"The Mac Has Never Been User-Friendly"
Originally posted at http://rethinking.squarespace.com
Wednesday, July 6, 2005 by Tory Larson | Discussion: Personal Computing
...but then, neither has Windows or any other OS.
A great article on computer usability on applematters.com...
A great article on computer usability on applematters.com...
Tory Larson
Reply #2 Thursday, July 7, 2005 7:54 AM
Reply #2 Thursday, July 7, 2005 7:54 AM
Good point, George. The thing is, all computer graphical user interfaces are built around some kind of metaphor. One has to be able to wrap his head around the metaphor before he can grasp how to make the thing work. I did a consulting job for the city finance office where I live yesterday. The poor lady needed to install Java. Not a big deal, right? It is when MS has stopped distributing the Java VM and that's where IE takes you to install it...and when you have to deal with firewalls and everything else. Finally, I gave up helping her on the phone and ran down there--and she felt so dumb. I told her, "It's not you. You buy a toaster or a microwave---you don't expect to have to know everything about how they work in order to get something done. You put your food in, push a few buttons, and a few minutes later it comes out hot. It just works. We need our computers to be the same way."
I'm not sure who said it, but it was once said that the only truly intuitive UI is the nipple.
I'm not sure who said it, but it was once said that the only truly intuitive UI is the nipple.
Ka806
Reply #4 Thursday, July 7, 2005 6:49 PM
Reply #4 Thursday, July 7, 2005 6:49 PM
some guis can be better than others though.
On windows, there is a clear and definate start button which implies the obvious, that that is where you start grasping the concept of a computer interface.
Mac OSX however (which has gone south in temrs of interface accessibility) has its little osx bar in the bottom and a status bar uptop. You really have no clue how to approach it.
Interface development is as much an art as a science, that doesnt mean that one interface is better than the other. The best option however is to explore and use the software to understand it. The same goes with programming languages (which are in essense user interfaces for creating software)
On windows, there is a clear and definate start button which implies the obvious, that that is where you start grasping the concept of a computer interface.
Mac OSX however (which has gone south in temrs of interface accessibility) has its little osx bar in the bottom and a status bar uptop. You really have no clue how to approach it.
Interface development is as much an art as a science, that doesnt mean that one interface is better than the other. The best option however is to explore and use the software to understand it. The same goes with programming languages (which are in essense user interfaces for creating software)
George Rogers Jr
Reply #5 Friday, July 8, 2005 1:30 AM
Reply #5 Friday, July 8, 2005 1:30 AM
I don't mean to hog space here Ka806....your totally right, of course...There's really NOT a GUI/OS I dislike it's just the implication by the software developers that it's simple & easy - opening & minimizing pages IS easy; turning your system on/off IS easy, double clicking on a file or files to open is simple - but getting EVERYTHING out of your system (understanding it FULLY & getting the most out it) takes time patience, work, hair loss (sometimes) & a whole host of inquiry. I know there are people (you may be one of them?) who learn very fast, have never had any kind of formal computer training & learned everything about them from the ground up in a short period of time....people with a high degree of math skills probably have a proclivity toward computers & make it look & sound easy. Many of us(certainly myself) are not one of them. I think most developers like Apple, MS, Linx, etc have improved their GUI's with every new release; they've tried to make it as nonintimidating as possible to the novice user....but to say it's EASY/SIMPLE/USER FRIENDLY....not yet. 
Tory Larson
Reply #6 Friday, July 8, 2005 10:52 AM
You're absolutely right about that. I was discussing this with my wife--the "Start" button is leagues ahead of any other GUI. Unfortunately, the intuitivity stops when you click the button.
I think computing is really about finding an effective metaphor. The original Mac (not the current OS X) was easy to use because the Mac UI guidlines adhered to a strict Desktop metaphor. The desktop is not a launcher--it is where you put things that need to get done or be dealt with. Windows made it into a launcher--and broke the whole thing. I think what we need is a new metaphor--or perhaps a better way to explain the current metaphor. Heck, we need UI designers to pick a metaphor and adhere to it. Apple cut off its own nose when it abandoned the original UI guidelines, IMHO. They were the original, and I think, the best. When I fashion my Windows UI after those guidelines, everything just works better.
And George, good points, all. I'm in full agreement. What can we do about it?
Reply #6 Friday, July 8, 2005 10:52 AM
| Ka806 wrote: On windows, there is a clear and definate start button which implies the obvious, that that is where you start grasping the concept of a computer interface. |
You're absolutely right about that. I was discussing this with my wife--the "Start" button is leagues ahead of any other GUI. Unfortunately, the intuitivity stops when you click the button.
I think computing is really about finding an effective metaphor. The original Mac (not the current OS X) was easy to use because the Mac UI guidlines adhered to a strict Desktop metaphor. The desktop is not a launcher--it is where you put things that need to get done or be dealt with. Windows made it into a launcher--and broke the whole thing. I think what we need is a new metaphor--or perhaps a better way to explain the current metaphor. Heck, we need UI designers to pick a metaphor and adhere to it. Apple cut off its own nose when it abandoned the original UI guidelines, IMHO. They were the original, and I think, the best. When I fashion my Windows UI after those guidelines, everything just works better.
And George, good points, all. I'm in full agreement. What can we do about it?
Ka806
Reply #7 Friday, July 8, 2005 6:20 PM
Reply #7 Friday, July 8, 2005 6:20 PM
The thing is that the people who design the GUIs are the ones who have used computers.
There is WAY too much that computers do these days.
And also it is strickly speaking a different playing field.
I say forget all this discussion about GUI intuitiveness for the new user. What NEEDs to happen is better documentation for those who never used computers. The BEST way to approach interfaces, is with consistency. Changing things around only stands to alienate users who have grown accustomed to current interfaces.
I dont think design and coding should not be done in a way so that we focus on getting the best metaphor. If that was the case, then we would be wasting a lot of time in software design. Where the metaphors are needed however, is in the documentation, wheather there is a video to show you how computer works, or in manuals.
It may sound silly, but we should try to get the metaphors to real life scenarios and such AFTER the code has been designed.
As it stands, I interfaces for all DE weather macOSX windows, gnome, kde, xfce, whatever are fine and have their own purposes. Apple has taken a turn for the worse because they are chaning crap around. I would say gnome is the most intuitive because of its simplicity. I would think kde would be the best for a new user because of its incredible documentation.
But should we strive to change this or that in interfaces? Naaaaah
There is WAY too much that computers do these days.
And also it is strickly speaking a different playing field.
I say forget all this discussion about GUI intuitiveness for the new user. What NEEDs to happen is better documentation for those who never used computers. The BEST way to approach interfaces, is with consistency. Changing things around only stands to alienate users who have grown accustomed to current interfaces.
I dont think design and coding should not be done in a way so that we focus on getting the best metaphor. If that was the case, then we would be wasting a lot of time in software design. Where the metaphors are needed however, is in the documentation, wheather there is a video to show you how computer works, or in manuals.
It may sound silly, but we should try to get the metaphors to real life scenarios and such AFTER the code has been designed.
As it stands, I interfaces for all DE weather macOSX windows, gnome, kde, xfce, whatever are fine and have their own purposes. Apple has taken a turn for the worse because they are chaning crap around. I would say gnome is the most intuitive because of its simplicity. I would think kde would be the best for a new user because of its incredible documentation.
But should we strive to change this or that in interfaces? Naaaaah
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
Reply #1 Thursday, July 7, 2005 12:44 AM