The computer for the rest of us · Jan 28, 09:15 am by Michael Dales
I’m ashamed to say that, like a lot of people last night, I caved and watched the live news feeds of the Apple event, thanks to Matt Wood’s excellent MacMash (even if I only came in 33rd on the keyword bingo :). And thus was we given the iPad, which seems to have quite a mixed reaction, but I think is quite important. I’m going to rant a little, but if you want the quick version of my point, watch this advert from 1984, but replace each occurrence of the word “Macintosh” with “iPad”:
Computers, even my beloved MacBook Pro, are still too complicated for general use. When all you want to do is read some web pages, check your email, process your holiday photos, and play a few games, why do non-technical users still have to worry about the file system? Why is Finder or Explorer still the default interface? There’s lots you can mess up in a file system. For those of us savvy enough on the Mac we’ll use something like QuickSilver) or LaunchBar to bypass the file system, but that’s because we’re techies who know how to seek out things, or indeed we know they exist to start with.
To me, what the most important part of the iPad launch presentation was when Steve Jobs described the aims at of the product before it was revealed. It’s that attention to detail that’s meant previous tablets were clunky toys – they were just your existing, annoying for non-technical people, Windows UI. Even Mac OS X, which is a lot better in the user friendliness stakes than Windows, wouldn’t translate to something with not mouse or keyboard. You need to marry the hardware and software well. The iPad is designed to let non-technical people do the few tasks they want without the main of managing a full computer.
It’s the computer for the rest of us, again.
Sure, it’s no good if you want to do complex tasks like programming, and if you want to run many apps at once. But outside those of us know either like to know a deep knowledge about computers, who wants to be exposed to a computer’s complexity when they’re just checking email and websites over breakfast? I recently converted my parents’ household to all Macs, but clearly I started that process two years too early, as this is exactly what I got my Mum an iMac for – to let her process her digital photos, to keep in touch by email, and to let her surf the web. It’s not that she’s not smart enough to understand a full computer – she is, but why should she when it shouldn’t be required to do those tasks? There’s more fun things in life to be getting on with.
As CTO at Camvine I always argue that our job as a technology company is to take the complexity of technology away from the user – let us solve that, that’s what we’re good at. Let the user just get on with what they want to do, and then let them get on with the rest of their life. That’s exactly why I think the iPad, whether it’s a success or not, is a step in the right direction.
commenting closed for this article
Yes, but….
I have quite a bit of sympathy with what you say above – but I’m not sure the iPad is (quite) the device to meet the need you describe. There are a number of features missing, I think. For instance… are you really going to want to use the onscreen keyboard or to have to connect to a dock in order to write email or work on a document in iWork? Surely a notebook or a netbook with a “proper” integrated keyboard is a better form factor for doing this, even for a casual user? (I can accept the use of the onscreen keyboard for web addresses and usernames/passwords, though — and even for short mails, but as soon as you get to the point of typing more than a paragraph or so, I think I’d want a proper keyboard – or at least a slide-out keyboard, in the style of some of the Android phones). It also strikes me as fiddly, especially for the class of user that you’re describing, to need to bother with docks and special connectors to transfer those digital photos etc onto the machine (or to print – assuming that’s possible, let alone do things like scanning; I don’t believe either of these activities are beyond the scope of what a user as described above might want to do – indeed I would say they’re more likely to want to print, rather than less likely). And I’d imagine that the system is too locked down to allow you to configure wireless printing…
And then there’s Flash – I understand the arguments against supporting this, and even agree that HTML 5 and H.264 is a better way of implementing much of what’s currently done in Flash – but the trouble is exactly that – much of it is currently done in Flash. And the type of user you describe above isn’t going to want to have to learn about ways of getting around this issue – they’re just going to want them to work. You can’t build a device for the everyman based on the way you want the world to be, I don’t think – it has to reflect how things are, and how people are really going to want to use it.
As for users still needing to bother with the file system – I had to explain relatively recently to someone how to access it on a Windows XP machine they’d been using for about 3 years. So if you really don’t need to know, it seems it’s perfectly possible to avoid knowing about it (he’d saved everything in one default folder on the corporate network to which he was attached, without bothering about what or where this was) – but then I would argue that it’s useful to have the flexibility to be able to access it if the need arises. I think this type of restriction, which the iPad will presumably impose in quite a number of ways, is a significant downside – but then perhaps that’s more of a personal preference as more of a “power user” than a drawback for the type of user you describe above.
None of these points take away from the fact that the iPad is a lovely device with a really good display, and it will fulfil particular needs well. I can certainly imagine using it to catch up on my RSS feeds, and to do other browsing, even up to the point of reading mails and doing online shopping. And I know from L’s iPhone that I’d end up using many of the apps, too. (Though even with the apps, I’m not sure I’d pay that much for a device I’d use only for those things…) But I’m not sure that it’s yet the device you argue – though I can see how it’s a step towards that goal, and subsequent versions might well reach it.
(It’s also being touted as an eReader replacement, of course (not by you above, I note) – but it’s not really that, either, I don’t think, since it uses an LCD display, which is a lot more tiring on the eyes than an eInk display. (I do entirely accept, though, that people who already use phones or laptops to read may find this a better way of doing so, though – but I’m not convinced it’s the ‘Kindle killer’ the media would have us believe. Time’ll tell, I suppose.)
[BTW, you need a bigger comment box! (especially wider)]
— Neil Jan 28, 11:41 am #
LED display, of course – oops!
— Neil Jan 28, 11:43 am #
Couldn’t agree more. It strikes me that Apple have been herding an uneasy coalition of hardcore technologists and creators (who like that Macs are really highly-evolved Unix workstations) and people who want appliances (who like the fit and finish). You only really get the latter on the Internet, and this device is almost perfect for splitting that coalition.
— Andrew Walkingshaw Jan 28, 12:55 pm #
Ugh, the former, even..
— Andrew Walkingshaw Jan 28, 12:56 pm #
Neil, all very valid points. I think for some the keyboard will be a deal breaker in particular, but no one device will do everything – you add a keyboard and it becomes more bulky, liable to break, and indeed expensive.
But I do think the point that the computing experience needs changing stands. This isn’t going to keep “Power Users” happy (as Andrew pointed out, they clearly aren’t :) but there’s no need for one solution for everyone. I’d like to have both, I suspect for 99% of what my Mum does an iPad would be fine. Any computer system is going to hit points where you’d like more freedom or such, but that comes at the expense of increasing overall complexity.
The constant battle I have against our marketing department, who are nice, sane, and intelligent people is that of features versus complexity. Every time I add a new option to our system, I’m also making it more complex and harder for people to find the few things they really use regularly. The flexibility full access to the file system brings is that you can really mess things up by accident. It doesn’t need to be the “one big folder” – you can have a look at how iLife works – users should never need to play with the file system for things in iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie, etc. But in the application there is a nice logical view of how to find the things from other apps in the Media Browser – I can from iMovie easily find and import pictures from iPhoto or music from iTunes without having to leave iMovie or user a file dialog. It’s more limiting, but it’s a lot easier for 95% of things you want to do.
Laura’s parents have two laptops each for general access, and a desktop for “power usage” – perhaps that’s a better model for some.
I’d not want to claim the iPad is perfect or suits everyone, but I certainly think it’s an attempt to say “what do we do most of the time, and do we really need on the device we use for that stuff the ability to do everything else?” I’m strongly of the belief no, we don’t. And I’m the guy who doesn’t use Finder on the Mac as he users a unix terminal!
Again, I know school teachers who are looking at the iPad quite seriously as it is powerful enough to run the apps they want to teach the kids about, without having to lock down and make safe all the things that could go wrong. The fact that things can go wrong tells you something is up. What makes me excited about the iPad is that it’s not a gadget for gadget’s sake – it’s designed to meet a need.
Do people really want computers? Or do they just want a way to access specific bits of information?
Erm, that was a bit of a rant wasn’t it? The summary? 1) nothing will suit all use cases 2) for a lot of people, the general purpose computer is too general purpose 3) it’s good that someone (not just Apple, I think all companies should do this) stopped to think.
(the box size, yes, needs fixed. On Safari you can just drag resize any text edit box, so I tend to forget you can’t do that otherwhere :)
— Michael Dales Jan 28, 04:21 pm #
Michael,
Thanks for your response. I think we actually largely agree – perhaps, in focussing on the areas where I felt the iPad falls short of being “the computer for the rest of us”, I didn’t make that clear enough in my previous comments. I certainly recognise the need that you have outlined – or rather, the lack of need: the fact that most computers ship with a lot that most users don’t need, and the danger that they can make a mess of them by not really understanding what they’re doing. I’m just not quite persuaded that the iPad 1.0 meets enough of that need to be “the computer for the rest of us”, though perhaps there are plenty of people for whom it will be sufficient – and I could certainly believe that there are a good number of people for whom it would be a good second machine, to be used for surfing and especially photo viewing, gaming and so on, along with the other functions provided by the apps. It’s not so very far off properly meeting that need, though, I don’t think. I do absolutely recognise that point, and I could well believe that the second or third generation will address these areas [or they’ll become obsolete]. (One comment I read earlier made the point that in 8 years’ time [not so very long in the real world], the relationship between what’s available then and today’s iPad will probably be similar to the iPod touch and the first generation iPods. It’s a thought-provoking observation.)
The more I think about it, perhaps some of my criticisms aren’t such deal-breakers after all – perhaps the people who are using this machine will be happy to sit at a desk and use the keyboard dock for those occasions when they need to send a longer e-mail or use iWork (this would certainly fit the school user model that you mention, though I’m slightly surprised that the teachers would consider this for a couple of reasons: I wouldn’t have thought the display was big enough; also, unless they’re able to show everything they’re wanting to do with the pupils through the browser, or it’s just to be used for iWork, I’m surprised they’d be confident about getting their material onto the machine, given how locked-down it seems to be – though I certainly recognise the gain in them not having to lock things down. Personally, I would also have a slight concern about whether it would be robust enough, particularly when it’s a touch interface – but I guess to make that judgement, you’d need to get hold of one and test it out.
I agree with your point that “the computing experience needs changing” (though in a completely off-topic aside, it’s not quite how I’d express it – see this post and its comments – http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2010/jan/27/english-language — in this instance, I’d probably have said “to be changed”, but I think in general “needs changing” would be the English way of expressing it, and “needs changed” the Scottish way). I never looked at the iPad as something that was supposed to keep power users happy (as their main machine) – it’s clearly not what it’s for, and as far as I’m concerned, anyone who’s criticising it for not doing that is completely missing the point. And for me, even at the below-expected price point it’s too expensive for what I would use it for – there will be others who make a different judgement about that, and fair enough; maybe I’m just not part of the target market, or maybe as its real cost sinks and my disposable income (maybe) increases, I’ll change my view, particularly if additional features become available in future versions – or maybe I’ll want to get one for the boys to use in a few years’ time (Actually, I can well imagine this – I note that Rory Cetlan-Jones made a similar point this morning: http://twitter.com/ruskin147/status/8314007254). As I say, it’s certainly an attractive device, and what it does, it appears to do very well – I’m sure that using it as a surfing/photo management device would be a pleasurable experience.
And I also recognise the truth of your comments about complexity vs usability (Especially given my employer!) Seriously, though, this is an area where the company has focussed a lot of effort during the time I’ve been working there – our software is unavoidably complex, but that doesn’t mean individual users’ experiences of it should be… Also, I wasn’t suggesting that “one big folder” was the only solution (and certainly not a desirable one) if you can’t access the file system, merely illustrating that it was actually already possible not to know/care about it even with the more “general computing” solutions (on reflection, I think this tends to reinforce your point – if users don’t know or care about it, why give them access at all – just design the device/software, as seems to be the case here, in such a way that it stores things logically, and you can access whatever you need wherever you might need it).
Laura’s parents have two laptops each for general access, and a desktop for “power usage” – perhaps that’s a better model for some.
Perhaps so, and I can certainly see this slotting into that general access role nicely for a lot of people. Certainly I think it will do a lot of what people are wanting to do most often in a much nicer way than the netbooks or low-end laptops that people might otherwise use to do these things – I would far prefer to use this to watch YouTube videos or play games (though of course, I couldn’t play any Flash-based games on it…), or even manage photos. I think your point about there being a few tasks that people do often is probably the key point – if the iPad does the things that you do often well enough, it doesn’t matter if it’s slightly more awkward than the alternative for those things that you seldom do; the gain in usability for the frequently performed tasks will more than offset that – as long as it can do them somehow – and this is my concern with it, that it can’t do quite enough, though it’s almost there – but Apple isn’t stupid, presumably they’ve done their research, so maybe I’m not aware of some features, and other impressions I have are wrong or out of date. Again, though, I realise this is only 1.0, and I think it’s a good start – I’m sure subsequent versions will address some of these issues (and perhaps Apple will consider others and deliberately avoid addressing them with the iPad).
Do people really want computers? Or do they just want a way to access specific bits of information?
The latter, undoubtedly.
And you thought your comments were a bit of a rant! This is a good old ramble… Sorry it’s a bit repetitive in places. I certainly agree with all your summary points – as you say, no one device will suit all use cases (and nor should it try to, I would add). You say that it’s a device designed to meet a need – my question is whether it really does fully meet that need for enough people, but I guess there will be a sliding scale of utility, and people will make the judgement as to whether enough of their needs are far enough along that scale that it’s worth their while getting one.
— Neil Jan 28, 08:02 pm #