29. May 2012 · Categories: Apple, Software

Michael Mace has written a very nice article about the problems with Windows 8. It clearly describes the problems I feel the software will face.

The main problem with Windows 8 is that Microsoft wants to leverage Windows to fight the iPad. When you read about the the design goals, you see that Microsoft sees the future as converged devices, with keyboard, touchpad and touchscreen all in one. On the other hand, Apple, which clearly moves OS X into the direction of supporting new features introduced with iOS, keeps the user interface paradigm based on using a keyboard in combination with a touchpad, and improves upon iCloud to ensure the interoperability between them.

The basic problem with the Microsoft vision is the tension over screen sizes. The larger the screen, the larger the battery needed to power it, and the heavier the entire device. The iPad already weights 662g (1.46 lbs), and feels on the heavy side. This means that the larger screens that are needed for efficiently working with classic Windows will be too heavy and even too large to create a reasonable tablet experience. The core benefit of the iPad is that you can use it on the couch, or anywhere else without a table, and that only works as long as the device is not too heavy. But for a desktop, you want the largest screen that you can fit on the table(s) you are using and still be able to carry around.

And an iPad is cheap enough that you can buy it in addition to a laptop or desktop, we are no longer in the nineties, when a reasonable computer was much more expensive, where even when you spent 5000$ on a machine you felt it could be faster for daily work, while nowadays only video editing / computer animation feel slow on a 1000$ computer.

Also mouse based computing has different constraints, it requires different trade offs for the user interface. Metro Apps will always be suboptimal when used with a keyboard, and making classic Windows Apps work with touch requires you to waste a lot of space to make the controls touchable. Take the layout for example: thanks to Fitt’s Law, you will want to put controls on all sides with a mouse, but for touch you will want them together so that you do not have to move your hand around. Or if you have a lot of different tools to present to the user: for the mouse, you will typically show all of them, densely grouped together, and rely on the high precision possible with a mouse so that the user can select what is needed. For touch, you will provide multiple panels with the information shown in a compact way, and when you click on one of these, they will expand to show touch friendly controls to manipulate.

Let us take a very telling example of the difference between touch and mouse: The humble list. On a mouse based device, lists can easily be very tightly spaced, and a tabular grid works very well. On a touch based device on the other hand, you will need 3 to 4 lines heights to pick a line. So you will want to use three / four lines per item, using the extra lines to put info below the header instead of to the right, and maybe use multiple columns of items to avoid wasting too much space. This will mean a different approach to spreadsheets than on the desktop.

So in the end I believe that the approach Apple takes, that you need a different UI for touch than for the mouse, is the right one.

(As an aside, the best way to select text on a touch screen would be to use something like the line loop in Diet Coda, and then use a tap with another finger while you still hold down your primary finger to switch over to switch over to select mode, with the main finger now extending a selection anchored on the position you were at when you did the tap)

12. April 2012 · Categories: Software

Recently there was a reminder what happens when you lose your smartphone and how curious and even even criminal we can be if given the chance and feeling that we are not being observed.

Of course the study was self selecting for bad behavior: Honest people tend not touch others people property so the people picking it up tend to be either more curious or more circumspect. But this is important to keep in mind: The typical person picking up a lost phone is nosier and/or less honest, so your chances are worse to get it back.

The problem however is the cavalier attitude to security that all phone makers share. If you set a pass code, there should not be any bugs that would allow you to break it, short of disassembling the phone chip.

More »

11. April 2012 · Categories: Software

The most convincing case for a larger iPhone screen I have seen has been made by modilwar. I do not remain convinced though because of two issues:

  • If we assume that a larger screen will result in an extra home row of app icons, then this will result in us no longer being able to reach all of them one-handed with your thumb (go ahead, try it, the top row will align with the top of the speaker grill). And more importantly, it will also break one-handed reach for the navigation buttons typically found at the top.
  • It doubles the number of iPhone UIs that have to be maintained. This might not be that big of an issue given the huge installed base, but it remains my conviction that Apple prefers one great program to two merely very good ones, and the two formats would be similar enough that one of the two would become a bit of an afterthought in the mind of developers.

On the other hand, it would make sense to extend the touch area beyond the screen to support extra gestures, as webOS has pioneered. This would be great mostly for games played in landscape orientation, as you would obscure less of your view with your fingers, and it would improve detection of system wide gestures, especially the show messages gesture.

Update: It seems that Apple considers a screen with 1136×640. This will mean that the new iPhone would have a bit more height so that you can still easily press the home button. To get an impression of the size, the larger screen would extend a bit farther than the current speaker grill on the 4S, with the base unchanged.

I am curious how you will be able to access the controls on that screen, it will be at the upper limit of what I can reach with one thumb, and even then only if I do not hold it very tightly. I have the impression that it will be too large for many women to use comfortably in one hand, so I wonder if some controls will get moved to make them more accessible.

05. April 2012 · Categories: Software

Because of the huge gap in the size of the iPod Touch and iPad, 37 to 290 cm2, people are always wondering whether there is room for a device in between these two sizes, with the most popular speculation reserved for a 4:3 iPad with iPhone dpi ( 7.8″, 188 cm2) and a doubled 3:2 iPod Touch ( 7″, 146 cm2).

I find it unlikely that such a device will appear, for the following reasons:

More »