Most new computer users find it very hard to remember additional, non intuitive actions like right clicking & context menus
I didn't realize this. In fact, if I were asked to guess, I would have answered that most new users would pick up pretty quickly how to use context menus, especially if the context menus had related commands like file manipulation if in Windows Explorer (is it still called that?), or formatting if in a text document, etc.
Hell, rats in a cage can learn what to push in order to eat, so I would have thought that people would be able to learn this. Of course, it would help if they were told somehow and didn't have to discover it.
Yes but people don't WANT to learn things like this. My mother doesn't want to remember what mouse button to click or that CTRL or ALT is a modifier on this command.
I would argue that THIS is what made Apple's OS hang on all those years it was in the severe minority. There is a segment of the population that wants only one mouse button to click, not 3, not 3 plus CTRL or ALT or etc. Apple did end up having to rely heavily on their option key to extend functionality but at its root the UI was designed so that the average user could do things in a simple, straightforward way. MS sees visually exposing commands to the user as their way to do it and while I may not entirely agree, I don't think it's without merit. My kudos to them for also letting me as a "power user" collapse the "newbie visual noise" off my screen and drop what I want on a custom quick access bar.
Remember: don't let your status as a power user cloud your view of how your grandmother might want to use her computer. There are FAR more 'grandmother' grade users than there are us.
Then why are the ipad and iphone taking off? It's really hard to learn to do things on those devices. It's cumbersome to turn off wifi and bluetooth to save battery. The control location makes no sense in the settings menu (to my mind, anyway).
I was a HUGE Apple fan for the early Macs. I totally get what you are saying. But we LOST in the workplace. It was just too slow for the other folks in the office to use (of course, the real death blow was having only a graphics mode to the display so the typing was dreadfully slow-- and the secretaries wouldn't use them- but that's another story).
But I get your point. That's why I phrased my response as I did. I have never done UI/UX testing- maybe the parent has and was sharing his insight.
But if we are all just speculating, I've got to throw out a shout for the other point of view. Yes, too many (how many is too many? I don't know) and it gets to be like using VIM. But two buttons? Seems like it should be ok.
I understand what you're saying, and despite the content of my above post I've never been an Apple guy, always a Windows one. Every time I went over to the Apple OS I felt I had one hand tied behind my back by lack of options. I also try to keep in mind that I'm not typical. I started on "PCs" in 1981 and have grown with them, this all comes naturally. So when I judge a UI I literally stick my Mom on it... she's 68. I have also had the good fortune to work with a lot of 'artistic types' over the years as well, and in turn I watched how they use a UI. In my experience they just don't use much more than what is presented before them option wise.
Trust me, I agree that this new ribbon is very cluttered and contains too much visual noise, but in turn I don't mind exposing things visually to the end user. I hate MS Office with the ribbon, but I deal with people all the time who love it. Just let me turn it off :)
". I also try to keep in mind that I'm not typical. ... So when I judge a UI I literally stick my Mom on it... she's 68"
Well she no more typical a computer user than you are I would think. I like to see a curve of typical computer users age distribution (but I understand it would be a little skewed if it's hard for the older generations to use computers).
I feel that ribbon is designed for a select group of new users who need that kind of help. And I hope it's easy to disable it. It's fine for Microsoft to use something like this as a default mode as long as power users are able to turn that stuff off.
This is what turns me off on OS X, there is often no way to do certain more advanced things. Or it's hidden so well it requires hours of searching on the web for what plist to modify.
I don't know why you got downvoted, and I upvoted to try and offset, but ignoring that...
I think that you overstate the importance of turning off wifi and bluetooth. Those are power user options, for sure. When you're trying to conserve battery power, you're trying to streamline how you use the device, which to me, smacks of 'power user'.
The flipside to that argument is that it is ridiculously easy to browse a web site, check your email and play Words with Friends and Angry Birds. These are the things that the majority of people care about... not whether or not a given physical interface is active or not.
I agree with you- that example may not fit everybody's problem. When I switched from a simple phone to a smart phone it was important to me, but now I don't bother (never too far from a charger).
And you are right, of course, in that ios allows most people to do the things they most care about very easily-- that's probably the takeaway. If you do that, then, apparently even if the other stuff is hard, people will probably figure out how to do it when they need it. Somehow.
Yes, absolutely. There is almost no reason to touch wifi and bluetooth settings on iOS devices. I have wifi enabled all the time, and battery life is still excellent.
Android devices on the other hand, need constant fiddling. My Droid would barely last a day with everything turned off, and with wifi, etc. turned on, it would die after only about 6 hours.
I'd hazard a guess your Android experience was a year or two ago. My Nexus 1 lasted barely a day when it arrived, but now lasts 48 hours on Gingerbread (2.3) with everything (including wifi, bluetooth and GPS) on.
Actually, it's probably the mobile network that's killing you. I get about a day of battery life with everyone on, and about a day of battery life with wifi and bluetooth off. But when I turn the cell phone radio off, suddenly my battery life increases to nearly a week. (I found this out by accident. I went to Sweden where my phone doesn't work, so I turned off everything except Wifi. A few days without charging later, I still had about 60% battery!)
That misses the point of "airplane mode". Airplane mode is for use during take off and landing. Ie, you'd need to turn wifi off too.
The only reason to turn off the cell radio but not the wifi radio is to conserve battery, which again puts you well outside the use case of the typical apple user.
It's cumbersome because you have to navigate through a bunch of menus - however, its easy because you have a finite, visible set of actions to look through those menus (tap, swipe, repeat) and a finite set of menus themselves.
In a desktop OS, you have a seemingly infinite set of modifiers (Ctrl, Alt, Double click, click, right click, Ctrl + Shift), which are not 'logical' operations like tapping and swiping - they must be learned and remembered.
Except that those boil down to a couple of basic gestures: tap, pinch, swipe. The hardware buttons are irrelevant in this case. Oh, and swipe to delete? That's in the "manual" that comes with the device. It's smaller than a dollar, for god's sake.
Yeah, because those gestures are more akin to keyboard shortcuts, i.e. something for power users. OS X is perfectly usable without complicated gestures. Two-finger scrolling is the most complicated thing an average user has to learn.
This same pattern continues on iOS devices. They don't ever use complicated gestures, certainly not as the only way to accomplish something. The most complicated gesture you need is pinching.
The new iOS 5 has gestures to switch apps and get home, but those are really like keyboard shortcuts since the home button is still there and offers a simpler alternative.
There is still a problem when you accidentally trigger gestures. All my friends are scared to touch my Mac because they'd trigger hot corners all the time. With 10.7, you can easily trigger gestures even on default settings. I am worried the iOS5 gestures will have the same problem.
I'm not sure if it's just me, but the 'pinch with 3 fingers and thumb' gesture seems to be practically impossible on the older macbooks with a separate pad & button - there just isn't the space.
No, it supports both 3 finger swipe (fwd/back in browsers), and 4 finger swipe (change Space), as well as, iirc 3 finger touch & click (although I haven't got this working since I installed Lion)
Easy? Maybe for some. I bet the same people who have to be told to right-click also have to be told how to work their bluetooth/wifi connection (and never bother to turn it off to save battery).
I believe that it's only part of it. Another part is the lack of a filesystem. Many, if not most users, just don't like it or understand it. Though there are functions that are seriously lacking in iOS, I can't help but think that they're much closer to what is needed than MS.
The actual removal of abstraction (mouse) have made it much easier to use it. This is why my son at 2 can use the ipad and he can't use the mouse and keyboard for the desktop and laptops.
I agree but what would happen if your son had to navigate Windows Explorer on a touchscreen? He may never have to but if older users are experiencing similar difficulties with the filesystem, little can be done with the command bar to completely fix this issue.
I have no doubt that this UI, though cluttered, will help users out but I question whether this is ultimately the best solution.
Yeah, while I think that select all & select none are pretty important ribbon items (most people never learn CTRL+A or Shift+Clicking), select inversion feels like a power user option to me.
I think the argument is less "noone but power users would need this" and more "only power users will know how to apply 'Invert Selection' to get the behaviour they want".
ie there's an inductive leap between "I want to delete all files except this one" and "I can select that one file and then invert selection before deleting". At minimum it requires you to know what "invert selection" means. Ordinary users may take a different, more fiddly, path.
I don't know if that's the case here. My intuition says it is. However, in my optimistic heart I hope Microsoft did a bunch of usability testing and determined that ordinary users do grasp an "invert selection" concept more often than not.
That's how design for mass-use user interfaces works, right? By evidence-driven testing, not by what the programmer/designer thinks makes sense? Clings to idealistic belief.
Select all, then deselect (ctrl-click) the one item you want to exclude. That's the exact same amount of work, just with the inversion step at the beginning instead of the end.
People who don't know about menus shouldn't really be mass-deleting things yet. Alternatively, add a button for "Help! -The Computer lost all my stuff".
A brief Google search confirms that "lost my files" wasn't solved in 1995. I'm pretty sure those aren't all Mac users. Even if 90% are due to other issues, there are many people who would like their data back. I believe many are due to the ease with which a user can delete files compared to the difficulty they experience when restoring them.
The dangerous button is much easier to find than the fix-it button. One is right there, with your files. The other is someplace else, related by metaphor alone. Once you have selected the recycle bin you then have to search through your very long deleted file list, select the file you want, select another button to restore it (which appears in the same place as a different button existed before selecting the file), and then navigate back to the place you were expecting the file to be. We're talking about users who can't figure out a menu, but they can perform this multi-step task. I can easily see a new computer user screwing this up.
Next time you look at the context menu of a removable drive, see that "Format" is right there with the eject menu item. One should be used every time you use the drive, the other very rarely and only when you're sure. The latter should be removed to a sub-menu under "advanced", or similar.
Myself, I'd make it harder to delete things and a lot easier to find them again.
It's not immediately obvious from the label what the button does, but it is from experimentation. And unlike the multistep 'cut' or 'paste' buttons or 'move to' (which pops up a dialog, I think?), the discovery process for a user is one click.
Or maybe two. One to go from selected file to all other files, and another click to get back.
I've often wondered why not pop up the context menu with the left mouse button, then. It's what most people seem to use most. How many times you actually have to select a file, except to context-click on it?
Selection only comes handy when you will be doing something to several items at once. Thus, the selection function could be turned on via a menu item or a button: it's a totally different operating mode where you click on or drag around the items to select them.
Agreed. And not only does the ribbon increase accessibility for novice users, it also encourages advanced use by displaying keyboard shortcuts to a wide variety of functions in an intuitive way.
Work in support sometime. It is EXTREMELY common to find users that really don't know about right-click. Or that double-click everything. These are not new users either, they have been using computers for decades.
For new users I might agree that they could figure out a right click because everything is new. But for users where everything is familiar ("I've always done it this way"), it gets much harder to break those expected actions.
Second part is about explorer itself. While it might seem like a common utility (even necessary), I find it very rare for a general user to know about it (my wife does not, nor my parents, siblings, their friends,...but my wife's father does). Once they see it, they have no idea what to do. Copy a file? Really, they have no idea.
Spending 2 years in hell doing phone tech support for an ISP after high school was probably the most valuable career experience I've ever had bar none.
Nothing has prepared me for making and selling software to regular people better than this experience. Entire assumptions about how users interact with computers, ones based on my own experience, were rendered useless.
The ways regular people think about technology is endlessly fascinating because it very rarely has anything to do with how I think about technology.
At my day job, we eventually decided to put our development lead as tier-2 tech support because we couldn't get this across. He receives every single piece of support mail we get and is asked to respond to a pretty good percentage of them.
It's been a 2 year, very difficult, education for him.
In small companies, people often fill multiple rolls. Our dev lead happens to be our lead UI designer as well -- but we all provide feedback. Sticking him on part-time tech support duty was a creative way of both giving us another tier of support while simultaneously forcing him to deal with our regular 'ol user.
Experiencing the mind of the typical user day after day has caused some major changes in his UI design philosophy. Don't bury things in menus, limit the number of ways you can do something, walk users through set procedures, etc.
There's a bunch of different approaches to interface design and many of them don't work well. We've all seen the beautiful but hard to use designs made by professional designers, and the control-panel-of-a-spaceship design made by developers.
It seems that what both cases miss out on is spending time working with and understanding the average guy on the street. Or rather, good interface design means spending lots of time optimizing for regular users.
Second part is about explorer itself. While it might seem like a common utility (even necessary), I find it very rare for a general user to know about it (my wife does not, nor my parents, siblings, their friends,...but my wife's father does). Once they see it, they have no idea what to do.
Seconding. Especially before Windows 7 added Explorer as a pinned item by default, the less-technologically-literate persons I know would simply called it "My Computer", and used it in the large-icon, single-paned view. On one occasion while helping a friend find a file, I opened Explorer and switched it to the Details view option. Between that and the folder hierarchy in the left pane, I guess it looked different enough from "My Computer" that my friend was used to and I was given the reaction "Wow, you're really in the guts of the machine, now."
Re: explorer-- then I probably used the wrong term. I was refering to the program you are using when you are on the desktop, and simply want to copy a file. Mac used to call this the "Finder," I believe.
Now the idea that you actually have more problem with experienced users is interesting. I can see that in myself (damn new microwave!). But I still feel like it's no harder to learn, however, than what a bunch of icons are supposed to represent. But once it's shown, then is it really hard for them?
Seems like the problem is one of discoverability, not complexity.
You have the right terminology for both platforms. It's still called Finder on the Mac, and Windows Explorer or Explorer for short - in fact the executable is explorer.exe.
Do those users use the desktop shell at all though? In my experience with novice users (across platforms: Mac noobs are no better) is that they only know enough to launch apps. They never touch the desktop integration at all.
This is only because the Finder/Explorer has been made harder and harder to use. Apple's OSX Finder is a shocking UI abomination.
Their old MacOS Finder was clear and simple - my wife would spend hours arranging her work in coloured folders, each of which opened in a window whose shape and position she had chosen, and was meaningful to her. It was a powerful tool that enabled her to arrange and group her work.
Now, both Apple and Microsoft compete with each other over how bad they can make their file system interface. Microsoft wanted to do away with the filesystem in Longhorn, and Apple have actually done so in iOS.
Are you talking about spatial mode? That still exists in Finder. Just hit Cmd+Opt+T or select "Hide Toolbars" from the View menu.
You're absolutely right. I don't have the citation on me right now, but spatial mode has been found to be easier to grasp for new users in every single test ever. The only reason it was dropped was because (1) Windows Explorer, (2) power users whined about too many open windows and (3) a lot of people got used to URLs opening in the same window thanks to web browsers, so people sought to apply the same principles to file browsers.
Spatial mode used to be default on GNOME for a long time. There, too, it was dropped because of the same reasons.
I don't know about Windows but on the Mac it's not spatial mode (and hasn't been since OS9) - it's just a poor imitation.
You can easily have two Finder windows open on the same folder, meaning you lose the immediate recognition that spatial mode gives you. My personal take - they should have two types of Finder window - a spatial "folder contents" window and a folder-browser (probably in column-view) that only shows folders and maybe a preview of the files within.
So you can navigate quickly/enter file-paths in the browser, but to actually use a folder, you enter spatial mode, so you have the instant recognition of where you are.
> Just hit Cmd+Opt+T or select "Hide Toolbars" from the View menu
The problem is that there's no global switch to force Finder in spatial mode coming from anywhere, anytime. This results in a messy affair when suddenly a non-spatial Finder pops up because you never opened that folder directly and previously put it in spatial mode.
There is a crusade against the filesystem in general. We should probably go all the way and design an OS that absolutely does not need the concept of files, extensions and directory trees, even for programmers, else we'll have to deal with this UI debate for god knows how long.
Disclaimer: I believe the best UI for a filesystem manager was Windows Explorer 98, the last iteration with perpetual, irrevocable and non exclusive root access, with Norton Commander as its only rival.
From the moment we cared about maintaining our system's safety from the user's "big fingers syndrome", it all went down (starting with hiding file extensions) to the atrocities we now have to deal with. And yes, I put Seven's Explorer in the same basket as Finder and the likes of Nautilus, mostly due to /that/ horrible folder scrolling bug that MS refuses to hotfix.
Gnome's (and OSX's) spacial mode was rubbish. The whole philosophy of MacOS's Finder ("spacial mode") is to hide applications from the user, and make the whole user experience document-centric. The user opens documents and manipulates them without having to worry about what program they are using to do it.
Wonderful though Linux is, it's applications are not consistent or mature enough to support a totally document-centric UI. Microsoft could achieve that with Office, but they would probably be accused of over-integration, and hit with the anti-trust stick.
> In fact, if I were asked to guess, I would have answered that most new users would pick up pretty quickly how to use context menus
As someone who has done a fair amount of tutoring seniors on basic computer usage, I have a large amount of anecdotal evidence to indicate this is definitely not the case for them. Depending on the person, I would sometimes try to not show them context menus or keyboard shortcuts at all and just teach them how to use the File, Edit, etc. menus.
There are people who just want to learn the correct order of incantations so that they can check their mail and do things with their photos. And that's okay! Trying to show them that that there is more than one way to do a given action often just leads to confusion as they meld them together (right click on Edit..)
I have seen a fair amount of people with a similar approach as well, but my largest body of personal experience comes from the tutoring, which is why I mentioned it.
>There are people who just want to learn the correct order of incantations so that they can check their mail and do things with their photos
I have been seeing the same thing with research colleagues.
What a lot of us in IT or related fields do not "get" from normal users is that the way they "see" the icons and pictures in the computer is completely different from what we do. We have a "mental model" of what Word or Excel or Firefox is doing. Some of us have a more accurate and detailed model than others.
But "normal" users only know what they see and what will happen after they do something (either because they have done it before or because we told them, and they trust us). For them, there is no more meaning to "click on the File menu" than if a Scuba diver told you to "check your SPG every 10 minutes".
Invisible actions are harder to discover than visible ones, not that illogical really, and one of the key ways in which the Mac is more user friendly as it depends on context menus to a lesser degree.
While I agree with all of your points, keep in mind that when 'civilians' were just getting to use computers (being forced to at work, etc.), Mac lost in favor of the IBM-compatibles (what people started calling 'pc's). There are a lot of reasons for this, to be sure, but difficulty of using the PC was not something that carried much weight in the argument (I was there for the arguments, and I was a mac man).
True, but for reasons closely related to this discussion. Back in the day, the benefits of Macs were mostly invisible to novices when making a purchase decision. PCs looked cheaper and safer.
Apple has learned a lesson here. They are now heavily optimized for ease and comfort of purchase.
The main problem with right clicking is that right clicking does a myriad different things depending on what is being clicked on, whereas left clicking almost always does the same thing.
agree, in fact UI like this encourages a user to develop bad usage habits, which will remain with them for an indefinite amount of time until these behaviors are (if ever) unlearned.
I didn't realize this. In fact, if I were asked to guess, I would have answered that most new users would pick up pretty quickly how to use context menus, especially if the context menus had related commands like file manipulation if in Windows Explorer (is it still called that?), or formatting if in a text document, etc.
Hell, rats in a cage can learn what to push in order to eat, so I would have thought that people would be able to learn this. Of course, it would help if they were told somehow and didn't have to discover it.