Debating the design dilemmas of Apple's iPhone
Remember, folks: different does not inherently mean "bad."
I was surprised at the reaction to my article, published this morning, titled "Coming to grips with the iPhone's design." Specifically, with the way some people see a discussion of design tradeoffs as an attempt to tar and feather the nonconformist.
Yes, you can use your iPhone with one hand. But it's not as easy as some would suggest. Some reviewers didn't think it was that big a deal, some thought it was more of a problem. Whether or not you think it's easy to use the iPhone with one hand probably has a lot to do with the size of your hands and the dexterity of your fingers and thumb.
However, that wasn't the point of the story. The point was that Apple didn't make one-handed use as high a priority as other smart-phone companies have for years. Instead, Apple prioritized the touch-screen user interface, betting that people would adapt their existing one-handed behavior to get a shot at a touch screen, or that people who hadn't used other smart phones before wouldn't be used to older ways of using smart phones.
Many readers saw that analysis as critical of Apple, which I just don't understand. Steve Jobs has been very clear from the start that Apple designed the iPhone to be a different product from other smart phones. This article pointed out one of the ways in which Apple is forging its own path, casting aside historical design goals.
It's simply too early to know if that was a good decision or not; this thing has been out there for only two months. The phone designers interviewed for this story thought Apple wouldn't have been able to make a breakthrough with the touch-screen interface if they didn't move one-handed use farther down the priority list, and a lot of design-oriented people probably told Apple they were crazy for abandoning that principle when the iPhone development first got under way. Since the touch-screen interface has (deservedly so) received most of the attention from early users, however, it would seem that bodes well for now.
But in the long run, if Apple wants to make the iPhone a more mainstream device, the designers think the company will have to tweak future versions to make them easier to use with one hand without eroding the capabilities of the touch screen. That's all, folks. No heroes, no villains, just an attempt to point out some of the differences between the way the iPhone was designed, what other companies have done, and what the future might hold.
These are very early days for the smart-phone world. Lots of different ideas are under consideration, and the established way of doing things isn't all that established. Smart phones may very well diverge into business devices where one-handed use is the priority and consumer devices where the screen is the priority. It's a big enough market for both.
Tom Krazit writes about the ever-expanding world of Internet search, including Google, Yahoo, online advertising, and portals, as well as the evolution of mobile computing. He has written about traditional PC companies, chip manufacturers, and mobile computers, spending the last three years covering Apple. E-mail Tom. 
new technology like the iPhone, the rest of us are not sure.
This makes sense, after all the iPhone plus the 2 year agreement
with AT&T is a lot to pay if you hate the thing after you get it.
I personally cannot afford a iPhone, but I am not feeling deprived
ether. I look at the basics of the phone. Other than it's a phone
with a much better UI than any other phone. It's mostly used
feature will still be the phone. If people like the phone and how
it functions then they will be OK with the rest of it. But if the
phone part of the iPhone has problems or is difficult to use.
Then the iPhone will not be the big seller.
As Palm's CEO said, "... a computer company cannot just walk in and get it right the first time."
But Palm's statement does not hold true if the new entrant defines new rules for what a smart phone should be; and this is what Apple has tried to do.
I think that Apple sees the "phone" part of a smart phone the same way we all do: i.e. it must work and behave like a phone, damn it.
So what makes a smart phone smart? I believe that this is what Apple has sought to redefine. What Apple have built is a personal computing device (not withstanding its closed architecture) and stuck a phone that mostly works and behaves like... well... a cell phone, albeit with fancy graphics and animations.
It is my guess that that is the reason that there is such a big discrepancy between the reported sold iPhones and the number of activations seen by AT&T - many people have bought the iPhone because it is a better pocket computing / internet / entertainment device than anything currently on the market, and that is the smarts that Apple is banking will make their smart phone a smarter smart phone than any other on the market.
Ask yourself, which other smart phone on the market has such compelling "smarts" that that alone makes for a compelling consumer purchasing proposition. Throw in the phone, and you have convenient communication capabilities (albeit missing a few components such as mms) in your thingamajig.
Its still too early to tell whether or not the Apple view of a smart phone will find traction with consumers - if it does, then incumbents like Palm are probably in for a rough time.
attributes" (smart-PHONE), it is possible that the two-hands use
becomes a big problem.
But if it is used as an "internet access device with
phone" (SMART-phone) the two-hands problem won't exist.
In other words, if I need to look to the display to see what I
working on (a web page, a YouTube video) there won't be any
trouble.
Apple has said there will be more than one type of iPhone, so we might see different models in the future that are optimized for different things, as either phones first or as data/multimedia devices first.
comment to a story/article and is easy to tell that they didn't get
the point. I read the original article, and it made me wonder if
really using just one hand was that important for me, which is
exactly what Apple wants people (and the market) to ponder. To
be fair, the author did kind of picked at the design in a critical
way, but that was the part of the point too: he's an iPhone user,
and he felt it was something 'different', and thought that maybe
others will feel the same way. He didn't say he didn't like the
iPhone, just that he needed two hands to use it and asked if that
will be a 'bad' thing in the long run. I say: probably not, and, by
the amount of persons commenting in the original article, I think
I may be right. That's it, no fuss, no muzz.
Besides, even he did say he didn't like the product, nobody said
that this phone was for everybody. Some people are going to
like it (specially those with big hands, hehe), but some others
won't and they will have their reasons. The same way that Apple
is not for everybody and have their reasons. This is normal, this
is ok.
Why is it that when a person dislikes one product, suddenly a
whole bunch of people jump to the 'rescue' of the product and
start evangelizing. I wonder if it's the need for people to feel
that they are different and they confirm it by using an specific
type of products, and when others dislike those products they
feel as they're being disliked too... wouldn't it be ironic if it
were?
to drive? Not good idea. Are you looking at porn? :-P
Seems to me I can't use my Blackberry Pearl for anything other
than making calls anyway. Now, the Blackberry is not even close
to being a version 1.0 device like the iPhone. If they add voice
dialing to the iPhone, then I think it's a non-issue. Give Apple
the number of iterations that RIM has had to make the
Blackberry so useful and see what it can do.
I for one can't wait to get an iPhone when my current plan runs
out.
they can make it do hand springs if they want to!
This line said it all, "the entire screen is Virtual".
Think of it this way, you're in the Matrix with iPhone's VR.
mainstream device, the designers think the company will have to
tweak future versions to make them easier to use with one hand
without eroding the capabilities of the touch screen."
Are these the same designers that said the iPod would never
succeed? :-)
for the iphone. If the history repeat itself (like US), it appear one
hand or not is not an issue. iPhone design got the approval of 1
million user so far, speak for it self. Let the fact to speak
itself...soon. design to keep your main camp happy is the key. It is
always have some hard to please type that never going to be
happy... (or just plain jealous).
different purpose. Dunno why you'd try to saddle it with backward
compatibility. One handed operation? Fine, if you're running thru
an airport with a latte in the other hand and trying to scan your
emails before your flight. That's just not what/who
iPhone/customers are about.
- Great article
- by brundlefly76 August 31, 2007 9:20 PM PDT
- Rarely as well said, but absolutely true. I have owned Linux, Windows, and Apple computers over 20 years of computing, and have good things and bad to say about each, and have my favorites.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(12 Comments)With the iPhone, I couldnt do it because over the last year the one thing about my Blackberry I couldnt take anymore was EDGE after using EVDO, so the iPhone, while having that amazing screen and browser I adore, just wasnt solving my #1 problem.
However, I still swoon when I see people using theirs, and Im glad that other people are happy with it!