Comments on: Why Apple is Kicking Everyone’s Ass – The Real Cost of Software Development is Usability

By: Thomas Chai

Thomas Chai — Thu, 27 May 2010 09:54:43 +0000

Apple understand the user’s mind. Their design is about thinking things that is not needed rather than cramping in more and more stuff like Microsoft. Just compares Microsoft Office with Apple’s iWork. You see gazillion icons and menus in Office that you don’t bother to use and clutter the screen, while in iWorks, it has only few icons.

By: Wardell

Wardell — Sat, 01 May 2010 10:04:03 +0000

@Phil hear hear, I strongly agree

By: Ergonomist Dr. Joe

Ergonomist Dr. Joe — Thu, 15 Apr 2010 06:42:13 +0000

Many years ago, I wrote my PhD dissertation on a Mac.
Then, after entering the industry, as an ergonomist, at work I had and have to live with a Windows PC as it is company standard. Having to learn Windows and MS Office was a nightmare for me. But because of job requirements I also have a PC at home. As a result I am spending about 10% to 20% of my PC time figuring out what went wrong, or how to do this or that. I actually started writing my own “tutorials” or “manuals” for things I had figured out so I will be able to do them again next time. Am I too stupid? Well, I am a user not a geek. Computers for me are like screw drivers – they are a tool to do something with. When I grab my screw driver I want it to work, immediately, and the way I expect it to work.
Under these conditions my ergonomic evaluation of Windows based PCs and MS software usibility is simple: it’s crap.

Last year my wife finally wanted her own lap top. She was sick of having to share my PC and use my time asking me how to do this or that. And – frankly – I was sick of telling my wife that it is NOT her fault and that she is not too stupid to use a PC. MS is still a crippling disease without a cure…

So I bought my wife a McBook for Christmas. All problems were solved. Except one: my 16 yr. old son is now mainly using her McBook. Guess what he will get for his 17th birthday…

If you think usability, Apple has the edge. And this by far. I am glad Apple exists – otherwise the geeks at MS would still tell us that it is not possible.

Apple shows us that Usability oriented software design is possible.

By: scottm

scottm — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:13:53 +0000

@Phil

“Make things easy by removing any options that might allow a mistake to be made. ”

For a consumer product like iPhone, iPad, iPod, etc.. that sounds like a darn good idea. People want to push a button and watch things work, not spend time figuring out what button to push.

By: curiosity

curiosity — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 12:49:15 +0000

Accidentaly stumbling over this forum I could hardly avoid to laugh out loud. This is a post from geeks for geeks. Most of these opinions have hardly anything to do with the expectations of the rest of us (99,9% +).

By the way, since “poor English seems to reduce credibility”: Sorry for my poor English – it is not my first, not even my second language.

Being a consumer and not a geek and as this in the company I work for responsible for the organisation and their processes I’m in a constand figth with the the technicians over software solutions and user interfaces. They can build pretty much everything what’s possible but who in the world wants this. Almost no user wants full flexibility and all the features which are in the box. All they want is an easy solution for the problem to solve; and in this it should always be an improvement over the past (including ease of use).

This said, the main effort in all our software projects is / should be put into user acceptance and positve user experiences. It’s al about user acceptance and with it comes image. Positve Image supports acceptance and so on. A technically good software solution will never be used according to plan if there is no acceptance or positive image attached to it.

And in case of Apple this seems to be (at least to me) the reason for their success. Most of the time they deliver a great user experience, gain acceptance for their solutions, improve their image and keep up with what they promised. The few shortcomings of their products (and there are some) are mainly overlooked because the rest of it works just perfectly. Additionally I – as a user – participate from apples image which adds to my good experience.

By: Bill B

Bill B — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 11:07:47 +0000

Apple’s marketing works, in part, because their message is true to their brand and their products.

You see, to reach most consumers you must convey your product’s Benefits — not just its Features. (“Batteries Included” is a Feature. Your child having fun the very moment they open the box is a Benefit.)

And Apple is a Benefit-providing company at heart.

Sadly, most software companies can’t resist the lure of what some call “Feature Creep” — that oh-so-tempting urge to pile on Feature after Feature, while paying little or no attention to whether those features provide real Benefits. “What’s the down-side?” is often the engineer’s implicit question. Unlike in hardware, in software new Features are practically free! And often, so-called marketing departments really believe that saying “Over 100 new Features!” is a unique selling point.

But it’s not. It’s just a number that conveys a grand total of ZERO Benefits. If, before proposing a new Feature, software designers would simply ask “What’s the Benefit for the end user?” our world, and the technology that powers, it would be made better. And I have no doubt that Apple employees asks themselves this question a hundred times a day.

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 04:38:39 +0000

Wow. As a consumer, I respect and love the companies that put out great products. Good job guys.

By: Darwin

Darwin — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 04:24:03 +0000

Phil you have no idea at all what you are talking about.

By: qka

qka — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 23:23:34 +0000

Apple products are simple to use, not “simplistic”.

Writing with poor English reduces your credibility.

By: tmu

tmu — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 23:00:00 +0000

@thomas:

good reply & valid points.
What comes to MS, theyre out, i’ll agree. My point was meant to be against your “OSX decades in the making” comment. I am sure that all major players have invested more and failed in making their mobile OS as usable as appl.

In the long run though, winners will be Koreans and most likely Nokia. They’ve had their hiccups now, amd soon theyll roll out an armada of phones. Their cost-effiency cannot be beaten, if you compare quality with price. With quality, I meand Q of 3g radio of phone, chipset or battery.Things that matter in long run. UI/UX they will copy from appl if it is decent. Im not sure it is. (great feats& expandable with apps, lacks modification for serious smartphone users)

what comes to OS wars,
iphone os is the plat to beat now, in terms of usability.
In other categories, it plain loses to any other main platform available (android, symbian, meego/maemo, Bada, MSOS)
Of those, I simply dont understand why one uses android, while there are free linux mob OSes around.

I also find quite amusing reading US analytics’ comments abt smartphone OSes. They ALL think their small neighbourhood is dominant marketplace. funny.