The Luddite Backlash

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.thefeature.com/article?articleid=100253' target='_blank'>http://www.thefeature.com/article?articleid=100253</a><br /><br /></div>"As mobile phones grow more feature-rich, a growing number of users are resisting the trends to move to smartphones and advanced devices, expressing preferences for simpler devices with improved basic functionality. Is technology moving too quickly and passing most people by? Is the industry's emphasis on shoehorning as many cool functions into a device as possible causing them to overlook basic functions? <br /><br />It's easy to get lost in a community of early adopters obsessed with the latest and greatest devices and services, and to forget that technogeeks and gadget freaks are the exception rather than the rule. The vast majority of people don't know and don't care about Series 60 versus UIQ, Symbian versus Windows Mobile, or GSM versus CDMA. SMS is the extent of most peoples' foray into mobile data, and that's a stretch in some places, like America. And while we're here fawning over our new P900 or 6600 or Treo 600, there are plenty of people still carrying first- or second-generation digital phones. They perform basic tasks well, they're simple, and most importantly, these people are comfortable with them."<br /><br />The Smartphone has been accused of being too hard to use - what do you think? Is that an accurate assesment, or are they overstating the case? What sorts of things can Microsoft do to make the Smartphone platform easier to use?

[TANKERx]

I think that half the issue is that people just don't want the extra features offered by Smartphones. Not even the intuitive user interface of a Series60 phone is enough to compell someone who sees no need to change phones because their battered old Panasonic thingie from five years ago still makes phonecalls and that's all they want.

Pretty much all the people I know who are not into technology (I think it's important to have friends who don't like technology, keeps one's feet on the ground) have Predictive Text turned off because it 'confuses' them, yet I see it as a great time saver!

A large proportion of the casual phone user buys a mobile for emergencies - for when the car breaks down or they need to contact the babysitter. That's all they want so all the cameras and Real Players and all will mean nada to them! They see e-mail as something to read at home when Granny Gertrude from Aussie has written to see how they are, not something that has to be checked every half hour, and certainly not at GPRS costs as they currently are in the UK.

I don't think it's a case of the UI of any smartphones being too complicated (heck, I'm fluent in Series60 and Microsoft smartphones, but show me one of those old three line text display phones and I'm lost! 8O ) It's just that people don't want the features and don't feel they need the features.

Their reason for keeping away from any smartphone is the same reason I keep away from denture cream...... There's no need...... Yet!

[Skitals]

Their reason for keeping away from any smartphone is the same reason I keep away from denture cream...... There's no need...... Yet!

Lol... quote of the day? Overall very well put.

[noelfoster]

As soon as I can get a decent offically offered Smartphone in Canada, I'll let you know if it was worth it. However, the majority of the people couldn't care less, as long as they can complete a call cleanly and cheaply.

[The PocketTV Team]

Do we really need to mention again all the *basic* cellphone features that don't work well on Smartphone ?

Such basic things as Caller-ID not working well... or the fact that you cannot abort a call in grogress (or set airplane mode) when you have no signal... or that fact that the standard press-and-hold a key to enter a digit in an SMS (when in TAP mode) does not work... or the fact that you cannot see the phone numbers when browsing the contact list. The list is long. Too long!

Of course, many software developers have jumped on the opportunity to provide commercial applications that fix for some of the flaws in MSFT built-in software. But to sell a cellphone with a broken Caller-ID? Come-on!

I tried using a Smartphone as my main everyday phone, i.e. just to do basic things like calling, receiving calls and sending/receiving SMS's. I gave up after a day, because my Nokia works way better for those basic functions (not to mention a much better battery life). It's a shame. MSFT should just stop adding bells and whistles until all the basic cellphone features are working without a glitch. They should *not* release Smartphone 2003 until every basic cellphone feature works well. They should rename it Smartphone 2004 if necessary.

[flash]

There is something to the K.I.S.S. principle. I could have easily kept using my v60 forever and been happy as a clam.

But since I got the i600 and with it I can do the same things the v60 did except better and then a zillion more things, I could never go back.

I don't think the SmartPhone is tougher to use at all. It is easier. Since it offers much greater functionality, there is a greater need to make it easy to access that functionality or the platform is doomed. Sure, there are some slight rough edges but that stuff will be ironed out in the next few years.

With the i600 and a keyboard, I do not have to pack a laptop around to stay in touch with work. That alone is worth a fortune to me. I don't see smartphones as NEW technology as much as repackaging of existing mobile technology in a new way that makes a lot of sense.

When I hear "I like my basic phone" I hear two things:

1. "I'm intimidated by (yet more) new technology."
2. "I have no idea what it can do, so I'll assume it won't add any value."

To put it less charitably, FEAR and IGNORANCE. :twisted:

OK to be fair some people just choose to keep "complexity" out of their lives except where necessary. That's cool with me, except for the few who feel the need to impugn something cool (like smartphones) to rationalize their decision. My brother does that. I hate that. :x


Flash

[The PocketTV Team]

It should not be more complicated to perform basic functions with a Smartphone, compared to performing the same basic function with a simpler phone.

If it's more complicated, that's because the people who designed the UI on the Smartphone made some mistake, or they did not look enough at how other, simpler devices work.

The SMS exemple is typical: When in TAP mode, all the other cellphone that I have recognize a press-and-hold of a number key, and they enter a number. No need to count the presses or pay attention to the display: if you press and hold "2", the digit "2" will be inserted in your SMS. This is simple, and standard on all the cellphones I have (Nokia, Erikson, Motorola). Why isn't this working on Smartphone ? Why do you have to press the key several times to rotate to the digit, or change the input mode to number, type one digit, then change input mode to TAP again ? Why does it have to be that complicated when all the other phone provide a simpler (and standardized) UI solution ?