Tiny Bubbles
Whack Pack
I’ve been watching the slow and steady accrual of votes to the iPod interface poll. The leader right now by a wide margin is the current interface for the iPod. However from comments I’ve received during speaking engagements, I’m convinced that the data I’m seeing here might be misleading. Some people really don’t like the current interface, and instead prefer one of the previous design options. I suspect that this minority may not be as vocal as the majority.
The same can be said about digital cameras. I know that I much prefer the interface of the older, 2004 Canon SD200 to its newer brethren like the SD700. The simple horizontal lever on the SD200 makes it easy to choose between: play, movie, or camera; on the SD700 I get lost in all the menus and the tiny mode-dial with five options instead of three.
There must be some sort of business opportunity out there like “Pimp My Ride” where the opposite gets done. Call it “Un-pimp my Gadget.” I’ll be first in line.
12 Responses to “newer. better?”
subscribe
that’s kind of a strange conclusion - why not conclude, instead, the reponses you get at your speeches is misleading… while, to be sure, some may not like the current interface (you can find detractors for everything), perhaps they are the ones more apt to come up to you after a speech, those who are satisfied having no reason to speak out… design is, to a large degree, like the umpires at a baseball game - you notice it most when you disagree with it…
love your book and this blog…
Ah, baseball metaphor! I just read Moneyball after being told for the umpteenth time that I should read it. I’m not really a sports-guy, but I am trying to catch up a bit in later life to get in the groove. It’s all very emotion-al for sure. You’re right. Disagreement is ouch-y; agreement is painless. So I’d like to disagree with you to make a point, but I can’t help but agree with you as I think you’re right. Best wishes for the Thanksgiving Day weekend.
seems in line with what i though it would be… but polls are always hard to make accurate esp. online ones.
peace. bv.
What? An unscientific poll isn’t scientific? Who’d have thought?
No worries. The US Gov’t is investing millions of dollars for scientists to figure this problem out for us once and for all. [cue slightly cynical soundtrack here — not because of the scientists, of course, but for the government’s involvement]
The sales figures for the iPod do, I think, show that many, many more people will have owned the current revision of the controls than either of the previous two. People might just be voting for the one they have.
And, of course, given that the iPod’s only been around for five years and is fairly expensive, there might not be a huge proportion of people who have used more than one of the control designs.
A proper usability test, measuring speed and error rate of users with the different designs, would be very interesting.
I think you’re right Paul. You know best what you have. And most don’t really have the older version. There’s a usability paper to be written in here somewhere, definitely.
Of course I know absolutely nothing about the subject, but I wonder if the current layout of the ipod controls has more to do with their need to fit a larger screen on the same face area than before.
Of course they could have shrunk the wheel a tad, but in terms of space the current design is a good solution.
Your point on the size of the screen is important. Many of the specific sizes for these small display screens are determined by the mobile phone market I understand (because they are able to sell so many of them). It isn’t like painting a square patch with a picture — which you can do at any size. Fewer sizes, greater constraints; greater the challenge.
The premise of the survey is faulty.
Most iPod owners can’t make a valid judgment about the interfaces because most iPod owners have never used the older two interfaces. The majority of iPods in existence have been sold with the current interface.
Ergo, it’s likely that users who have experienced the earlier two interfaces make up a minority of the survey respondents, so the results will skew to the majority’s bias toward the current interface (since that’s all they’ve experienced and they’re probably quite happy with it).
To get more accurate results you need to only survey users who have experienced all three interfaces — a much smaller sample, to be sure, but one that will generate more useful results.
Although, since people frequently feel biased toward the interface they learn first and resist change, you might get a skew toward the earlier interfaces from that group.
The ideal survey would be to sit a bunch of people who’ve NEVER used iPods down and let them play with each of the interfaces.
the idea of the survey is misguided from my point of view. it’s not like apple is going to move backwards in terms of design (well, 20 years from now i’m sure we’ll get the “nostalgia-pod” which will replicate the first one, but that’s another story….) they should look at current users and ask them about the interface and how it works - not comparing it to the last few, but working with improving what’s there… as someone who used ituned first and an ipod second there are many things about the new itunes software that would make the ipod’s use more streamlined and user friendly beyond the botton locations (although one good thing about the newest design is it’s relatively easy to navigate with one finger while driving
. integrating a search by album cover (even if postage stamp sized) would create a different approach to the existing buttons, etc.
hey, you are quoted again in businessweek.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_50/b4013061.htm?campaign_id=nws_insdr_dec1&link_position=link3
Like what you have wrote and done, and am trying to see how to extend it to my work and life in Singapore. Still did not manage to find your book in the local shops, probably have to buy it off amazon.com.
Thomas Wong