New Tech Gadgets Get Tougher To Operate

[Janak Parekh]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=528&e=1&u=/ap/20040126/ap_on_hi_te/unfriendlier_electronics' target='_blank'>http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...ier_electronics</a><br /><br /></div>"Not only are the latest electronic gadgets packed with more features than ever, they're also harder than ever to figure out. Culprits span the gizmo gamut from DVD players to digital cameras and wireless devices. Even televisions are increasingly acting more like computers, those notoriously confounding beasts. Barry Jaruzelski would have never imagined he'd need to consult a 146-page owner's manual just to learn how to turn on his new cell phone."<br /><br />Believe it or not, I'm mixed on this subject. I agree that many companies don't put any effort into making a decent UI, and that's a shame. But, at the same time, I see lots of consumers who don't bother to make any mental effort to learn new devices as well.<br /><br />Here's a simple example: the toughest cell phone I've ever had to use was the (now venerable) Motorola StarTac. It had a <i>horrible</i> user interface, replete with up, down, and a middle button being used in all sorts of bizarre ways, especially when manipulating a phonebook. Being a geek, I figured it out and got it to work, but I had to comb through the book several times. I saw countless people's StarTacs not programmed optimally. Many modern cell phones are <i>much</i> easier to use, but people get used to one interface and refuse to learn others, calling them "complicated", unless they have a compelling reason to. People used to complain about fax machines all the time in the early days; now everyone uses one without second thought.<br /><br />What's your take and/or experience with newer devices?

[felixdd]

I'm having a similar problem -- I'm having trouble figuring out the ins-and-outs of my Motorola MPx200 smartphone. Granted it's got its quirks, but I'm still having a hard time figuring out certain things (i.e. how to toggle to T9 instead of abc-input).

I do agree on one thing though -- I've gotten used to the Windows layout and UI and now I'm "lazy" to the point of "adverse" towards trying out new ways of doing things, and I'm only in college. For those that are older, I can see how it can be worse....

[klinux]

iPod. Powerful and simple.

Nokia 3650. Powerful but very complicated.

[andrei]

Nokia 3650. Powerful but very complicated.


I wouldn't go as far as calling Nokia 3650 powerful. Complicated, yes, but not powerful

[WillyG]

"...people get used to one interface and refuse to learn others, calling them "complicated

Now, where have i heard that before? :roll:

[PR.]

People used to complain about fax machines all the time in the early days; now everyone uses one without second thought.

Heh, you reckon?

My desk is next to the office fax machine I'd say 70% of the people who use it have at least two tries to send a fax, I often wonder if there is some hidden pong game in it :)

But its true people don't take the time to learn what they are using, I was in a training course a few weeks ago and while I sat there whizzing around my computer others wasted hours of the trainers time with him simply explaining the difference between double and single clicks :roll:

[cessquill]

OK, you need a fundamental foundation of knowledge to be able to use something (as mentioned - double clicks, drag and click, etc.), but that doesn't excuse bad or ill thought out design.

Some people treat anything that isn't a Nokia mobile phone as confusing. I took the plunge and moved away from Nokia and realised just how bad some user interfaces could be. Inconsistent was the worst culprit, where text entry would be different depending on which view you were in. You make an interface consistent, you give them less to remember, you make it easier to use.

Logical interfaces also follow the same formula, but what's logical to one person may not be logical to another, so it's always open to interpretation.

A lot of this, I think, is due to consumer demand. Products hit the shelves before they are really ready in a rush to get purchased. Couple this with the fact that it's inherantly hard to design a user interface for an new and evolving section of technology (colour screens, cameras, etc., etc.), and you're not only left with a manual that's far too long for its own good, but badly written (because of the rush to get product out on the shelves, etc...).

That said, I've not seen the latest wave of peripherals, but it would seem that the more you cram into it, the more you've got to focus on interface design.

[Bill Gunn]

"Here's a simple example: the toughest cell phone I've ever had to use was the (now veritable) Motorola StarTac.

"veritable" ?

[felixdd]

OK, you need a fundamental foundation of knowledge Logical interfaces also follow the same formula, but what's logical to one person may not be logical to another, so it's always open to interpretation.

Yeah, that's a biggie. I've not jumped and tried a PalmOS device (hey, see what the enemy is up to right? ;) ) because I don't really understand the way their OS works. Whereaas for PPC2003 you see a clear hierarchy of features (start -> programs -> blablabla), it seems more like a web for the Palm -- but what about the menus? When do I know I'm accessing the Palm OS's base menu, and when do I know I'm accessing a program's menu? This is the same for some other OS's that I've used, like my university's distribution of linux -- I just don't get it.

[rdrose61]

I think that the digital UI vs. analog knobs and switches is a generational thing. Those over 30, except us geeky technical types, have trouble with the logic of device controls. Younger people, especially kids, who know nothing else in their lifetime I find have no problem with various and quirky UIs.

My kids, 9 and 13, have no trouble figuring out our various family toys (computers, MP3 players, PDAs, cell phones, digital cameras, networks, DVRs, remotes, etc...). On the other hand, my wife who is the typical of the average technically challenged, usually just gives up and asks one of us.

[possmann]

I totally agree with the importance of UI - in fact I would argue that UI is the most important feature of any technical device - without building the UI to target the audience you are going after the technology or capabilities of the technology are useless or at best, not used ot their true/full capacity.

I have swore that I will never get a Motorola phone again becuase their UI sucks - until they decided to put out the smartphone OS... Now I can't wait to get a motorola. Best UI on phones I have had were on my Nokia phones - seems like people in Europe look at UI as more meaningful than the folks at Motorola ever did - hmmmm is that why Nokia is beating the panys off everyone else?

[whydidnt]

First off I agree that things are getting more complicated. Of course thats because they do more. An older Televsion has one RF input - you plug your antenna into it and change channels, volume, etc. Now we have all these fancy VCRs, DVD Players, surround sound, TIVO, PC's, digital media players etc to attach. They each need their own connection to the TV - now I've got to figure out how to tell the TV which connection to use at a given time. If you're the guy who connected all these things you get that concept, but don't ask my wife to figure it, she just thinks it's "stupid" and that it's too complicated. Don't even think of asking her to read the manual to a television, though! :devilboy:

The other issue is that devices are much more portable than before, and often the first time we try to do something, the manual is at home, and we are left to try and figure it out on our own. To use the TV analogy, at least the TV is set in the family room, so the manual will be there for me to try and figure out how to make it work. If I'm at the airport and don't know how to change to T9 on my smartphone, the manual isn't with me, in all likelyhood. Most people find it easier to learn how to do something, by actually doing it, not just reading about it in the manual. I bet a lot of us have read how to do something in the manual, only to not remember when we really need it.

The other day I couldn't remember how to pull up the missed calls log on my smart phone and no it's not a menu item. Of course, the manual was at home, so it took me about 5 minutes to figure it out. Yes, it was frustating. I'm guessing a non-geek would have quit after about a minute and decided the phone was too complicated to use. Not the phone's fault, but the reality of our times, with no easy answer.

whydidnt

[jkendrick]

We don't always notice it but this community is by and large a group of people that is interested in and LIKES technology and new devices. Most of the people in the "real" world I run into don't share that interest. They actually dread technology and care nothing about it.

Those people find everything complicated and will not spend any effort to learn any new device. How many people do you know like this that haven't even learned the most basic time saving steps on their mobile phone?

[whydidnt]

How many people do you know like this that haven't even learned the most basic time saving steps on their mobile phone?

Excellent point. I know several who don't even have speed dial or address book entries. The funny thing is some of them have expensive feature rich phones, but still only use the basic telephone functions. :roll:

whydidnt

[famousdavis]

We don't always notice it but this community is by and large a group of people that is interested in and LIKES technology and new devices. Most of the people in the "real" world I run into don't share that interest. They actually dread technology and care nothing about it.

Those people find everything complicated and will not spend any effort to learn any new device. How many people do you know like this that haven't even learned the most basic time saving steps on their mobile phone?

Excellent insights!

My 75-year-old mother is an interesting woman. Growing up in her house some 30 years ago, she patently refused to even consider buying/using a microwave oven. Then, one day, in the last 10 years, she bought a microwave oven -- to this day, I don't know why, as she was stubbornly against the newer heating technology -- and BAM, she's come to appreciate the time-saving value of microwaves.

For years, my mother would marvel at my passion for technology, but swore off ever trying to learn how to use a computer. Then, one day, she did. To this day, I don't know why she decided to learn how to send and receive email, and surf the web, but she did and now she has made a number of very good online friends.

My 80-year-old father is my mother's antithesis. He has never sat before a computer, and refused to learn how to use a computer, even though his writing skills deteriorated badly over the last 10 years (tapping emails would be so much easier for him). He lives in the world of his youth, 50 and 60 years ago.

It's all a matter of choice. My mother chooses to learn new technology -- not immediately, but in her own time. My father chooses to not learn anything new.

[tregnier]

In learning how to use things, most people tend to learn what they need to for the task at hand. When word processing came out, many people who were used to typing jumped in and tried it. However, they used it like a typewriter. They didn't set margins or use the ruler. Instead they tabbed over when they wanted to indent something. Not until they learned that this method caused chaos did they learn to use it properly. Over and over I’ve seen people learn only as much as they need to in order to accomplish their immediate task. Only after they learn that there are easier, better, understandable, quicker, and readily available ways to improve will they invest time in learning.

The key to dealing with technology (at least for me) is to understand the options available to me. When I pick up something new, I’m like everyone else looking for a solution for the immediate task; but then I look for the options. This requires that I browse the manuals so that I understand the ballpark that I’m playing in. After I’ve purchased and installed a piece of software, I will browse to see if there’s something special. I’ll then read the sections of interest to me.

After I use the software for some time, I always go back and thumb through the manual to see what piques me, now that I know more about how to use it. While I’ve used Excel since it came out (and Lotus, Symphony, Framework, SuperCalc and VisiCalc before them), I still benefit from perusing the Excel books.

If moms have no immediate need or desire to cook differently, they usually won’t be interested in a microwave. I have no need for a camera on my phone. Therefore, even if I had one, I wouldn’t be too concerned about its workings because it is not on my list of immediate tasks at hand.

If a new technology is going to be widespread, it must address an immediate need, encourage the user to look further, and deliver a usage value beyond current technology.

Just my thoughts…

[mace]

Manual?

My PDA, My Computer, My Phone, Heck most of my new technology do not come with a manual, everything is on PDF's or ebooks.

That's the speed of new technology :wink:

[tregnier]

Manual?

My PDA, My Computer, My Phone, Heck most of my new technology do not come with a manual, everything is on PDF's or ebooks.

That's the speed of new technology :wink:

By "manual" I meant a source of information other than the actual application/device.

[denivan]

Yeah, that's a biggie. I've not jumped and tried a PalmOS device (hey, see what the enemy is up to right? ;) ) because I don't really understand the way their OS works. Whereaas for PPC2003 you see a clear hierarchy of features (start -> programs -> blablabla), it seems more like a web for the Palm -- but what about the menus? When do I know I'm accessing the Palm OS's base menu, and when do I know I'm accessing a program's menu?

I have the exact same problem with PalmOS. I've used pocketpc (2000 and 2003) devices for a while and their UI + Core seems logical to me. It has a real file system etc. and reminds of my desktop OS. A month ago, I touched a PalmOS device for the first time (a Treo 600 from my boss) and I was totally confused, after fiddling for half an hour I felt like a complete idiot ;-) Seriously, I've never had this problem with Symbian type devices (P800) or phone interfaces, usually I pick it up and get the hang of it in about five minutes. I guess, for some reason, some people are 'incompatible' with some user interfaces.

[rmasinag]

Yah, Palm UI is not very logocal for windows users I must admit. So every people who bought a PDA due to me bought an IPAQ 1900, 2200, or 4100 series :D (I should get some royalties from HP)

Also, I tell them that I will not answer Palm questions, maybe thats why none of them buy Palm devices..

My GF has a Sony Cliche 9 something with the 2 megapixel camera. She loves her device and tries to teach me how to use it, guess I'm a very slow learner. :wink: I do have a Palm XIII, but it never gets used.

I'll still wait and see what the POS 6 will deliver though....b/c I want an all in one device the size of a Treo 600, plus XDAII is very expensive right now.

[dma1965]

I am definitely a geek, but I will not purchase software or use a device that I cannot get "basic" usage out of within 5 minutes, without a help file. I have to, at the very least, be able to intuitively do something useful within 5 minutes without a manual or help file, or it gets tossed aside. If it has other features that require me to dig deep, that is gravy to me! The geek in me needs those features to achieve Nirvana. A great example is Adobe Photoshop. Photoshop is a huge program with more features than the average user will ever need, but the average user can edit a photograph with it with about 5 minutes of fiddling around, and the geek can do a ton more with a little digging and reading. Remember, as they say in marketing, you don't sell the steak, you sell the sizzle. A device has to have some sizzle right away, or I will never bite into the steak.

[Andyvan]

Several reasons occur to me:

1) gadgets do more, which usually means they're more complicated. It takes a lot of effort to keep the UI simple. That's one thing that Apple does well.

2) gadgets are smaller. This means buttons are multi-purpose, and there is generally insufficient room to label them completely.

3) New gadgets are coming out at a faster rate. The only constant in our society is change.

4) Every device has a different UI. Not only that, but the same manufacturer will change the UI from model to model. When I have to change the clocks every 6 months, the analog clocks are easy. All the digital clocks differ. I can usually figure it out in about a minute, but some of the methods are arcane to say the least. And that's just a clock.

5) People are burning out on learning new devices. I use a fax machine about once a year. When it comes time for me to send a fax, I've either forgotten how to use it, or they've upgraded to a new model.

I personally have an old (4+years?) cellphone that just makes calls. No bit-mapped screen, no fancy stuff, not even color. But it's simple to use, small, and rugged. My fingers know where the buttons are. I have all the accessories I need. It will take a lot to replace.

-- Andyvan

[klinux]

Multi-function buttons. Yick. Someone should mention again how cool iPod's scroll wheel is again. :) Of course, not all wheel/dial design is right. BMW's iDrive comes to come.

[Jason Dunn]

Fascinating thread guys - thanks for sharing your thoughts. :D

[Janak Parekh]

"Here's a simple example: the toughest cell phone I've ever had to use was the (now veritable) Motorola StarTac.
"veritable" ?
Believe it or not, a lot of people still "miss" their StarTACs.

--janak

[klinux]

Yup. StarTac was bling bling before the term bling ever existed. Also, I would even argue that it is the very first PDA-phone combo. Anybody recall that one could piggyback a REX PDA/card onto the StarTac?

[Andyvan]

"Here's a simple example: the toughest cell phone I've ever had to use was the (now veritable) Motorola StarTac.
"veritable" ?
Believe it or not, a lot of people still "miss" their StarTACs.

--janak

I believe you missed Bill's point. Bill was questioning the use of the word "veritable". The word you meant to use is "venerable" (worthy of reverence or respect by virtue of dignity, position, or age.

Whereas "veritable" means unquestionable, actual or true.

-- Andyvan

[Janak Parekh]

I believe you missed Bill's point. Bill was questioning the use of the word "veritable". The word you meant to use is "venerable" (worthy of reverence or respect by virtue of dignity, position, or age.

Whereas "veritable" means unquestionable, actual or true.
:oops: And to think I'm under the delusion that I have decent English skills...

Thanks, I'll fix it.

--janak

[tregnier]

Great article on MSNBC (web) re this very subject. You can see it at: http://shorterlink.com/?4VHMLP