The problem with the iPhone

9 Jun 2007 - 5:09pm
7 years ago
9 replies
823 reads
Jeff Axup
2006

Hi all,

A while back there were some threads on IXDA pertaining to the iPhone which
I browsed, but never fully engaged with because I was thinking about writing
a blog article on the topic.

My main argument is that Apple doesn't understand the need for serious text
entry, integration with community, or designing an overall mobile
experience. However, they have produced a ground-breaking new piece of
disruptive technology that is really beautiful.

The article is here:
The problem with the iPhone
http://mobilecommunitydesign.com/2007/06/problem-with-iphone.html

Any comments appreciated.

Thanks,
Jeff
____________________________________________________________________________
Jeff Axup, Ph.D.
Principal Consultant, Mobile Community Design Consulting, San Diego

Research: Mobile Group Research Methods, Social Networks, Group Usability
E-mail: axup <at> userdesign.com
Blog: http://mobilecommunitydesign.com
Moblog: http://memeaddict.blogspot.com
____________________________________________________________________________

Comments

9 Jun 2007 - 7:06pm
Matt Theakston
2007

Jeff -

I had been reading the comments on iphone and was surprised nobody had
brought up text entry earlier. The fact that we ported qwerty keyboards from
typwriters to computers is one thing, but on mobile devices it makes even
less sense. Two thumbs for entry is not efficient and requires a dual focus
of attention. Touchscreens(or optical joysticks) seems like an opportunity
to move away from qwerty, perhaps with zone based input, in the style
of Ken Perlin's Quickwriting (although i think Microsoft took this for
"XNav" and then didn't do much with it).

I just remember watching the apple keynote and being annoyed by how people
were amazed by the texting demo. qwerty is not innovating, its an old
paradigm, and it needs to change in the mobile space. And i agree, text
is fundamental to I/O in mobile devices. Apple dropped the ball here i
think, (or nobody came up with a good enough idea) but they're not alone.

cheers,

Matt

DePaul University

Xnav article:
http://research.microsoft.com/displayArticle.aspx?id=395

which came from..

NYU Quickwriting:
http://mrl.nyu.edu/projects/quikwriting/

On 6/9/07, Jeff Axup <axup at userdesign.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> A while back there were some threads on IXDA pertaining to the iPhone
> which
> I browsed, but never fully engaged with because I was thinking about
> writing
> a blog article on the topic.
>
> My main argument is that Apple doesn't understand the need for serious
> text
> entry, integration with community, or designing an overall mobile
> experience. However, they have produced a ground-breaking new piece of
> disruptive technology that is really beautiful.
>
> The article is here:
> The problem with the iPhone
> http://mobilecommunitydesign.com/2007/06/problem-with-iphone.html
>
> Any comments appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Jeff
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> Jeff Axup, Ph.D.
> Principal Consultant, Mobile Community Design Consulting, San Diego
>
> Research: Mobile Group Research Methods, Social Networks, Group
> Usability
> E-mail: axup <at> userdesign.com
> Blog: http://mobilecommunitydesign.com
> Moblog: http://memeaddict.blogspot.com
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>

9 Jun 2007 - 9:32pm
Chris Pallé
2007

Two words come to mind when I think about why it's difficult to
innovate on the Qwerty model: "dvorak keyboard"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvorak_Simplified_Keyboard

It's the same reason why for over 25 years we've had the same d-pad
or analog j-stick on the left and thumb-buttons on the right.

And the classic: never switching to the Metric system!

Familiarity is a tough factor to fight when it comes to humans.

Not to say that it's impossible to move into new paradigms, but for
mass-consumption, there has to be more compelling reasons to move
away from that which is familiar to adopt something new than even
just "ease-of-use." Even though we're almost always looking for
something that will make our lives easier (e.g. the untethering of
wireless devices), there are usually other reasons why innovations
are worth adopting. Why in the world so many folks are "texting"
zillions of messages on numeric keypads despite the cumbersomeness
totally confounds me. Communicating with others is so terribly
important, that people will subject themselves to almost any insanity
just to stay connected.

Business often times drives how we ultimately use a device.
Development for apps and OSes to take advantage of a hardware change
such as the Dvorak Keyboard is too risky a move despite the obvious
benefits for the person. Apple's done a good job at convincing
businesses to shift (Motorola 68000 CISC to IBM RISC to now Intel,
MacOS to OSX, etc.), but that's a fraction of the persuasive prowess
needed to convince the millions of consumers to get used to something
else for typing. Qwerty is just familiar, but it is feasible to see
it going away someday.

The beauty of a input device such as the iPhone's is that it _can_ be
changed at the software level and designers are not going to be
strapped to the physical dependence of a Qwerty-board. This is just
the beginning.

Here's a fun exercise: hold something about the size of an iPhone in
both your hands and pretend that you're saying something with your
thumbs, but not using a keyboard. How do you imagine it to work?

chris.pallé, user experience
--------------------------------------------------------
blueflameinteractive
732.513.3570
chris.palle at blueflameinteractive.com
http://blueflameinteractive.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/chrispalle

On Jun 9, 2007, at 8:06 PM, Matt Theakston wrote:

> Jeff -
>
> I had been reading the comments on iphone and was surprised nobody had
> brought up text entry earlier. The fact that we ported qwerty
> keyboards from
> typwriters to computers is one thing, but on mobile devices it
> makes even
> less sense. Two thumbs for entry is not efficient and requires a
> dual focus
> of attention. Touchscreens(or optical joysticks) seems like an
> opportunity
> to move away from qwerty, perhaps with zone based input, in the style
> of Ken Perlin's Quickwriting (although i think Microsoft took this
> for
> "XNav" and then didn't do much with it).
>
> I just remember watching the apple keynote and being annoyed by how
> people
> were amazed by the texting demo. qwerty is not innovating, its an old
> paradigm, and it needs to change in the mobile space. And i agree,
> text
> is fundamental to I/O in mobile devices. Apple dropped the ball here i
> think, (or nobody came up with a good enough idea) but they're not
> alone.
>
> cheers,
>
> Matt
>
> DePaul University
>
> Xnav article:
> http://research.microsoft.com/displayArticle.aspx?id=395
>
> which came from..
>
> NYU Quickwriting:
> http://mrl.nyu.edu/projects/quikwriting/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 6/9/07, Jeff Axup <axup at userdesign.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> A while back there were some threads on IXDA pertaining to the iPhone
>> which
>> I browsed, but never fully engaged with because I was thinking about
>> writing
>> a blog article on the topic.
>>
>> My main argument is that Apple doesn't understand the need for
>> serious
>> text
>> entry, integration with community, or designing an overall mobile
>> experience. However, they have produced a ground-breaking new
>> piece of
>> disruptive technology that is really beautiful.
>>
>> The article is here:
>> The problem with the iPhone
>> http://mobilecommunitydesign.com/2007/06/problem-with-iphone.html
>>
>> Any comments appreciated.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jeff
>>
>> _____________________________________________________________________
>> _______
>> Jeff Axup, Ph.D.
>> Principal Consultant, Mobile Community Design Consulting, San Diego
>>
>> Research: Mobile Group Research Methods, Social Networks, Group
>> Usability
>> E-mail: axup <at> userdesign.com
>> Blog: http://mobilecommunitydesign.com
>> Moblog: http://memeaddict.blogspot.com
>>
>> _____________________________________________________________________
>> _______
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
>> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
>> List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
>> List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
>> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
>> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
>> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
>> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
>> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org

9 Jun 2007 - 11:20pm
Jeff Axup
2006

Matt,

Sorry but I disagree with "Two thumbs for entry is not efficient and
requires a dual focus of attention." Two thumbs on a wider keyboard is
almost certainly going to give faster text entry rates than any size
keyboard with one finger. This is because the cumulative acquisition time
for keys is less (one thumb can be finding the next key while the previous
one is still being pressed.). I do not have a "dual focus of attention"
either on my touch typing on my desktop, nor on my Sidekick. However, in
defense of this idea, I will say that I tried one of the "butterfly" Nokia's
(that has a screen in the middle of a Qwerty that is split in half), and I
*did* have split attention there. However, talking with people that used it
for a while, they said they soon got used to it.

There have been a lot of attempts to find alternate ways of inputting text
on small devices such as those you mention. Most of them were a) too
difficult to learn b) not that much faster once you learned them c) not
worth the transition cost. Remember the lesson of Graffiti on the Palms. It
is largely gone now. The reason is that it was too difficult to learn and
once people learned it, it wasn't really all that fast. And compared to a
qwerty thumbboard it justifiably lost out.

Qwerty is not a new concept, but to an archaic phone industry stuck on
9-digit number keypads it still seems pretty innovative.

Chris, point taken on the being able to re-map a touch-screen. (and only
show a keyboard when it is needed). What we probably need is a
contextual-hardware-keyboard. It physically rises up out of a flat panel
when needed and then disappears when it's not needed. ;)

-Jeff

On 6/9/07, Matt Theakston <mattcmonfeet at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Jeff -
>
> I had been reading the comments on iphone and was surprised nobody had
> brought up text entry earlier. The fact that we ported qwerty keyboards from
> typwriters to computers is one thing, but on mobile devices it makes even
> less sense. Two thumbs for entry is not efficient and requires a dual focus
> of attention. Touchscreens(or optical joysticks) seems like an opportunity
> to move away from qwerty, perhaps with zone based input, in the style
> of Ken Perlin's Quickwriting (although i think Microsoft took this for
> "XNav" and then didn't do much with it).
>
> I just remember watching the apple keynote and being annoyed by how people
> were amazed by the texting demo. qwerty is not innovating, its an old
> paradigm, and it needs to change in the mobile space. And i agree, text
> is fundamental to I/O in mobile devices. Apple dropped the ball here i
> think, (or nobody came up with a good enough idea) but they're not alone.
>
> cheers,
>
> Matt
>
> DePaul University
>
> Xnav article:
> http://research.microsoft.com/displayArticle.aspx?id=395
>
> which came from..
>
> NYU Quickwriting:
> http://mrl.nyu.edu/projects/quikwriting/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 6/9/07, Jeff Axup <axup at userdesign.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > A while back there were some threads on IXDA pertaining to the iPhone
> > which
> > I browsed, but never fully engaged with because I was thinking about
> > writing
> > a blog article on the topic.
> >
> > My main argument is that Apple doesn't understand the need for serious
> > text
> > entry, integration with community, or designing an overall mobile
> > experience. However, they have produced a ground-breaking new piece of
> > disruptive technology that is really beautiful.
> >
> > The article is here:
> > The problem with the iPhone
> > http://mobilecommunitydesign.com/2007/06/problem-with-iphone.html
> >
> > Any comments appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jeff
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________________________
> > Jeff Axup, Ph.D.
> > Principal Consultant, Mobile Community Design Consulting, San Diego
> >
> > Research: Mobile Group Research Methods, Social Networks, Group
> > Usability
> > E-mail: axup <at> userdesign.com
> > Blog: http://mobilecommunitydesign.com
> > Moblog: http://memeaddict.blogspot.com
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________________________
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> > To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> > List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> > List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> > (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> > Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> > Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> > Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> > Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
> >
>
>

--
Thanks,
Jeff
____________________________________________________________________________
Jeff Axup, Ph.D.
Principal Consultant, Mobile Community Design Consulting, San Diego

Research: Mobile Group Research Methods, Social Networks, Group Usability
E-mail: axup <at> userdesign.com
Blog: http://mobilecommunitydesign.com
Moblog: http://memeaddict.blogspot.com
____________________________________________________________________________

10 Jun 2007 - 1:57am
Matt Theakston
2007

Jeff-

touch typing i think only requires one focus of attention, but i would be
genuinely interested to see someone touch type with two thumbs on a
handheld, sidekick or otherwise.( i don't doubt someone can do it!)

qwerty is definitely a hard habit to kick, but predictive text and a twelve
key layout proves people will adopt a new paradigm and run with it(even if
noone planned it that way). My thinking was in line with what chris
mentioned - its touchscreen, so the input is not bogged down in the physical
layout of the keys - maybe this will be used as a drive for innovation in
time. And i agree learning a new method is a big barrier for people adopting
something new. I wonder, will we have to wait until speech recognition comes
through properly to see the end of qwerty, or will we still be crunching or
thumbing keys in 2050?

Matt

On 6/9/07, Jeff Axup <axup at userdesign.com> wrote:
>
> Matt,
>
> Sorry but I disagree with "Two thumbs for entry is not efficient and
> requires a dual focus of attention." Two thumbs on a wider keyboard is
> almost certainly going to give faster text entry rates than any size
> keyboard with one finger. This is because the cumulative acquisition time
> for keys is less (one thumb can be finding the next key while the previous
> one is still being pressed.). I do not have a "dual focus of attention"
> either on my touch typing on my desktop, nor on my Sidekick. However, in
> defense of this idea, I will say that I tried one of the "butterfly"
> Nokia's
> (that has a screen in the middle of a Qwerty that is split in half), and I
> *did* have split attention there. However, talking with people that used
> it
> for a while, they said they soon got used to it.
>
> There have been a lot of attempts to find alternate ways of inputting text
> on small devices such as those you mention. Most of them were a) too
> difficult to learn b) not that much faster once you learned them c) not
> worth the transition cost. Remember the lesson of Graffiti on the Palms.
> It
> is largely gone now. The reason is that it was too difficult to learn and
> once people learned it, it wasn't really all that fast. And compared to a
> qwerty thumbboard it justifiably lost out.
>
> Qwerty is not a new concept, but to an archaic phone industry stuck on
> 9-digit number keypads it still seems pretty innovative.
>
> Chris, point taken on the being able to re-map a touch-screen. (and only
> show a keyboard when it is needed). What we probably need is a
> contextual-hardware-keyboard. It physically rises up out of a flat panel
> when needed and then disappears when it's not needed. ;)
>
> -Jeff
>
> On 6/9/07, Matt Theakston <mattcmonfeet at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Jeff -
> >
> > I had been reading the comments on iphone and was surprised nobody had
> > brought up text entry earlier. The fact that we ported qwerty keyboards
> from
> > typwriters to computers is one thing, but on mobile devices it makes
> even
> > less sense. Two thumbs for entry is not efficient and requires a dual
> focus
> > of attention. Touchscreens(or optical joysticks) seems like an
> opportunity
> > to move away from qwerty, perhaps with zone based input, in the style
> > of Ken Perlin's Quickwriting (although i think Microsoft took this for
> > "XNav" and then didn't do much with it).
> >
> > I just remember watching the apple keynote and being annoyed by how
> people
> > were amazed by the texting demo. qwerty is not innovating, its an old
> > paradigm, and it needs to change in the mobile space. And i agree, text
> > is fundamental to I/O in mobile devices. Apple dropped the ball here i
> > think, (or nobody came up with a good enough idea) but they're not
> alone.
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > Matt
> >
> > DePaul University
> >
> > Xnav article:
> > http://research.microsoft.com/displayArticle.aspx?id=395
> >
> > which came from..
> >
> > NYU Quickwriting:
> > http://mrl.nyu.edu/projects/quikwriting/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 6/9/07, Jeff Axup <axup at userdesign.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > A while back there were some threads on IXDA pertaining to the iPhone
> > > which
> > > I browsed, but never fully engaged with because I was thinking about
> > > writing
> > > a blog article on the topic.
> > >
> > > My main argument is that Apple doesn't understand the need for serious
> > > text
> > > entry, integration with community, or designing an overall mobile
> > > experience. However, they have produced a ground-breaking new piece of
> > > disruptive technology that is really beautiful.
> > >
> > > The article is here:
> > > The problem with the iPhone
> > > http://mobilecommunitydesign.com/2007/06/problem-with-iphone.html
> > >
> > > Any comments appreciated.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Jeff
> > >
> > >
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> > > Jeff Axup, Ph.D.
> > > Principal Consultant, Mobile Community Design Consulting, San Diego
> > >
> > > Research: Mobile Group Research Methods, Social Networks, Group
> > > Usability
> > > E-mail: axup <at> userdesign.com
> > > Blog: http://mobilecommunitydesign.com
> > > Moblog: http://memeaddict.blogspot.com
> > >
> > >
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> > > ________________________________________________________________
> > > Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> > > To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> > > List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> > > List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> > > (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> > > Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> > > Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> > > Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> > > Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Jeff
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> Jeff Axup, Ph.D.
> Principal Consultant, Mobile Community Design Consulting, San Diego
>
> Research: Mobile Group Research Methods, Social Networks, Group
> Usability
> E-mail: axup <at> userdesign.com
> Blog: http://mobilecommunitydesign.com
> Moblog: http://memeaddict.blogspot.com
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>

10 Jun 2007 - 8:53am
Taneem Talukdar
2005

It's easy to think that using your thumbs takes more effort that just
pressing on the keys like in the iPhone demo...until you actually try it.
Several million people already have, and they're called Blackberry users.

Here's how to tell a new blackberry user: he/she will be "hunting and
pecking" using their one index finger. But after seeing how much easier it
is, users will invariably switch to using their thumbs. You just get faster
and more comfortable, its no contest really.

And it's actually not all that uncommon to see people basically touch typing
on BBs. It's nothing unusual. Try it!

I do agree that qwerty feels outdated right now, but thumb-typing on a
mobile form-factor can come pretty close to matching a regular keyboard. So
the problem isn't with mobile, the problem might be with qwerty input in
general. And many people have tried to improve on that.

The iPhone keyboard is a question mark. You simply can't be as fast or
efficient (you'll tire out faster with the hunt and peck method) as using
your thumbs on a small form factor. But a typical iPhone user I suppose is
not going to need the keyboard as much as a typical blackberry user (unless
iPhone comes with IM) so maybe it won't be a problem. It's the only part of
the UI demo that struck me as something to look out for.

Personally, I liked the thumbs approach that Microsoft took with the Origami
(whatever happened to that anyway?). I think iphone could have could have
generated thumb-pads like the origami did instead of replicating the
rectangle qwerty layout. Who knows, maybe that was because MS had patented
the idea...

Cheers,
Taneem Talukdar

On 6/9/07, Matt Theakston <mattcmonfeet at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Jeff-
>
> touch typing i think only requires one focus of attention, but i would be
> genuinely interested to see someone touch type with two thumbs on a
> handheld, sidekick or otherwise.( i don't doubt someone can do it!)
>
> qwerty is definitely a hard habit to kick, but predictive text and a
> twelve
> key layout proves people will adopt a new paradigm and run with it(even if
> noone planned it that way). My thinking was in line with what chris
> mentioned - its touchscreen, so the input is not bogged down in the
> physical
> layout of the keys - maybe this will be used as a drive for innovation in
> time. And i agree learning a new method is a big barrier for people
> adopting
> something new. I wonder, will we have to wait until speech recognition
> comes
> through properly to see the end of qwerty, or will we still be crunching
> or
> thumbing keys in 2050?
>
> Matt
>
>
> On 6/9/07, Jeff Axup <axup at userdesign.com> wrote:
> >
> > Matt,
> >
> > Sorry but I disagree with "Two thumbs for entry is not efficient and
> > requires a dual focus of attention." Two thumbs on a wider keyboard is
> > almost certainly going to give faster text entry rates than any size
> > keyboard with one finger. This is because the cumulative acquisition
> time
> > for keys is less (one thumb can be finding the next key while the
> previous
> > one is still being pressed.). I do not have a "dual focus of attention"
> > either on my touch typing on my desktop, nor on my Sidekick. However, in
> > defense of this idea, I will say that I tried one of the "butterfly"
> > Nokia's
> > (that has a screen in the middle of a Qwerty that is split in half), and
> I
> > *did* have split attention there. However, talking with people that used
> > it
> > for a while, they said they soon got used to it.
> >
> > There have been a lot of attempts to find alternate ways of inputting
> text
> > on small devices such as those you mention. Most of them were a) too
> > difficult to learn b) not that much faster once you learned them c) not
> > worth the transition cost. Remember the lesson of Graffiti on the Palms.
> > It
> > is largely gone now. The reason is that it was too difficult to learn
> and
> > once people learned it, it wasn't really all that fast. And compared to
> a
> > qwerty thumbboard it justifiably lost out.
> >
> > Qwerty is not a new concept, but to an archaic phone industry stuck on
> > 9-digit number keypads it still seems pretty innovative.
> >
> > Chris, point taken on the being able to re-map a touch-screen. (and only
> > show a keyboard when it is needed). What we probably need is a
> > contextual-hardware-keyboard. It physically rises up out of a flat panel
> > when needed and then disappears when it's not needed. ;)
> >
> > -Jeff
> >
> > On 6/9/07, Matt Theakston <mattcmonfeet at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Jeff -
> > >
> > > I had been reading the comments on iphone and was surprised nobody had
> > > brought up text entry earlier. The fact that we ported qwerty
> keyboards
> > from
> > > typwriters to computers is one thing, but on mobile devices it makes
> > even
> > > less sense. Two thumbs for entry is not efficient and requires a dual
> > focus
> > > of attention. Touchscreens(or optical joysticks) seems like an
> > opportunity
> > > to move away from qwerty, perhaps with zone based input, in the style
> > > of Ken Perlin's Quickwriting (although i think Microsoft took this
> for
> > > "XNav" and then didn't do much with it).
> > >
> > > I just remember watching the apple keynote and being annoyed by how
> > people
> > > were amazed by the texting demo. qwerty is not innovating, its an old
> > > paradigm, and it needs to change in the mobile space. And i agree,
> text
> > > is fundamental to I/O in mobile devices. Apple dropped the ball here i
> > > think, (or nobody came up with a good enough idea) but they're not
> > alone.
> > >
> > > cheers,
> > >
> > > Matt
> > >
> > > DePaul University
> > >
> > > Xnav article:
> > > http://research.microsoft.com/displayArticle.aspx?id=395
> > >
> > > which came from..
> > >
> > > NYU Quickwriting:
> > > http://mrl.nyu.edu/projects/quikwriting/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 6/9/07, Jeff Axup <axup at userdesign.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > A while back there were some threads on IXDA pertaining to the
> iPhone
> > > > which
> > > > I browsed, but never fully engaged with because I was thinking about
> > > > writing
> > > > a blog article on the topic.
> > > >
> > > > My main argument is that Apple doesn't understand the need for
> serious
> > > > text
> > > > entry, integration with community, or designing an overall mobile
> > > > experience. However, they have produced a ground-breaking new piece
> of
> > > > disruptive technology that is really beautiful.
> > > >
> > > > The article is here:
> > > > The problem with the iPhone
> > > > http://mobilecommunitydesign.com/2007/06/problem-with-iphone.html
> > > >
> > > > Any comments appreciated.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Jeff
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> > > > Jeff Axup, Ph.D.
> > > > Principal Consultant, Mobile Community Design Consulting, San Diego
> > > >
> > > > Research: Mobile Group Research Methods, Social Networks, Group
> > > > Usability
> > > > E-mail: axup <at> userdesign.com
> > > > Blog: http://mobilecommunitydesign.com
> > > > Moblog: http://memeaddict.blogspot.com
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> > > > ________________________________________________________________
> > > > Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> > > > To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> > > > List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> > > > List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> > > > (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> > > > Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> > > > Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> > > > Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> > > > Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> > Jeff
> >
> >
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> > Jeff Axup, Ph.D.
> > Principal Consultant, Mobile Community Design Consulting, San Diego
> >
> > Research: Mobile Group Research Methods, Social Networks, Group
> > Usability
> > E-mail: axup <at> userdesign.com
> > Blog: http://mobilecommunitydesign.com
> > Moblog: http://memeaddict.blogspot.com
> >
> >
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> > To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> > List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> > List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> > (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> > Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> > Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> > Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> > Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
> >
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>

10 Jun 2007 - 11:23am
Todd Warfel
2003

I'm with Jeff on this one. In theory, two fingers/thumbs on a mobile
device would seem awkward and unusable. But if anyone has ever seen a
crackberry user, they seem to hum along on a pretty fast speed. I
used to think it would be a horrible interface (theoretically). But
realistically, based on observations in the field, it seems to work
pretty well.

That being said, I'm always up for finding a better way.

On Jun 10, 2007, at 12:20 AM, Jeff Axup wrote:

> Sorry but I disagree with "Two thumbs for entry is not efficient
> and requires a dual focus of attention." Two thumbs on a wider
> keyboard is almost certainly going to give faster text entry rates
> than any size keyboard with one finger.

Cheers!

Todd Zaki Warfel
President, Design & Usability Specialist
Messagefirst | Designing Information. Beautifully.
----------------------------------
Contact Info
Voice: (215) 825-7423
Email: todd at messagefirst.com
AIM: twarfel at mac.com
Blog: http://toddwarfel.com
----------------------------------
In theory, theory and practice are the same.
In practice, they are not.

10 Jun 2007 - 10:46pm
Will Parker
2007

On Jun 9, 2007, at 3:09 PM, Jeff Axup wrote:

> My main argument is that Apple doesn't understand the need for
> serious text
> entry, integration with community, or designing an overall mobile
> experience. However, they have produced a ground-breaking new piece of
> disruptive technology that is really beautiful.
>
> The article is here:
> The problem with the iPhone
> http://mobilecommunitydesign.com/2007/06/problem-with-iphone.html
>
> Any comments appreciated.

I'm writing during a lull in a hot-deadline project, so please
forgive any typos or omissions. Please also forgive any acerbic notes
that creep in. I'm channeling my spiritual relative, Dorothy Parker,
and I can't at the moment let her loose on the deserving.
----------------------------------

My particular must-have in a mobile commo device is that I *NOT* be
required to use it for heavy text entry, that nobody expects me to
get into an extended IM session, and that I can respond when I bloody
well want to. At this very moment in my long workday, I heartily wish
I could claim to be dangerously allergic to cell-band radio waves.

In your article, you call voice communications 'old-school',
'difficult to use', 'annoying', and 'synchronous'. May I take it from
your list that you would prefer to communicate via IM rather than
voice? I happen to have a very different response to voice versus IM.

The I in IM indicates that one can expect an instant reply, and
indeed, I've founded most IM'ers I've known get quite testy when you
don't respond immediately, whereas voicemail, if not happily accepted
by most callers, is at least a known quantity.

Personally, I see IM texting as only theoretically asynchronous,
especially when a group is using it as the primary com channel.
However, please note that the iPhone SMS implementation looks like a
darned good way to force asynchronous text messaging. Also, please
note that the iPhone voicemail implementation lets you pick only the
important callers out of your voicemail, so VM allows the iPhone user
to treat voice communications as partially asynchronous.

IM, except among the true keyboarding adepts, requires enough of your
attention centered on the device that any multi-tasking is flatly
impossible. I can stay in production mode for well-known tasks while
communicating via voice channels _because my hands and eyes are free,
and because I can be at least a few feet away from the com device. IM
ties me up badly, and it kills any chance I can take notes during the
IM session.

Voice is certainly difficult under certain situations, but most
people learn how to avoid or mitigate those when using a phone. For
those situations where you're socially obligated to not use a phone,
you are also almost certainly socially obligated to be engaged with
the local situation (I don't actually want the Crackberry
experience.) For the rest (irremediable noise, using the voice for
other things, etc.), IM is still available -- but perhaps you should
be elsewhere in those situations in any case.

For times when heavy text input is truly required, I have to ask for
cases where you really can't postpone response until you're near a
'real' keyboard.

Ummm - I don't know how to respond to the idea of voice as
"annoying". I happen to like the voices of all the people who call me
regularly, except for the folks who're trying to sell me "protection'
for my domain names.

So what is it about voice communications that's annoying, in your
estimation? Is it the wait states in natural conversation, or the
telephony-specific aspects? If the latter, which?

- Will

Will Parker
wparker at ChannelingDesign.com

“I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If
that were the case, then Microsoft would have great products.” -
Steve Jobs

11 Jun 2007 - 2:13am
Morten Hjerde
2007

I don't get the argument about what is the "best" way to communicate.

People choose their communication method based on a lot of factors.

Snail mails are likely to be read in a few days. Emails are likely to be
read in a few hours. Text messages are likely to be read in a few minutes.
Calls are synchronous.
Calls interrupts the receiving party but has a greater emotional bandwidth.
Its also better suited to negotiation. Text messages are less interuptive.
They are asynchronous and provide some "emotional deniability". IM's are a
lot like text messages, but the sender can see your online status, so you
can't pretend you are not there. There are thousands more factors like this.

There are cultural differences as well, email may be more "businesslike",
IMs may be considered unprofessional etc.

Not all mobile phones - or computers for that matter - are equally suited
for all communication forms. That's why we have a choice :-)

Morten

On 6/11/07, Will Parker <wparker at channelingdesign.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 9, 2007, at 3:09 PM, Jeff Axup wrote:
>
> > My main argument is that Apple doesn't understand the need for
> > serious text
> > entry, integration with community, or designing an overall mobile
> > experience. However, they have produced a ground-breaking new piece of
> > disruptive technology that is really beautiful.
> >
> > The article is here:
> > The problem with the iPhone
> > http://mobilecommunitydesign.com/2007/06/problem-with-iphone.html
> >
> > Any comments appreciated.
>
> I'm writing during a lull in a hot-deadline project, so please
> forgive any typos or omissions. Please also forgive any acerbic notes
> that creep in. I'm channeling my spiritual relative, Dorothy Parker,
> and I can't at the moment let her loose on the deserving.
> ----------------------------------
>
> My particular must-have in a mobile commo device is that I *NOT* be
> required to use it for heavy text entry, that nobody expects me to
> get into an extended IM session, and that I can respond when I bloody
> well want to. At this very moment in my long workday, I heartily wish
> I could claim to be dangerously allergic to cell-band radio waves.
>
> In your article, you call voice communications 'old-school',
> 'difficult to use', 'annoying', and 'synchronous'. May I take it from
> your list that you would prefer to communicate via IM rather than
> voice? I happen to have a very different response to voice versus IM.
>
> The I in IM indicates that one can expect an instant reply, and
> indeed, I've founded most IM'ers I've known get quite testy when you
> don't respond immediately, whereas voicemail, if not happily accepted
> by most callers, is at least a known quantity.
>
> Personally, I see IM texting as only theoretically asynchronous,
> especially when a group is using it as the primary com channel.
> However, please note that the iPhone SMS implementation looks like a
> darned good way to force asynchronous text messaging. Also, please
> note that the iPhone voicemail implementation lets you pick only the
> important callers out of your voicemail, so VM allows the iPhone user
> to treat voice communications as partially asynchronous.
>
> IM, except among the true keyboarding adepts, requires enough of your
> attention centered on the device that any multi-tasking is flatly
> impossible. I can stay in production mode for well-known tasks while
> communicating via voice channels _because my hands and eyes are free,
> and because I can be at least a few feet away from the com device. IM
> ties me up badly, and it kills any chance I can take notes during the
> IM session.
>
> Voice is certainly difficult under certain situations, but most
> people learn how to avoid or mitigate those when using a phone. For
> those situations where you're socially obligated to not use a phone,
> you are also almost certainly socially obligated to be engaged with
> the local situation (I don't actually want the Crackberry
> experience.) For the rest (irremediable noise, using the voice for
> other things, etc.), IM is still available -- but perhaps you should
> be elsewhere in those situations in any case.
>
> For times when heavy text input is truly required, I have to ask for
> cases where you really can't postpone response until you're near a
> 'real' keyboard.
>
> Ummm - I don't know how to respond to the idea of voice as
> "annoying". I happen to like the voices of all the people who call me
> regularly, except for the folks who're trying to sell me "protection'
> for my domain names.
>
> So what is it about voice communications that's annoying, in your
> estimation? Is it the wait states in natural conversation, or the
> telephony-specific aspects? If the latter, which?
>
> - Will
>
> Will Parker
> wparker at ChannelingDesign.com
>
>
> "I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If
> that were the case, then Microsoft would have great products." -
> Steve Jobs
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org
>

--
Morten Hjerde
http://sender11.typepad.com

13 Jun 2007 - 11:40pm
Jeff Axup
2006

Hi Will,

I always like it when I can provoke an impassioned reply from a blog entry.
;)

Firstly I'd like to agree with Morten's comment that there isn't a "right"
way to communicate. People communicate for different reasons, in different
social situations, in different physical environments, with different
numbers of people and about different content. Clearly one size (or medium)
doesn't fit all.

But to follow up on a few points:

- There is a big difference in how different age groups use devices.
Your love of voice calls is obviously not from the perspective of teens, who
are some of heaviest and most creative users of many new communication
technologies. Voice often works better for adults for a number of reasons. A
significant reason might be that they were raised on land-lines and are more
used to placing phone calls than finding chat rooms. Teens use SMS, IM,
online communities, mo-blogging and a lot of other text based systems.

- Potentially annoying aspects of voice communication: synchronous,
time consuming, unneeded social introductions and closures, high bandwidth
(with corresponding cost), loud, not private, interfering with others,
potentially rude, not usable in loud (or especially quiet) environments,
confusion with other simultaneous voice communications with other (present)
actors, increase in cognitive load while simultaneously doing other
activities (also true for typing, but at least people don't try to type and
drive usually), language barriers and more difficult translation, large time
to produce content, large time to receive content, discontinuities between
received sound volume (heard) and volume spoken resulting in loud voices. I
can go on...

- I think some of the synchronous and asynchronous labels you use are
misapplied. Voicemail is asynchronous regardless of what order it is
accessed in. It might be non-sequential. IM is an interesting example where
it is flexible between synch and asynch. I know people that have
conversations stretching weeks, and those stretching 30 seconds. It can be
used in many ways.

Voice certainly has it's place, but for group collaboration, usage in many
common mobile environments, and facilitating truly mobile work, it isn't
cutting edge, and it has many problems. Admittedly it does still have quite
a following.

-Jeff

On 6/10/07, Will Parker <wparker at channelingdesign.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 9, 2007, at 3:09 PM, Jeff Axup wrote:
>
> > My main argument is that Apple doesn't understand the need for
> > serious text
> > entry, integration with community, or designing an overall mobile
> > experience. However, they have produced a ground-breaking new piece of
> > disruptive technology that is really beautiful.
> >
> > The article is here:
> > The problem with the iPhone
> > http://mobilecommunitydesign.com/2007/06/problem-with-iphone.html
> >
> > Any comments appreciated.
>
> I'm writing during a lull in a hot-deadline project, so please
> forgive any typos or omissions. Please also forgive any acerbic notes
> that creep in. I'm channeling my spiritual relative, Dorothy Parker,
> and I can't at the moment let her loose on the deserving.
> ----------------------------------
>
> My particular must-have in a mobile commo device is that I *NOT* be
> required to use it for heavy text entry, that nobody expects me to
> get into an extended IM session, and that I can respond when I bloody
> well want to. At this very moment in my long workday, I heartily wish
> I could claim to be dangerously allergic to cell-band radio waves.
>
> In your article, you call voice communications 'old-school',
> 'difficult to use', 'annoying', and 'synchronous'. May I take it from
> your list that you would prefer to communicate via IM rather than
> voice? I happen to have a very different response to voice versus IM.
>
> The I in IM indicates that one can expect an instant reply, and
> indeed, I've founded most IM'ers I've known get quite testy when you
> don't respond immediately, whereas voicemail, if not happily accepted
> by most callers, is at least a known quantity.
>
> Personally, I see IM texting as only theoretically asynchronous,
> especially when a group is using it as the primary com channel.
> However, please note that the iPhone SMS implementation looks like a
> darned good way to force asynchronous text messaging. Also, please
> note that the iPhone voicemail implementation lets you pick only the
> important callers out of your voicemail, so VM allows the iPhone user
> to treat voice communications as partially asynchronous.
>
> IM, except among the true keyboarding adepts, requires enough of your
> attention centered on the device that any multi-tasking is flatly
> impossible. I can stay in production mode for well-known tasks while
> communicating via voice channels _because my hands and eyes are free,
> and because I can be at least a few feet away from the com device. IM
> ties me up badly, and it kills any chance I can take notes during the
> IM session.
>
> Voice is certainly difficult under certain situations, but most
> people learn how to avoid or mitigate those when using a phone. For
> those situations where you're socially obligated to not use a phone,
> you are also almost certainly socially obligated to be engaged with
> the local situation (I don't actually want the Crackberry
> experience.) For the rest (irremediable noise, using the voice for
> other things, etc.), IM is still available -- but perhaps you should
> be elsewhere in those situations in any case.
>
> For times when heavy text input is truly required, I have to ask for
> cases where you really can't postpone response until you're near a
> 'real' keyboard.
>
> Ummm - I don't know how to respond to the idea of voice as
> "annoying". I happen to like the voices of all the people who call me
> regularly, except for the folks who're trying to sell me "protection'
> for my domain names.
>
> So what is it about voice communications that's annoying, in your
> estimation? Is it the wait states in natural conversation, or the
> telephony-specific aspects? If the latter, which?
>
> - Will
>
> Will Parker
> wparker at ChannelingDesign.com
>
>
> "I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If
> that were the case, then Microsoft would have great products." -
> Steve Jobs
>
>
>

--
Thanks,
Jeff
____________________________________________________________________________
Jeff Axup, Ph.D.
Principal Consultant, Mobile Community Design Consulting, San Diego

Research: Mobile Group Research Methods, Social Networks, Group Usability
E-mail: axup <at> userdesign.com
Blog: http://mobilecommunitydesign.com
Moblog: http://memeaddict.blogspot.com
____________________________________________________________________________

Syndicate content Get the feed