucket: Articles (3) Posts (120). This makes it easier to select the right filters.
- If the table is empty it should be easy to get to a content creation page.
- Buttons along the bottom of a dialog provide clear ways to exit or complete the task.
- Things that don’t map to the core task should be hidden. In the original mockup there were options to update the status of content from published to unpublished. This type of functionality belongs in a management section, not when you’re “adding content.” It should be removed or hidden in a similar way that filters can be hidden.
Why the Chrome OS Matters
Jul 09
13
Two years ago I stood at Goolge’s mountain view campus in front of about 100 Linux desktop architects. The message I delivered was simple. Linux would never take off in it’s current form. A new strategy was needed and the core of this strategy was the web.
The arguments for Linux on the consumer desktop were not working:
- The main argument of Linux was that it’s a free alternative, however most people get PC’s with an OS pre-installed. From this perspective ‘free’ doesn’t matter because it’s built into the price.
- The second argument of Linux is ‘it’s open source.’ This argument carries some weight with businesses but a typical consumer doesn’t understand or care about open source.
- The third argument is speed. Not a bad argument but when most people only care about web-browsing and email the bottleneck is usually the dial-up connection, not the x86.
- Beyond that the argument isn’t very compelling. Linux provides the same abilities to launch basic apps, configure settings and has the same or often times worse compatibility issues with drivers.
The future OS is will be based on the web
- Current operating systems where all developed at their core before the web was invented. We know a lot about what users do on websites and we haven’t made any of that easier in the desktop OS.
- Files can show up on the desktop but live in the cloud
- Everything is backed up
- Web sites (apps) work online and offline
- When I double click on a file in the future it should be able to open in a web-based editor and that web-based editor should be able to save that file back to my desktop.
- I should not need to worry about installing and uninstalling stuff. I should just use the tools I need when I need them.
All these things are part of the Google portfolio and plan
- Google Chrome – the browser and it’s integration into Google Gears can be the foundation of very complex and rich desktop class apps.
- Google Docs is a web based editing suite that is obviously going after Office. The ability to click a file from your desktop and have it open online is too obvious not to happen.
- Google has said that it will target the OS toward ‘netbooks.’ If you haven’t realized it all laptops are becoming netbooks as you spend more and more of your time online.
An operating system based around the web is a really interesting proposition. It’s not about ‘Linux’ it’s about a better web experience. This is what consumers are doing understand and this is why this OS matters while Linux still does not.
When I gave my talk many of the Linux architects had good comments and discussion but quickly retuned to bickering about KDE vs. Gnome. It was the Google guys, lurking perhaps, that have taken the message to heart and are building a true OS with the web at it’s heart.