Comments on: Coming to grips with the iPhone's design
Apple bucked convention when it asked people to commit both hands when using the iPhone. Was that the right touch?
Apple bucked convention when it asked people to commit both hands when using the iPhone. Was that the right touch?
December 28, 2009 9:50 AM PST
December 28, 2009 9:48 AM PST
December 28, 2009 8:00 AM PST
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Related quotes
requiring two-handed usage. Maybe we should be concerned,
especially with the boneheads who want to text and surf while
driving. My thoughts - "Your in a car not a phone booth you idiots,
pay attention to your driving!"
I think this article is the standard "Apple product are totally great in every way but one, so they suck terribly." This rapt concern about physical buttons reminds me of when cars started going to automatic transmissions. "You cannot push start a car with an automatic transmission. So it must be a terrible thing. You should never use it. It will not be reliable"
Of course today, most cars come with an automatic transmission and you have to special order a manual transmission. :-) Ain't life weird.???
en
The dam_ed things should be turned off in a restaurant, and a theater and a meeting room and................... we are whining because it requires 2-hands?
Unbelievable. For once the mega ego Steve has made a good choice. More power to him. I would prefer a wireless device that would need three hands! Or be smart enuff to know when it was in a restaurant, theater, meeting, moving vehicle of any type and turn off or at least go into silent mode.
Where were we before these things invaded? Think person shopping in WalMart and talking on a cell phone; "Which isle are you in now?"
Enough.
The dam_ed things should be turned off in a restaurant, and a theater and a meeting room and................... we are whining because it requires 2-hands?
Unbelievable. For once the mega ego Steve has made a good choice. More power to him. I would prefer a wireless device that would need three hands! Or be smart enuff to know when it was in a restaurant, theater, meeting, moving vehicle of any type and turn off or at least go into silent mode.
Where were we before these things invaded? Think person shopping in WalMart and talking on a cell phone; "Which isle are you in now?"
Enough.
iPhone. I would say that at least 50% of my phone is poly-
chronic and the iPhone does really require your full attention.
One-handed operation and the overall discrepancy of scale of
the UI creates user challenges considering the tight cluster of
querty keys and then the giant easy-reader keypad. If I use the
phone with my right hand I can't really reach the "1" with my
thumb. A straight up palm grip renders your thumb useless so
you need to lock the phone into the flesh of your thumb.
The keypad could actually be smaller with the option for right or
left hand use and it could follow the arc of your thumb if the
keys had a slight radial alignment or just adapt to the user's
hand size.
I've been researching the use of haptic feedback and Samsung
has integrated this technology into a touch phone. Here's a link:
http://www.time4.com/time4/microsites/popsci/howitworks/ce
llphone_motor.html
I'd be interested in hearing why Apple didn't pursue this as it
"feels" like it could help.
I love the device overall.
As the author suggests, I think the iPhone is a step in the adaption
and development of a type of personal technology, but I can tell
you I'd much rather wrestle with the iPhones big virtual buttons,
that also have very good visual feedback that let's you know what
you just pushed, than the stupidly unuseable tiny buttons of the
Treo, Blackberry, et. al. I would not even consider a "smart" phone
for my personal use until Apple's iPhone got here.
system. What's lacking, and what would be a true KILLER APP for
the iPhone, is DICTATION SOFTWARE. (Like iListen, for example.)
This could let a user dictate an outgoing Email to be picked up on
a home computer later for filing or printing. Also, with one-button
initiation, there would no need for 2-handed operation, or even for
much finger work at all!
DOOMED! DOOMED! to a miniscule fraction of "the" market.
average person. Most people don't learn what all those tiny
buttons do, and don't "pick up the phone in the middle of the
night and know what button to hit." The average person are
stymied by the multilevel menus that those kinds of phone. They
never begin to learn all the functions of their phone because
they're too difficult to learn or access.
I'm extremely happy with the UI from my iPhone, and I've happily
discarded the "one hand" model designed for geeks who seem to
have nothing better to do!
NO cell phone (or PDA, or tiny device of similar size) is well suited for SMS and similar tasks. It is a matter of making a compromise. The iPhone's compromise is better than most (if not all) that is out there. The rest of the UI is a MUCH better improvement over the mess out there in the industry that passes for a user interface.
about half the time with just one hand, although I can type faster
on the virtual qwerty keyboard with two hands. I have no problem
scrolling through my contacts with a flick of my thumb up or down
the list, then tapping the correct spot on a contact to dial. The one
problem area I've noticed, and this is with one or two hands, is
listening to my top voicemail- about a quarter of the time I tap the
"greeting" button instead, and have to cancel out to get back to
voicemail...
This guy has completely missed the point of Apple products, from the iPhone and iPod, all the way back to the first iMac. This is the type of guy who still can't fathom why we're not all using beige computers with beige monitors and beige peripherals. Apple is not about utility. They're about style.
They're about making a product that looks so appealing that you don't want to hide it under the table at the restaurant. A product that the friend with whom you're having lunch would gladly stop whatever they're saying just to watch you use this utterly cool looking device for 30 seconds. Its been Apple's M.O. for years now. Its the reason they have fashion industry execs on their board of directors. Its what allowed Apple to take the mp3 player from geeky to chic in a matter of months. And its what will allow them to dominate the cell phone industry while the engineers continue to scratch their heads in their beige offices.
have been using, buying and loving Apple products. But I want to
take your comments one step further... Sure they are pretty, but
don't forget they are also functional, user-friendly, and literally
indestructible machines. If I can't run it on a Mac, it's not worth
using. The technology of Apple will ALWAYS be decades ahead of
the others, the fact that it comes in a pretty package is just a bonus
for us.
First the Mac, a computer for technophobes. Yep- it taught us all a few things about UI design.
Then the iPod, which taught us all that if Apple built something different, the sheep would gladly pay too much money for it. Yes, MP3 players and download software were a bit cumbersome for some people to understand, and Apple fixed that, while introducing us to yet another proprietary file format...
Now the iPhone- an oversized and overpriced telephone built for people too dumb to understand a cell phone.
Newton is absurd.
I have no complaints other than EDGE-onlyt, and for iPhone to be
the first iteration and have this much success should silence critics
as to whether Apple knows what it's doing or not.
iPhone for any length of time. Most likely just for a few minutes
in order to write this.
Myself and two kids have iPhones. The 13 year old operates it
with one hand for goodness sake. Let alone myself and the 17 yr
old.
Being a cell phone user since 1985. And a hand held user since
1986 I do have some experience. And coming off a Motorola
RAZR, which I used from the day of release, using this one
handed was not easy. Manly because it took s many numerous
clicks to get anywhere. So the hand and fingers constantly
needed to be adjusted to accomplish something. The iPhone is
infinitely easier to operate one handed. One click and you have
what you need. Yes look at the screen for the icon, but then
done. And I don't have large hands or long fingers. Average. To
quote from the article, "People are getting so visceral with their
phones; they can pick up the phone in the middle of the night
and know what button to hit." That is just not true other than
answering. Unless a flip to open. Whether a Blackberry or iPhone,
a user hs to using the screen. The quote is just plain false.
Another quote, "navigating through the menu, looking up a
contact, and using countless other functions only requires a
single hand" This is simple one handed using the iPhone. One
hand to slide to unlock, one click on phone icon. Done. Why is
that so much harder on an iPhone than any other phone? All one
handed.
Through all negative articles written by people about the iPhone,
which I include this one, their largest complaint is the iPhone is
not the same form factor as current "smart" phones. All these so
called tech writers, deride innovation. They prefer the status
que. So strange.
This article no different. It's not really an opinion or review of the
iPhone. It's promoted as first and foremost a critical flaw the
iPhone was/is not a copy of current "smart" phones. So it's not to
be taken seriously.
Use the iPhone Mr. Krazit. If you can't operate most features one
handed after a few days, it's not the phones fault.
Or, it could just be that advertising dollars come into play once
again. I don't see any Apple ads on this site. It might just be RIM,
Blackberry, Moto, Sony ad dollars need to be protected?
Sure, it can be done, but it wasn't designed with one-hand usage in mind. Apple, in all their demonstration videos and commercials, shows the iPhone being used with two hands.
The point of this article is that companies have to make design choices, and tradeoffs, when they bring new things to market. Most traditional smart phone designers would have wanted Apple to stay on the one-handed track, but they chose this approach, which allowed them to introduce the touch screen interface that has wowed almost all iPhone users. The tradeoff was that they had to make it a two-handed device.
But that's not necessarily a flaw. It's a design choice; they couldn't do the touchscreen and "one-button" approach if they adhered to the traditional one-handed design. So they did this, and now the whole industry is rethinking the one-handed method because of how people have responded to the touchscreen.
Thats just... I can't think of a word that isn't offensive to finish that
thought.
really don't understand the premise of your article...
1handed use has benefits in all other areas of being mobile. Laptops are mobile. PDAs are mobile. Tablets are mobile. But all these require the end user to use 2hands, or find an optimal position or situation before full operation can be done with the device.
1handed use reigns supreme navigating large masses of people, packed commuter transports, shopping malls, social events, carrying books/bags etc., while soakiing in the tub/jacuzzi, smoking, eating, moving, running, jogging. Every situation where you're truly mobile and need to multi-task.
I wrote a long reply to this article trying to explain it all in as short a manner as possible. It's complicated and I would have liked to have added more.
place with their BOTH thumbs a wagging!
- Still one-handed w/ important buttons on bottom...
- by oh4real August 27, 2007 10:41 AM PDT
- True to the article, Apple made a design choice to not have buttons, but I would add that they didn't really compromise simple cell phone actions at all since most of the major buttons are along bottom which are (mostly) thumbable and since software derived, can be made more thumbable to suit each user.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 3 pages (89 Comments)If you want to make a call, on home tap bottom left with thumb then choose favorites, recent or keypad. 'End call' is at bottom. All within thumb-reach.
While you would have to have pretty long thumbs to find contacts or even to dial keypad as it currently is, the beauty of the software button interface is that Apple can come up with options like alphabetical sort along bottom as an index, just like how to dial contacts in Verizon's interface where you 'spell' the name with numbers/letters and the OS autofills to find contact:
[ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ] [ 4 ] [ 5 ]
space abc def ghi jkl
[ 6 ] [ 7 ] [ 8 ] [ 9 ] [ 0 ]
mno pqrs tuv wxyz go
start dialing 2638 until 'cnet' contact is displayed, then click go. You can swap 1=go,0=space for lefties.
Again, the beauty is that with software keys Apple(or an ambitious developer) can redesign and offer this.
Or they could make the keypad more accessible by dropping it 'keyboard' position on the bottom with all numbers along bottom within thumb reach.
AND they can even make the size of the keys and placement customizable for lefties, righties, biggies, tinies!
AND for texting you can adjust the visual size of the letter keys on the keyboard based on frequency of use. And the software, once left/right preference is noted, could even morph the active areas to be angled toward palm on left or right.
Anyway, point is the article is right in indicating that Apple made a more flexible and ultimately personalizable design choice that enables 1,000s of future apps that DON'T depend on keyboard or keypad, developers can put buttons/keys whereever their UI designers decide.
ANd not enabling you to send text messages to your girlfriend while having dinner with your wife may not be a bad thing.
oh4real