Wizard69 | # 11 | 2007-10-28, 21:10 | Report

Exactly! That is why the interface is the way it is. If you have an iPhone you would expect to be able to get to the iPhone screen quickly.
Which brings in the question of a comparison to an iPhone. Lets face it how many other cell phones even inspire a comparision to the N series.
The key here is that no one user has an infinite number of primary functions. So you produce a screen manager that allows one to custom tailor a top level of icons. In a nut shell this is no different than many of he windows managers available today. Most allow customization to provide access to the users common set of tools.
The point is that it doesn't have to scale. Granted for a machine that has been jail broken to add third party apps it needs to be modifiable but it has already been shown that there are approaches to that.
It really depends on what you are into. If you are into the music and the artists then yes the visual effects are important. If you just let the player randomly select music for you then you might not ever see the visuals.

In any event Apple has demonstrated that things like cover flow have legs and can be extended to system wide utility.
Love it? I'm not sure everybody loves it but I turned it off on my machine because it is unstable, nothing more. Will it be useful in the future - possibly. It is more a manner of changing ones work habits than anything.
I'm not sure what you are talking about specifically. Frankly I don't own an iPhone so I can't review what might be objectionable. What I can say is that the iPhone got me looking seriously at smart phones in general and the so called internet tablets. It is Apples attitude with respect to third party apps that has keep me from buying in.
Sure it is easy if you don't mind the lost space on the screen. Instead of looking at this as a negative look at it as innovation.
Apparently a lot of people as this seems to be a big selling point for Apples devices.
Not a good user interface experience?? Frankly it is the whole reason that things like the touch exists. Many people want to see the touch as some sort of competitor to the N series. It is far from that. The touch is a product designed to deliver a better cover flow experience. In any event cover flow isn't the only access method to your music.
I'm not sure if it is in your way or you just are to biased to look at the interface in depth. Even a few minutes with an iPod will demonstrate an interface that has a lot of depth for its intended purpose.

In nay event we should at least cut Apple the same amount of slack that Nokia got with their first N series debut. Lets face ti the software has come a long way since then.

Dave

rs-px | # 12 | 2007-10-28, 21:54 | Report

You're right, and it's because Apple is Apple, and Nokia is Nokia.

It was Andy Hertzfeld, one of the original Mac developers, who pointed out that modern developers need equal amounts of empathy and programming skills. Apple's culture is to encourage creativity, and to encourage amongst its staff real, genuine understanding of what users need. This is why the touch and iPhone are so good (and they are -- if you believe otherwise then you're in a minority).

Nokia is a mobile phone company. It's quite a rich and successful mobile phone company, so it can divert some resources into skunkworks projects like the internet tablets. But one gets the impression they're merely kicking a football around, rather than playing the game properly.

I believe that, within five years, Apple will release their own Internet tablet. And it will blow everything else out of the water, just like when Apple released the iPod. Many people believe that Apple invented the MP3 player but that's a curious bit of history rewriting. Apple was simply the first to do it well. It reaped the rewards -- we talk of 'podcasting', and when people want to refer to a digital portable media player, they simply refer to an 'iPod'.

Now I love my 770, and I'm sure I'm going to love my N800 when it arrives in a few days time. But I'm a hardcore geek. I have skills, interests and abilities beyond those normally found in computer users. To me, the N800 represents a cool challenge. If it crashes, then I try to work out why. If it doesn't do something I want, I try to make it do that thing. But not everybody wants challenges. The Nokia tablet is just too clunky and geek-orientated for the ordinary user.

I think Internet tablets (as a form of computer) are going to be as big as the personal computer was back when (yup) Apple created the Apple II back in the late seventies. In 10 years time everybody will be carrying one. But it's going to take a company like Apple to do it right and show the way forward *. Nokia just isn't cut out for it. Nokia simply got there first with an excellent form factor and barely-decent software.

* Of course, once Apple has shown the way, many other companies will get in there with their clones; if Microsoft is still around, then it may well release its own tablet but I think the battle at that point will probably be between Apple and Google

---

Last edited by rs-px; 2007-10-28 at 21:58.

benny1967 | # 13 | 2007-10-28, 22:01 | Report

Dave, dont get me wrong: I'm not saying that Apple did a bad job for their customers. Apparently not! Everyone who can read knows so.

But the whole thread started as some kind of accusation: bad, bad Nokia management doesnt give us the "Apple experience". Nokia, give us the Apple experience!

All I wanted to do is point out that

a) tablets cant be like iPhones (or the iPod Touch) simply because they are so much different in what they can do.

b) there's a lot of reading about good UI design, there's a lot of personal experience with it, and all of it says: a good UI is one you dont notice. Certainly, a UI that is the main act on the device doesn't fall into this category.

While Apple might have a market with devices that are "so different" (because people are different), I still think a majority of consumers (me included) has this classical attitude towards user interfaces. (or else, why would all these researchers come up with the same findings?) My hope is that Nokia does not get carried away with this "iAttitude" and will continue to provide a straightforward, easy to use, no special-effects user interface for the tablets.

benny1967 | # 14 | 2007-10-28, 22:06 | Report

What kind of point are you trying to make here?

Hedgecore | # 15 | 2007-10-28, 22:15 | Report

Don't make me go into another long diatribe comparing the N810 to a brick. It's exactly what you're doing.

Apples products being 'polished' is a matter of preference, nothing more. Their marketing juggernaut has created many zombies who are willing to shell out their hard earned cash on what they are told to like. What they are told is chique. What they are told is good UI.

I think the iPOD has huge design faults from a usability standpoint, whereas they're genius from a marketing standpoint.

A.) The headphones leak horribly. I take the subway / bus to and from work every day and every time I hear hideously mainstream washed up music leaking from someone's mp3 player it's an iPOD. I know this because of the distinctive white ear buds. They don't even have to pull it out of their pockets.

B.) Lack of tactile feedback. My RCA Lyra has a button I push, not a touch wheel. I can feel the fact I pushed the button. While the iPOD has a touch wheel and clicks can be heard through the headphones, this isn't good design. The sense of touch is superior. Wanna change tracks on your iPOD? Pull it out and hold it up to your face. Everyone can see you doing it. Marketing genius.

C.) Apple took design queues from maxi pads. The day I buy an iPOD is when it comes with wings... though it is impressive that the iPOD Touch absorbs 40ml more blue liquid than the Nano.

Your Apple products might look good while lying on your IKEA Lack end table, but most of you gadget freaks that like them had best stop wearing girls' jeans (if you're male) and get your head screwed on better. From an objective standpoint, they're horrible.

Now, go back to comparing the iPhone to the stylus that came with the 770. I'll get you started. The 770's stylus can't play mp3's and I don't think it was any video codecs either. Clearly the iPhone is better than a stylus. You can also stab yourself in the ear with a stylus when trying to pick up a call whereas with the iPhone all you can do is miss the call because you took so long to pull it out in an obvious fashion so that everyone could see you've got one.

ragnar | # 16 | 2007-10-28, 22:31 | Report

Interesting discussion, although I don't see perhaps the need for it to be so heated. There's plenty to learn from both directions and both companies.

One perspective that I might give to this discussion is that Apple supposedly spent 5 years developing the iPhone in secrecy. They're generally a closed-source / closed-development company. That's really Apple's style, and it serves them very well.

The tablets, going in comparison open source, are doing what for instance Ari Jaaksi wrotes once in his blog: "Release early, release often". It really means precisely that, both for hardware and software. Instead of spending 5 years in secrecy and then coming out with something.

Iterative development, releasing early, gathering feedback and making corrections and improvements to all aspects. I would guess... or hope... that people would ... if not appreciate, then at least understand or tolerate the consequences that this general direction has.

Which model is better, closed vs. open and iterative can of course be argued to infinity.

Wizard69 | # 17 | 2007-10-28, 22:34 | Report

They are very good at what they are designed to do. What people seem to have trouble with is that going beyond that puts you into a no mans land. The reason the depth of UNIX is hard to leverage on an iPhone is because it is purposely not exposed. So when people go looking for all this depth there is nothing to find and they are surprised.
If true probably a bad sign for the future of the N series. The N810 is already indicating to me that they don't grasp what the users want in the market.
give them 5 months This I wonder about. I don't see how any sort of internet tablet can be a success without a vibrant third party software source. It is the one thing that bothers me the most about Apples i series products. If the rumored Apple tablet follows the same development path it could be an issue.
Well being new to the market I can't comment on clunky As a long time Linux user I'm probably a geek by now. The thing that has keep me off the so called internet tablets is the lack of capabilities I consider important. The idea is to find a substitute for a laptop. Something that is easy to carry and is as communicative as a laptop. Most of the so called internet tablets come up short in one manner or the other. The common issues being speed, storage space, screen usability and I/O.
I don't see them getting that huge unless they incorporate other tasks as primary functions. This is why Apples iPhones and Touches will be popular as internet tablets, they will be easy to justify due to the considerable use they will get due to their primary function.

It is also why I see the N810 as a big disappointment. It really doesn't have a primary function beyond being an internet tablet and even there is thinly outfitted. It had potential but doesn't have enough flash to function as a media player nor as a GPS system.

As a internet access only platform, the N series are too limited in screen size to appeal to the mass market. If there is anything that will keep the growth in this market truncated it is the compromise of the screen that one has to deal with. This is why devices of this nature, without a more compelling primary use, will always have trouble.
I wouldn't count out Nokia yet. Further while Apple will likely get it right again, they still have issues with openness. Apple isn't far form a solution either, simple adjustments to the Touches hardware can result in a very competitive internet tablet and be marketable as long as it maintains its media player roots. The question is are they so bound to the current cell phone providers that they can't innovate in this arena?
Google - A corporation with a lot of money and a history of going its own way. There is a lot of potential for a great device. Again though I see this as a device with a primary purpose (Google Phone) and a bunch of internet tablet feature tagging along.

dave

lavo | # 18 | 2007-10-28, 22:35 | Report

@hedgecore
Points a and c having nothing to do with a usuability standpoint - even if the iPod looks like a woman's "product", it still plays music as intended. I think you are clouding Apple hating with your objective judgement

The usability of the iPod is typified by the lack of instructions in the box that the iPod comes with. It doesn't take people long to figure out how to use one. You guys have to step away from being a geek for 5 minutes and think of yourselves as newbies that have only a passing interest in computers (mainly to achieve some other goal, like pay bills online). How ticked off do people get with phone menus when you ring up a bank? 5 different menus to speak to someone about a change of address? Infuriating! To me, that is where Linux is now. That is what Nokia needs to fix with the IT. Having every option under the sun is heaven for a geek, but for the average schmo on the street it is a living hell.

BTW, if people didn't like eye candy, there would be no art on our walls, our houses would look like jails, and we would all be wearing the same clothes. People love pretty things

lavo | # 19 | 2007-10-28, 22:37 | Report

BTW, you guys do know there is an SDK coming out for the iPhone/Touch?

Wizard69 | # 20 | 2007-10-28, 22:57 | Report

Well I understand what you are saying but on the other hand I in some respects agree with the original poster. Nokia simply hasn't given the time and thought that it deserves. The N series is a good concept suffering from a lack of commitment in my opinion. It is apparent that Apple threw everything they had into the iPhone (for better or worst) to the extent of delaying a major software upgrade. If the N series had that sort of corporate push imagine where we would be today.
Well yes and no. The Apple products are limited because Apple made them that way. At their core though they have a system that can be the equal of Linux on the N series.

My point is that the devices from Nokia need a primary function to make the attractive to those that can't justify some thing like the N series. Everyone has an excuse to carry around a Cell phone for example and a lot of people an MP3 player. Few have the need for a Linux only pocket computer.

The problem for N series like devices is that as platforms like the iPhone grow in capability it becomes harder and harder to justify carrying around a N series machine also.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say.
Which is? I don't know maybe somebody else can fill me in on what you are saying here. The classical interface for a phone was the rotary dial. There are many interfaces for a computer, each suitable for specific classes of use. For example many people love the BASH command line.
Ok I like straight forward, but beyond cover flow what is or are the special effects on a iPhone that bothers you? List boxes get scrolled with a swipe of the finger, a tap at the right place zooms in. I don't see these as special effects but rather innovation. What would you have Apple do ship a mouse with each iPhone?

By the way I'm not implying that Nokia needs to implement the same sort of user interface elements. But an easy to use PORTABLE platform is very important. As is a platform that gives you a reason to carry it around.

Dave