This essay is nothing more than the authors opinion (which there is nothing wrong with) presented as fact (completely take umbrage with this). Looking at the authors website, the current design of Apple's UI elements are not to their taste. An example would be this; http://www.nicholaswindsorhoward.com/blog-directory/2016/1/2... The odd idea is interesting, but it's massively regressive.
The Apple Goes Mushy Part I: OS X's Interface Decline
331–340 of 440 posts
Re: The Apple Goes Mushy Part I: OS X's Interface Decline
#332Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or they make their own internal testing and don't provide links to their "papers"? How about that?
Quite possible, do you think they they lead the design primarily with usability or fashion?
Usability is great and all, but if your products dont sell because they're perceived as unfashionable it's not that good...
Re: The Apple Goes Mushy Part I: OS X's Interface Decline
#333The camera icon is not just a picture of the physical world object. It is pretty universal symbol for taking pictures. When the same symbol is used in so many places, even people who have never used the physical object resembling the icon, will recognize its meaning. In my view the reason behind many of these user interface changes is not really improved usability. The simple reason is that no matter how good interfa…
Re: The Apple Goes Mushy Part I: OS X's Interface Decline
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
By the same logic you can dismiss every critique. Not everything new is an improvement.
Change for change's sake disgusts me. It is rampant in Apple's macos, iOS, as well as Google's Android.
And usually to assemble piecemeal some functionality related to a long term master-plan (usually of the "All your Apple devices as a digital hub" category).
Re: The Apple Goes Mushy Part I: OS X's Interface Decline
#335Also, everything he points out is to the benefit of a society that's making it's first steps into computing using GUIs. Once you've accomplished that first introduction, you optimize for efficiency. Do you really need to sit there and parse an icon's details every time before you actually click the icon and move on to the actual task you intended to do?
I'm sure Apple considers a lot before making design changes, from UX efficiency to cross-platform aesthetic consistency to iPhone battery life (does displaying white icons encourage darker backgrounds which ultimately have more pixels using lower energy to light up or some such nuance?), which this article ignores entirely.
Re: The Apple Goes Mushy Part I: OS X's Interface Decline
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 40 years ago, the majority of people using computers knew what they were doing. You think that 10 and 20 year olds growing up with computers and even smartphones available for all of their life, know less of computers than people in the past? Even a 7 year old that plays games can almost run circles around a 1980s propellerhead computer programmer in using a GUI. Compared to regular people (e.g. office workers) fro…
I think they know less than the people who were using computers back then. The difference is of course that today computers are used by more of the general public for communication, office, and media consumption, rather than (only) bunch of tech savvy specialists. Most of my generation and the generation that followed barely have a concept of a computer beyond "press the thing to make things happen". They know no mor…
That is patently false. There are hard core GUI users, from VFX and 3D artists to DAW and NLE operators, graphic designers and many more, than run circles around any "command line" person for the tasks they actually do.
Just as there are tons of programmers using Visual Studio and other GUI platforms, than can program far more efficiently with the intelligent autocomplete, integrated debuggers, profilers, and such, than some CLI-jockeys who think they are more efficient with their pimped Emacs or Vim.
Is Rob Pike and his GUI editor/environment a "novice/consumer"? What about tons of excellent Windows programmers? What about Notch?
Re: The Apple Goes Mushy Part I: OS X's Interface Decline
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think they know less than the people who were using computers back then. The difference is of course that today computers are used by more of the general public for communication, office, and media consumption, rather than (only) bunch of tech savvy specialists. Most of my generation and the generation that followed barely have a concept of a computer beyond "press the thing to make things happen". They know no mor…
> As for running circles around people while using a GUI, while I accept there are specialised fields and exceptions that disprove the rule, outside of marketing presentations I just don't see it happen. As much as any generalisation can be valid, the GUI does not run circles around anyone that can actually program and is generally the mark of the computer novice/consumer... I wonder. Every time I see a colleague usi…
A lot of the CLI usage feels fast because its busywork.
Re: The Apple Goes Mushy Part I: OS X's Interface Decline
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
> As for running circles around people while using a GUI, while I accept there are specialised fields and exceptions that disprove the rule, outside of marketing presentations I just don't see it happen. As much as any generalisation can be valid, the GUI does not run circles around anyone that can actually program and is generally the mark of the computer novice/consumer... I wonder. Every time I see a colleague usi…
Your colleague doesn't use completion? To me, using CLI is like having a conversation, with much richer vocabulary, than GUI. That's just pointing at things.
Re: The Apple Goes Mushy Part I: OS X's Interface Decline
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 40 years ago, the majority of people using computers knew what they were doing. You think that 10 and 20 year olds growing up with computers and even smartphones available for all of their life, know less of computers than people in the past? Even a 7 year old that plays games can almost run circles around a 1980s propellerhead computer programmer in using a GUI. Compared to regular people (e.g. office workers) fro…
> You think that 10 and 20 year olds growing up with computers and even smartphones available for all of their life, know less of computers than people in the past? Yes. Aptitude with screwing around with a GUI isn't very relevant. 40 years ago, computers were at best used by clerk type people for specific tasks at a terminal. Accountants were using tabulation machines, written materials were on IBM selectrics. The p…
It is relevant to actual stuff they want done.
Unless they are programmers aptitude in screwing around with cli commands isn't very relevant.
Re: The Apple Goes Mushy Part I: OS X's Interface Decline
#340If you want an icon that looks like a physical object, OK. I can probably live with that. But the moment you want to extend that to making the app act like the object its icon represents, you've lost me. Perhaps Ive et al decided that having a realistic Notes icon attached to a non-notebook-like app was more confusing than keeping the old one? That certainly seems justifiable.
Also: who cares what the Safari compass looks like? To me, "compass" means "compass". It's never represented a safari to me (not that "safari-the-adventure" represented "Safari-the-browser"). What would that skeumorphic icon be anyway - a rifle?
This is what we used to have: http://venturebeat.com/2012/10/30/skeuomorphic-design-or-one... . I couldn't have been happier when Mavericks ditched all that. It wasn't perfect, to be sure, but it went a long way to restoring artificially-lost usability.
The article feels to me as though the author is caught up in nostalgia. That's fine, but not mistake "I liked it that way" for "that way was objectively better".