There has in the past been discussion about Nokia taking on Apple. It's focused a lot on things like services. I think that, while there's merit to this focus, the battleground can shift very quickly, and at the centre of it, in all ways, is the person using the device, that mythical 'user'.

Many years ago, when Apple brought the Macintosh to us, there was a heavy emphasis on the mythical user, with many reams of paper and documents published by Apple discussing what was required in an application, behaviours, placement of buttons and menue items, and so on.

Those days are not gone, but it seems to me that the emphasis has changed at Apple.

There is a torch still to be borne on this 'User experience'/UI/HCI thing though.

I'd venture to suggest that Nokia has grabbed that torch, perhaps unwittingly, with the imminent release of the N900, the excitement around it, the potential that it has, and the advancement of Maemo. Unwittingly because I really don't think they saw the N900 was going to generate as much excitement as it can (has?).

We have UI guidelines, we have N900s being used by excited people at onedotzero, we have discussions with execs and developers ongoing. For me, it's like a return to the heady days of macintosh-ism when the world was the oyster, and the tool to get the pearl was getting the user excited and comfortable with the device and its applications.

Arguably, this focus on the user is much more important on devices like the N900 for 3 reasons: Firstly, as with all mobile devices, the space limitations on the screen are a huge driver to getting it right; secondly, the mode of interaction is paramount (and must be appropriate not just for the device but for the person) and third, such devices are constant companions (much more than PCs ever were or will be) and any little niggle is going to turn out to be a big pain in a short time.

(One thing: Industrial Design does not equal User Experience...)

I'm sure Nokia sees this, and has for some time, and maybe I've missed the ongoing work regarding this on Symbian devices, but the N900, even as a step along the Maemo road, is a device that it is essential to get right for the user (or, learn from the mistakes it makes)

I wonder, is Nokia the new Apple, boldly grabbing the UI torch and going forward with its user experience mantra?

If this can continue, perhaps the future is bright...

Disclaimer: yes, I use a macintosh, have ever since 1986 (always upgraded, but still have the first one, a Plus that still works...), coded on it, played on it, swore at it (still do), etc. etc. I'd rather not have another 'Apple is the antichrist' set of replies to this - I think the 'experience' focus is what's interesting.

Nokia's not the new Apple. Nokia is the new Nokia. And I mean exactly what I'm saying. Maemo and open source is a whole new avenue and way of doing things and they seem to be embracing it. We'll see where it goes from here.

No, I think you miss my point - Apple all those years ago focused on the user. Nokia is doing that right now.

If I could write the title again, perhaps it would be - Is Nokia the new torchbearer for the user which used to be held by Apple? But then, it gets a bit long...

I agree Maemo is a different way of doing technical things/technology, but the user thing is not 'different,' it's a movement.

+1
I hope Nokia doesn't become what Apple has become. User interface is important, but I hope Nokia won't sacrifice the rest for just a better UI.
The user experience is not only the UI, but a lot of other things.

Maybe you could give us an example of a company which doesn't focus on the user ? All the ones I know do, and would not remain alive without doing so. Hell, even Microsoft is very user focused... One of their software developing motto is said to be "if the user doesn't see the bug, it's not a bug", or something like that...

I'd reckon we don't hear much of companies that don't focus on the users because those companies aren't successful enough to gain any market visibility...

For Nokia becoming what Apple became - why should they? The focus at Apple is not in fact user experience any more, it's industrial design and shiny things. Sells boxes though...

What a ridiculous motto. It's still a bug... Not seeing it is one of the biggest problems because it's a potential hole too.

Talking about the user is not the same as thinking about the user and acting about the user. Even Microsoft took a long time to get it to this stage.

Meanwhile 'Nokia is the new Nokia' is interesting to me, but it remains a tautology of sorts - I don't know enough, probably, about Nokia's focus in the past, but with a device such as the N900, which is aimed very differently from other Nokia devices (any of them?) I think there's an imperative to move the development process differently.

The thing is, when you move that dev process differently, the key is 'experience', which the UI is certainly a big part of. And if you encourage people to develop for it (not just big companies), helping them understand that is very important. I think we agree with each other there...

Other parts include getting the product into the right hands (it's in the context), allowing people to customize, making them excited when they use it... (care to add others?)

I was drawn to Nokia when they released the N770. It was the Open Source Linux thing that drew me in. Up till then I never ever owned a Nokia phone. Since then I have become a fanboy of Symbian devices AND continued to use my internet tablet.
My wife and my kids all have E63's cause they just work, so Nokia have got sales from me for their mainstream devices as a result.

I think what Nokia has done by embracing the Open Source community IS the new Nokia. They have taken their time to get involved in lots of upstream activities, moved the Maemo platform forwards, encouraged participation, acquired Open Source companies. As someone who has worked for large corporations I know how hard this can be. Ari Jaaksi and his ever growing team need to be commended, as do members of this community who have kept the faith, screamed at the mistakes and watched Nokia come back each time which has improved on the last device.

For those that have not been involved with Open Source it will be hard to understand, that being part of the "community" is not just about enthusiasm, but participation..... in whatever small way, even if its just voting on bugs, giving encouragement to the likes of LCUK or making changes to the wiki, or helping other users.

The beauty of the community is that it extends beyond just Maemo, Nokia and the n900. it extends to all of the Open Source work going on out there in the big wide world. Nokia have understood this and I for one am here to stay.

Mike C

They take care of the user interface, not only by making it shiny, but also by making it simple (generally by removing the less used features I'd say... too bad for the ones who want them).


I agree that the motto is ridiculous, but one can see it as "if the user doesn't care for this bug to be solved (minor and doesn't change the perceived result), let's focus on something else than its resolution, like making another part of the product more user-friendly. That makes sense, even though it's not really a good way of thinking.


We agree on this, but for example I prefer powerful software with poorly designed (or even slightly buggy) UI to weak but intuitive and easy to use software. To each his own, but I see the user interface as a secondary element in user experience, the quality of the results produced by the application being the first one.

But yes, people should always focus on the user experience, and at least a little bit on the user interface.

How about powerful software with a properly designed UI...?

(Which end, of course, I think we can achieve with OSS/Maemo/community

Here's a good rule of thumb though - if you don't design with the UI in mind, I really don't think you will get to this holy grail.

Nokia focused also on the user, but had different strategies to achieve that. For example, the product lines had far more hardware products, each having a target market segment. Incomparable with Apple iPhone; Nokia caters to far more market segments.

To draw a (rather pathetic) analogy: Nokia is like a car company which also manufactures high-end cars, where Apple only manufactures high-end cars. These Apple high-end cars do not focus on 'the user' because 'the user' is 'the car user' to which these high-end cars are not targeted for since they're targeted at people who are interested in high-end cars.

As soon as you drift away from the way Apple intended the device you're going to meet artificial barriers implanted by Apple. Usually its either their lack of standard hardware, or software limitations. Software compatiblity wise Apple is rather strong: they have ports available for Mac OS X, and allow 3rd party software to be installed. Ofcourse, such comes with a price, and what I said rather refers to Mac OS X for on iPhone OS you get jailed.

Even though you can break the jail you'll risk future incompatibility, and the 'very well integrated Mac experience' is (partially) gone. Such is even true if you use some kind of USB WLAN on your Mac; it won't be called an 'Airport' and therefore you cannot use Mac's default 'Airport' config utility to configure your USB WLAN. While both are simply devices to get 802.11abgn (WiFi) to work on computer.

While the possibility of incompatibility is true when you run Extras on Maemo at least the behavior is not frowned upon, and there are at least no deliberate attempts to brick your device (like Apple and Nintendo do).

With Nokia devices the lack of software updates (firmware) were traditionally the culprit, and they're moving away from that, at least allowing community-based support.

Meanwhile, where Apple uses DRM to create an OS-wide jail, and where Apple cripples its hardware intentionally like Bluetooth, and where Apple puts all kind of restrictions on their one and only software manager (App Store), Nokia instead is far more liberal.