Disclaimer – Despite the fact that I first learned personal computing as it exists today via an Apple, I have long since drifted away from Mac as my preferred computing format.  I switched to Windows OS in college, but tried to return to Mac in 2008.  I did not enjoy the experience, finding it too restrictive.  That said, I have been an iPhone user for nearly 2 years now (as I patiently await the release of Windows Mobile 7).

Travis, you ignorant slut.

While I do agree with you that the App Store is not working, I believe it’s because of a lack of options, not an overabundance.  Specifically, the lack of options and functionality surrounding search.  Perhaps I'm spoiled to the search functions of Microsoft products, such as Outlook, that give me options of what to search and how to search, but I find the App Store’s lone search box woefully lacking.  I have no opportunity to select options such as “show by rating,” “show by relevance,” “search only last 6 months,” “search only the utilities category” – you get the idea.  Granted, under individual categories, I have some options, but that doesn’t really help when I'm searching for a very specific app type.

Recently, I attempted to find a task list program for the iPhone that would allow me to use task lists on my iPhone.  (That’s right, non-iPhone users, there’s no native task list functionality on the platform.)   I wanted an app that allowed me to schedule recurrence, set a deadlines, use multiple lists, sync with Outlook, categorize, and send me reminders.  But all I could enter was one little search box.  With those criteria, the search data returned was maddening.  A little more than half of the results returned were actually focused on task lists, others included grocery lists, note taking apps, and even a sketching app or two .  I tried a variety of search terms such as “business task list,” “outlook task list, “ and “selectable task list.”  No dice.

Thusly I began the arduous task of wading through all the options out there.  I wanted to read other users’ reviews, but I didn’t want to restrict myself to only checking out the apps that popped up first in the list.  But reading reviews after selecting “show me 25 more” multiple times is exasperating.  After finishing a reviews for a specific app, the App Store returns the user back to the initial list of 25.  Heaven forbid you’ve made it down to app #210 – you’ll wind up selecting “show me 25 more 8 times before getting back to where you left off!  Argh!  Had I been able to better whittle down my search by specific criteria, I could have saved hours.

Now I know, Travis, that you oppose the free apps, but after my experience, I say thank goodness for the free options.  Most quality developers provide a free mini version of their apps, so I was able to try a dozen or so before actually paying for anything.  I would have been furious if I'd had to pay even 99 cents for every app I tried.  Yes, the iBeer app and others like it are pointless.  But remember, this is not a business phone (or it would have a native task list app), but a general purpose phone.  That means frat boys are going to want their Virtual Lighter app, teenage girls will want their Hairstyle app, and someone with too much time on their hands will want the More Toast! virtual toast app.

I know it will come as no shock to you, Travis, that I can’t stand the Apple “we know best” way of thinking.  I totally understand that it makes some people feel safe and comfortable, but the last time I tried owning a Mac, I nearly went out of my mind not being able to customize my computer the way I wanted to use it.  

 (And for those who are curious, I wound up buying and trying 3 different apps over the course of 2 months before finally giving up altogether.  Now I use a combination of Outlook’s task lists and Post-its.)

Disclaimer- I have been an Apple user since my childhood. I have been using Macs exclusively since 2001, and I don’t plan on ever going back to Windows … ever.

After finally moving to the iPhone, I can now talk intelligently on the iTunes App Store, and more specifically tell your why it is not working.

The App Store is the antithesis of Apple. Apple is providing a platform, the iPhone, and allowing anyone to create software to run on the platform. The App Store represents the “Microsoft-ing” of the iPhone platform. This is exactly how Windows has been operating for decades. Since its inception Apple has been providing a limited product line-up, which they control from creation to retail, with a “we know how to innovate” attitude. This attitude is highlighted in this article where Steve Jobs admits that Apple doesn’t do market research, and essentially they could care less what their customers have to say. This attitude might not be the best, but many people are excited about the innovative products Apple creates. With the App Store, the control to innovate is being taken away from Apple and given to the masses.

There are many reasons why I enjoy living in Apple’s world, not least of which is I am tired of having to make so many decisions about electronics. People have too many important daily decisions to make about food, shelter, and transportation that they really don’t need to be deciding on which of 12 video cards they should buy. For example, I have been looking to buy an HDTV for the better part of 2 years. I know the specs, I have the cash, but there are too many choices, and the choices keep changing. It is too much for me to take. People say they want as many choices as possible, that they don’t want to be fenced in, and they want options. This, friends, is simply not true. People only say they want options so they can shift blame to the choices, and away from their ability to choose correctly. “I thought this was going to be the best HDTV, but there are too many choices; how was I supposed to know?” This mindset is more of a defense mechanism than a true ideological stance.

The Apps Store brings too many choices to the iPhone. To make matters worse, gathering information on all these apps to make an informed decision is practically impossible. Let’s try an experiment. Please search for a utilitarian app, something that serves a purpose and the iPhone is perfect for: a grocery list app. I’ll wait … for those of you without iPhones here is a screenshot of what you get.

In total there are 112 apps that come up when you search for “grocery list.” Admittedly, some of the apps are not relevant, but the majority of they are. How do I know which one is the best? Apple used to tell me what was the best, or at least there were only one or two options. Now Apple makes me wade through dozens of apps and go through a clunky download process to see if I will like the app. And because there are so many apps, I am always wondering, “Well is there another app that is a little better out there?” Now I have to think about which grocery store app to use, and not something more important, like feeding my dog – which I am sure there is an app for, but how do I know it is the best one for my dog and me? Will I ever know?

Now some of you might be thinking about the App Store approval process, where each app is carefully screened, and only the good ones make it. (Warning, from here on all links will open in iTunes) To that I would say, “Raspberries!” There is an app in the App Store called “Hold On.” It is an app that records how long you can hold down a button, and it now has multiplayer functionality via Bluetooth (no, seriously).

Really? This was rigorously approved? Come on … and let’s not even talk about all the flatulence apps. So in the spirit of offering solutions with my complaints, here is what I think should happen:

1) Apple should create more apps in-house. This will allow them to continue to innovate, and create better apps for their platform.

2) All apps should be $.99 or more. The free apps are the heaviest weight pulling Apple into the mud. If the application is good enough, people will buy it.

3) Focus apps to match the strengths of the iPhone, portability, multi-touch, accelerometer, geo-location, and the Internet. The iBeer app does not really leverage any of these strengths well.

In conclusion, Apple – please stop pandering to the masses. I know the revenue is nice, but you were already a successful company and the iPhone already has a HUGE profit margin. The iPhone has gotten you into more houses than ever, but is this really the company you want to be keeping? You are who you associate with, and I can’t see this going anywhere good. You have been warned …

Last time on the Tuitive blog, I talked about doing one thing well. Today I am going to expand on that. New technologies, especially on the web, have to play well with other programs.
The days of proprietary formats, and disconnected applications are numbered. As more and more applications begin to move to the web, being able to share information and users is becoming vital to success. The idea of making user stick to one tool or another is starting to backfire.
Users want freedom.
“I want to be able to update my tumblr blog with photos from my Flickr account, and then tweet about my new photos and update my Facebook page. Oh, and I want to be able to do it from my cell phone…”

This sounds ridiculous when you type it out (but it is nicely illustrated above), but many of us are doing it every day. I will not take the time to update each of my accounts across all my cyber hangouts. Instead, I want the systems to do it automatically.
Users want to be able to choose their own tools and services online, and they want these tools to work together with services they already have chosen to use. Users want to know what other services will work with a specific service. This interaction with existing services is no longer a luxury feature - it is a necessity. I am not going to sign up for a new online tool if it will not work with my existing Facebook page, personal blog, Twitter account, and my cell phone.
Users also want the ability to move to a new tool whenever they want, without loosing their existing content or the time they have put into that service.
The use of open API’s has helped users weave their preferred services together. The best web services are beating their users to the punch. Flickr, for example, has a blog-ready photo widget you can create and then paste into our blog. When you update Flickr, your latest photos are now on your blog.
In order for a web service to survive, it has to be able to play well with others.

Until next time, keep it usable, Internets.

As my mother always said “If you are going to do something, do it well.” This sentiment seems lost on many different technologies and websites that many of us encounter every day. Sites and software that are cluttered and difficult to navigate abound on the web and on our computers.
I am writing this post in Microsoft Word (gross, I know). Just in this Word window alone there are approximately one gazillion different buttons (approximately) and options I can choose from, only a few of which are labeled, and even fewer are actually relevant to the task I am currently trying to complete. I am including a picture of my Word window, which I may have intentionally complicated to prove my point.

Now Word does what I need it to do, but it does not do it well. I don’t feel good after completing a Word document. In fact, I usually feel like a have escaped an early demise, and I quickly need to move on to something that does one thing very well, Google.

Now Google has taken the idea of doing one thing well to the extreme. They are a search company. This is very evident on their homepage. All you can do from this page is search. They are so good at searching, and google.com is so easy to use that Google has become synonymous with Internet searching.

I understand that comparing Word to Google is not really a fair comparison, but it helps me make my point. So just to be thorough lets also look at Google’s closest competitors.
Yahoo!

and MSN.com

Yikes. I was going to search for something on msn.com, but then I watched that hula-hoop video… and bought a computer. I sure wish I could remember what I was going to search for.

So what does all this mean?
The idea of doing one thing well should serve as the foundation of all technology. When technology starts to try and be everything to everyone, it becomes nothing to everyone (sorry, I totally stole that from someone else). There are many examples of technology doing one thing well, Twitter, iPhone apps, facebook Facebook (in the beginning). All of these technologies had a specific purpose and they implemented their focused functionality very well.
Twitter allows you to broadcast short messages to your friends. That is all. The core functionality is still the same, and the ease of use is astonishingly simple.

iPhone apps are another great example. Each application does one thing, and many of these do it very well.
Facebook was born as a way to connect and communicate with people you already know. It is easy to setup, and easy to find people you know. The Facebook team may have strayed from their core functionality with applications and other features, but the core functionality is still there. It is interesting to see if Facebook users begin to jump ship to the next super-simple social networking site that comes around (Twitter), the same way that people jumped from the ever-cluttered MySpace to the super clean Facebook.

As technology moves away from the “kitchen-sink” model of development towards the user-centered model, users are beginning to change with it. In the future, it will be essential to do one thing very well, and be able to integrate with other one-function technologies. This way users have complete control over what technologies they are using, and also how they choose to use those technologies together.

Until next time, keep it usable, Internets.

People are good at waiting for what they want, but only as long as they know how long they are going to have to wait.

This situation happens all the time. Think about the last time you were frustrated or had a bad experience at a restaurant. Was it the food? Probably not. It was probably the fact that you had to wait longer than anticipated for a table, or that you could not find your waiter to place your order or get the check. Think about other regularly frustrating events in your life, the DMV, the post office, Christmas shopping, or visiting your in-laws. It is not that these situations are terrible; it is just that they take longer than you initially thought they should.

So how does this relate to usability on the Internet or software?

As you design a product you need to manage the user’s expectations about:

1. What is possible
2. What is currently happening
3. How long it is going to take.

This can take the form of a progress indicator:

an accurate loading timer:

or simple information about where a link takes you.

We have all been exposed to poor implementations of this type of information. As we wait for a progress bar to fill in something happens…Is the bar still moving?? Did my computer freeze? How do I stop this thing? If the user has a question mark after their thought, you are losing them.
As technology users become more savvy, they are less patient and more apt to move to another technology.

As designers of technology, we need to understand how to avoid this type of frustration by identifying potential issues early in the design process and come up with creative ways to solve them.

Also, we can utilize user testing to find possible frustration points within a product, and test ways of solving these issues by providing the user with information - information to know where they are, know where they can go, and tell them how long it is going to take to get there.

Until next time, keep it usable Internets.

In the pristine digital world that we live in, how is it possible that some would prefer their music on vinyl records? Chris Stevens of CNet puts it nicely:

“It’s likely that the tactile joy of owning a physical object that represents your attachment to a band is infinitely more enjoyable than entering a credit card number into iTunes. Not to mention the fun of manipulating turntable technology to play vinyl, that sense of physical control of the medium.”

From an NPR bit last week:

“It’s always been more personal, so much more tangible than a CD. The size, the look, the gatefold, you get to watch it go around, you know what I mean. It’s, what’s the word,. . . interactive.”

For some, it seems, it’s not about just listening to music—it’s about engaging with your music and experiencing music on more than just an audible level. For them, music should involve all of the senses, not just that of hearing.

Could it be that technology, no matter how advanced, will only succeed if it solves our complex emotional needs rather than just our technical needs?

What other fun or meaningful experiences has technology “relieved” us of?