The HIG is undead

Yesterday’s was a great episode of Hypercritical by @siracusa about Apple’s (lack of) UI consistency. This topic struck a cord with me as someone who spends their days teaching new computer users.

As a teacher, my gut reaction is to hate apps that do not follow the HIG.

I understand Tog’s argument about GUI quote-unquote “bandwidth” which has expanded enormously over the past 25 years. However, it still isn’t ubiquitous. There are still a lot of new users. We could generalize and say something terrible like “It’s all just old people, so the problem solves itself” but that isn’t true. It is estimated that only 2 billion people are using personal computers. UI patterns are important. I don’t think anyone would deny that. I would further argue that it is still too early to abandon standardized UI elements. The “bandwidth” isn’t there yet. There is still value in the HIG, at least in low-level, system-wide contexts.

That said, I think the iPhone and iPad might accelerate the abandonment of standardized UI elements. But first, I must digress.

Computers are not machines. I mean that in a mechanical sense. You cannot punch a few buttons and pull a lever and have the same output produced time after time. Computers are problem-solving devices. Everything depends on context. That is why step-by-step lists of instructions fail so often. Problem-solving tools and concepts are key (cf. Tog’s point of recognizing differently shaped houses). Every day computing is an exercise in problem-solving.

To return to iOS: when 3rd party apps were released I was appalled at all the crazy interaction metaphors that were being used. Every app is different! Talk about ignoring the HIG. However, limitations due to form factor and capability constrain the types of things that can be done. Even though iOS UI conventions are pretty loose people can make sense of it. And much quicker than they do on regular computers. This is brilliant because they can take these skills to their desktops and figure out what is going on there.

iOS devices are giving people the right problem-solving skills that will help navigate other UIs, hastening the demise of things like the HIG. Also, think about the future of mobile devices in markets overseas where traditional PCs are not accessible. That is class of new user that could benefit from not being saddled with HIG-encumbered historical expectations like we have.

In the end, the HIG is just a guide, shambling along. I agree with John’s argument that it is there to serve in situations where a better UI pattern cannot be executed. I think it should be adhered to for basic, system-wide functionality for the benefit of new users, but abandoned when a more effective alternative is possible.

Influence of the iPhone on smartphone design

I love this bit from Gruber:

During Jobs’s iPhone introduction keynote address in January 2007, before showing what the iPhone looked like, Jobs put up this slide showing four of the then-leading smartphones on the market: the Motorola Q, a BlackBerry, a Palm Treo, and the Nokia E62.

Those pre-iPhone smartphones Jobs displayed all shared the same fundamental design: half-screen, half keyboard, and an up/down/left/right navigation controller. Now look at this prototype Android phone Gizmodo spotted in December 2007 — 11 months after the iPhone introduction. Android was conceived of that same old model — the prototype Gizmodo found in December 2007 would have fit perfectly alongside the other four phones in Jobs’s keynote slide.

The gaping chasm between that Treo-ish/BlackBerry-ish prototype Android device and the HTC G1 that went on sale a year later (let alone the Nexus One today) was bridged by ideas from the iPhone.

The iPhone introduced a new model. A true great leap forward in the state of the art.

The man must have a memory sharp as a razor to recall those slides.

I imagine his office to be filled to the ceiling with bankers boxes full of quotes and financial reports, corkboards of “claim chowder”, and walls covered in relational diagrams, all ringed around a massive, loud typewriter.

(I know he uses a MacBook Pro and Yojimbo to organize everything. I just like the journo-hack of yore persona…)

Challenging conventions with the Magic Mouse

Conventions are an important aspect of product design. Using accepted conventions can help achieve a better user experience by lowering the barrier to learning a new product.

When Apple’s Unibody MacBooks were released they shattered a number of conventions. Trackpads were based on the desktop mouse experience and thus users were faced with the usual left and right buttons below the trackpad. Unibody MacBooks got rid of all the buttons. Furthermore, Unibody MacBooks added a number of gestures through its MultiTouch interface. Pointing and clicking is moving further and further away from the conventional two button mouse which everyone is familiar with. And with more people buying laptops over desktops, the days of the conventional two button mouse may be over.

Now Apple has challenged the convention by introducing the Magic Mouse — getting rid of the buttons and adding MultiTouch to a desktop mouse. It will be interesting to see if other manufacturers follow suit, as most mobile handset makers followed the iPhone in developing MultiTouch smartphones. If they do not, then the convention will remain and the Magic Mouse will forever be a niche product, like the trackball mouse. The two button mouse has proven itself a champion and has been with us for more than twenty users. It will be difficult to unseat.

Another scenario might be more likely: the complete leapfrogging of MultiTouch devices on the desktop to touch interaction directly with the monitor. This scenario could come to fruition long before Apple’s challenge to the two button mouse is played out.