Complex Gadgets: We Are Not Worthy? Doh!

[Jonathon Watkins]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://news.com.com/Are+gadgets+too+complex+for+us%3F/2100-1041_3-6046314.html?tag=fd_nbs_ent&tag=nl.e703' target='_blank'>http://news.com.com/Are+gadgets+too...ent&tag=nl.e703</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Half of all malfunctioning products returned to stores by consumers are in full working order, but customers can't figure out how to operate the devices, a researcher said on Monday. . The average consumer in the United States will struggle for 20 minutes to get a device working before giving up, the study found. [A researcher] gave new products to a group of managers from consumer electronics company Philips, asking them to use them over the weekend. The managers returned frustrated because they could not get the devices to work properly."</i><br /><br />Quel surprise? I wonder if this was before or after Philips rebranded to focus on <a href="http://insight.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020415,39250169,00.htm">'sense and simplicity'</a>? :lol: It would be nice to think that managers actually had to use thier own products during their development cycle, i.e. <a href="http://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/eatyourowndogfood.asp">ate their own dog food</a>. If this happened all the time then perhaps then we would have more powerful and elegant gadgets that were simple to use? I'm doubtful, but what do you guys think? Do we need simpler gadgets or should we demand smarter users? Now excuse me while I search out the 300 page instruction manual supplied on CD-Rom with my new gadget. :?

[axe]

In My opinion, there is not enough development going on on gadgets and many programs for the 'user experience' only that it technically works. The person usually ends up being a 'human emulator'. The user has to be taught to use an application. If that is a program like Photoshop or a VCR, 20 minutes doesn't cut it, but it should if the interfaces are designed intuitively. That's why On Screen programming was such a hit when it came out, or better yet, the VCRs that remove the flashing 12:00AM but someone realizing a time-sync 'channel' existed and decided to use it.
I figure there should be MUCH more going on under the covers to automate as much as possible for users so that they enjoy spending the $500 or $1000 or whatever on the newest gizmo and only using it to 10% of its functionality because that was all they could understand. It shouldn't need to be the uber-geeks that have the amazing sound systems or PVR systems or even the Handhelds. If the interface was easy, millions will buy it, ask Apple.

So the end result is Yes, the Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair, however if the interfaces were intuitive and easy to use, from a development side, you'd see a lot more Gadgets being sold, driving more innovation and more user-experience development. A not-so-vicious circle...

AXE

[msafi]

in the software that i use i want everything to be completely customizable. for example, why should i have to use third party software to change the softkeys of the today screen? why can't i choose to hide the systray? who determines which items i want to see in the taskbar? these are only a few GUI related examples. there is much more, but unfortunately, sometimes, simplicity means restrictions, and i don't like that. i want to always have the ability to go to "Expert Mode"

[rmasinag]

I think the primary interface of ALL devices should always be Grandma mode with an option to go expert mode that is still logical.

I like simplicity for entertainment that's why I'm one of the millions of sheep that use an iPod video despite the Creative player blows it out of the water in features. I just want the damn thing to play my music.

At the same time I just picked up an iMate JAM and appreciate the full customizability of PI 2005 Pro and other programs I have on it.

It all depends on what you want out of your device :D

[Gerard]

It's an old complaint, but really, standards are a huge part of the solution. Look at the basic icons of audio/video playback and recording for example. The Play, Pause, Record and Stop icons have been standardised on 95% or more machines and software interfaces with these features for many years now. Same for Fast Forward and Rewind. Extending this sort of uniformity to many other functions would go a long way towards helping users figure out new devices.

In computers, the Save and Open icons have been standardised, more or less, for PCs at least. Though a floppy disk was not the most long term sensible solution, there is enough recognition among users to make it useful. The folder opening icon is a little more generic, which is good. A few other common elements exist, but soon it breaks down, especially when it comes to association-grabbing installed software. And it seems too many hardware makers still want to be cute and 'original' when it comes to laying out buttons and icons. A recent personal example; I've been testing the Recorder2 for Neuros, and the first remote they sent out was very slick, easily intuitive as to functions of most buttons. The manual made the one or two unclear functions known with little effort. The next recorder was almost the same, but the utterly re-designed remote had a host of custom icons, almost none of them working as my guesses had them. After hours studying the manual I was still often hitting the wrong buttons! Why? It seems (I don't know yet) that they were trying to be useful in ways particular to the recorder, not paying attention to tradition and common expectations. The result is virtually unusable within the first hour or more. A radical decrease in fun resulted. Of course, the thing is still in the development stages, and one hopes that further changes will be made based on tester feedback - and Neuros is more responsive than almost any company I've encountered previously.

Could there not be some survey done, some global poll taken by all the big OEMs, and then a set of standards based upon the results? Perhaps universities and governments could participate. A world design expectation referendum, that'd save billions of hours of wasted effort in learning unnecessarily complex and obtuse interface designs. Surely such a savings should appeal to almost every level of authority! Think of how that time might better be spent... like, actually using the products!

[sudermatt]

I like the complexity.....this is a business opportunity....gadget training

It's the American way.

[whydidnt]

"Half of all malfunctioning products returned to stores by consumers are in full working order, but customers can't figure out how to operate the devices, a researcher said on Monday.


I think the researchers are giving the manufacturers too much credit. I have returned fully functioning devices before, not because I couldn't figure them out, but because the device didn't work as advertised. In my mind the device was defective - it didn't do what it was supposed to, but I'm sure it worked as the manufacturer intended, just not near as well as they marketed it.

Too often consumers are sold devices based upon marketing hype that either don't do what is advertised or do it very poorly. How many people have purchased PMPs only to return them when they found out it wasn't possible to easily copy their DVD collection to to the player? How about that video card that was supposed to provide the "fastest" 3D graphics, but in reality is couldn't run the latest and greatest games. Perhaps if tech companies starting requiring the marketing department to use these devices before writing ad copy then we all wouldn't be oversold particular gadgets.

[msafi]

remember that question mark button that used to be in some of the dialog boxes with the close, maximize, minimize buttons in older windows versions? do you remember how it worked?

if you didn't know something about the program, you clicked on that "?" and then clicked on the textbox, button or whatever object you didn't understand and it gave you a brief explanation of the purpose of that object. this is a great feature for learning-on-the-go. no one has the time to go through the extended help files. when i don't know something, i want the explanation to be right there in front of me. it would be great if this feature was adopted as a standard for all applications so that it reliably works. then, consumers may actually put trust in it and start to use it...

[Phoenix]

I don't think gadgets are too sophisticated for people.

The problem is that we have too many nerds and uninterested businessmen with no clue designing them. Nerds and businessmen with no sense of aesthetics, and no instincts in regard to intuitive design and human vs. hardware interface dynamics.

We need people who have both the mind of a geek and the soul of an artist designing products. Apple would be the closest example of this.

[Storkman]

Too often consumers are sold devices based upon marketing hype that either don't do what is advertised or do it very poorly. ... Perhaps if tech companies starting requiring the marketing department to use these devices before writing ad copy then we all wouldn't be oversold particular gadgets.

Hear hear!!! I second this motion. Before buying anything electronic I make sure the retailer will take it back if it doesn't do what I want it to - regardless of what the pretty brochure says. Maybe the return codes that the clerks have available need to include "assertive consumer not fooled by exuberant marketing."

[Jason Lee]

I think this is more cultural based than anything. Americans are tech lazy. No other way to put it. We are not willing to put any effort into anything. Most phones have cameras and all kinds of cool features in them which the majority of the population don't even know how to use. It's not that americans are stupid (i reserve judgment on the country as a whole. lol) it's just that we don't care. It isn't really important to most people.
Being an anthropologist i have studied many other cultures. And being a geek i love to study how other cultures relate to technology.

I love watching my japanese (not the ones born here) friends open new gadgets! Do you know what the first thing they go for is? The manual... Yeah.. they will read the manual cover to cover before ever touching the device. As apposed to me.. who still hasn't popped the tape on the manual to my k-jam. :lol:
But unlike the rest of america, i will sit and play with my new toy for hours trying to see what i can do with it. Most of us here are that way. :)

American culture just places lower priorities on these things. I really don't know why. It has taked for ever for txt messaging to finally kinda catch on. Bluetooth? Some people know what it is now.

So i don't think that gadets are to complex... I just think that people will not apply enough/any effort. Working in the user support field (pays a lot better than anthro :) ), i know from experience that most people will give up after a minute or less of looking at something. MAnY of my users won't even try becaue it looks or sounds too hard. They haven't even seen the technology yet! Fear of change, lack of effort, or just fear of technology in general. Americans resist new things and change. Technology is always new and different. :)

[whydidnt]

I can't argue with your points Jason, they are all very valid. I call it the "TV Babysitter" phenomenon. :)

For many of us our first exposure to technology was the TV. It did one thing, and was easy to maniuplate, with about 3 knobs - on/off - volume and channel - any 5 year old could figure it out and make it work. Large numbers of people look at that ease of use as the standard for any technology they use. If it's harder to use or learn than the TV, then it's too hard, or intimidating. Many people don't see specific value in using the new technology, so they don't want to invest time in learning.

Many manufacturers are guilty of selling features not benefits. It's got 7 GB of RAM, a 17 GHZ processor and hi-resoultion screen!! - Wow :roll: my mom hears that and says "so, what am going to do with it?" Now if I tell her she can e-mail and IM her family, play games and meet new friends online, as well as comparison shop, all of the sudden she says "I gotta get me one of those", and is willing to invest some time in learning how to use the technology. However, if the time investment is more than the percieved value, she won't ever be interested in it - AND if the first or second time she tries something it is a hassle, she's not very likely to try it again---this is where the manufacturers can take some blame.

However, I do think the current generation of teenagers have been exposed to a much wider variety of technology and will probably be much more open to experimenting and trying new stuff. It doesn't excuse companies from creating unfriendly user interfaces, or over-hyping functionality, however.

[Gerard]

Not being 'American' I am still 'North American', and am prone to not reading the manual, sometimes. Many manuals are so poorly written, so riddled with non-essential, lawsuit-preventing prevarication, and so useless in resolving anything like the flaws which actually show up in devices, that I choose not to read them. After a proper try, that is.

I have a 'simple' mobile phone, a Motorola v220. It's got too many features for a phone; games I'll never open, email and 'browsing' I'll not touch, piles of ring tones wasting memory... and a crappy little camera which could be useful, if I could get the pictures out of the phone. I've pored over the literature, both the manual and online. I've tried 8 versions of Motorola Phonetools, with 3 different cables, on 2 different PC OS versions. I've scoured phone forums, implemented more than a dozen 'tricks' to get it to work. NOTHING will get the bloody pictures from the phone to a PC, period! Minutes? I've spent over 30 hours on this absurd problem. Motorola's software locks up, refuses to show the images. It'll synch with my Contacts database - with a tonne of errors, but still, it sort of works. The PC installs it as a friggin' modem, something I'll never need nor want (not at the pirate rates Rogers charges!). It even let me flash upgrade the phone's OS, and then unlock it (a more recent event, after I gave up using the camera). But will it 'see' the phone as a mounted memory store and allow simple file transfers? of course not. That'd be too easy, to obviously useful.

I'd like one thing from Motorola; the opportunity to soundly slap the idiot responsible. That'd be satisfying. I'd slap him with the manual. Hard.

[Steve Jordan]

When I buy products, I read manuals and even try things I don't expect to use on a device. I research them fully before I buy them. What I have discovered is twofold: One, that there is simply a dearth of effort put into "common sense" design. Simply put, it should be easy for anyone, from a geek to a grandma, to do what they want simply by using the device and its control interface. If you can't figure out how to turn on the FM mode on your MP3 combo device... bad design. I've passed on many pretty or powerful gadgets because the interface, in a word, sucked.

And Two, too many companies are rushing their devices out into the market, trying to beat this competitor or make that holiday deadline, without making sure they work in the first place. I recently bought a Sony MP3 player, a gorgeous little thing, but after a total of over 6 hours messing with it (and the manual), I realized it just didn't work worth s**t, and returned it.

No one should need special classes and a college degree to operate a cell phone. Good design and quality hardware is essential, and any company that can't accommodate that is wasting our time.

[Jonathon Watkins]

Good design and quality hardware is essential, and any company that can't accommodate that is wasting our time.

That's the crux of the argument really. Devices should be better. Developers should fix thing in compile-time, not run-time. ;-)

Trouble is, 'good enough' may work for many things, but it does not make for a great user experience. :?

[Steve Jordan]

What's really unfortunate is that we bring this problem upon ourselves, by buying from cheaper manufacturers and not supporting the companies that put that extra effort into good design.

How many praise Apple for its design efforts, for instance, but complain about their higher prices? Then, when other companies pick up on Apple's design cues (and charge less, since they didn't have to hire the designers), we flock to them and buy their cheaper product.

So we can blame ourselves as much as the companies... they don't sell extensively-designed products, because most of us have demonstrated that we won't spend the money on them.

[Storkman]

How many praise Apple for its design efforts, for instance, but complain about their higher prices? Then, when other companies pick up on Apple's design cues (and charge less, since they didn't have to hire the designers), we flock to them and buy their cheaper product.

I hate to pick on details, but Apple is a bad example, they're as bad as the rest. Maybe they have some great ideas, but they're just as guilty as the next company. And the worst part is they're doing it on purpose!!! Everything they do is proprietary, they won't let you out of their domain!!! To me that's the just as bad.

[Steve Jordan]

I'm just referring to Apple's design efforts... much higher and more serious than other computer companies. They have put serious work and money into their outer design, their ergonomics, their marketing, their interface, etc. They have spent money working out what people want in a computer, and purposely design their computers with that in mind. You can't say that about most PC companies.

[Cybrid]

I'd like one thing from Motorola; the opportunity to soundly slap the idiot responsible. That'd be satisfying. I'd slap him with the manual. Hard.Nearly fell off the chair laughing! :lol: This is definitely going to become an internet favorite quote.

Isn't everyone forgetting something?? A single feature device can be simple. A dual feature device is 1.5 times more complex if the UI is consistent. Giving anyone a PPC with even the basic 10 or so features requires the person learn!. You can have simplicity or complex multi-features. The two are opposites.

The more you pack in to a device, the further that Motorola manual writer is gonna fly :lol: