Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Installing Apps Confusion?
- Thread starter UWF404
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
UWF404 said:
OK. Do this from now on instead:
1. Open DMG, drag icon to Applications folder.
2. Eject Mounted DMG
3. From Applications folder start program.
4. Right click on dock (Ctrl-click if no 2nd button) and click "Keep in Dock" in the menu that appears.
UWF404 said:I'm a MAC newbie.. Ok, not exactly "new" but have only been using MACOSX for 14 months. And yet I'm still confused with installing programs. Can someone explain the disk image concept in plain english? When I install programs I don't want to see the annoying disk image icon on my desktop.
How do I get rid of it? Why do some applications not install the disk image and others do? Once my application is installed what setting must I change to rid my desktop of virtual disk images??
Sincerely,
Clueless Newbie
This really screwed me up when I first switched! The answer is, it's easier than you think.
The disk-image is little more than a zip file (well okay, it's more, but think of it this way). When you double click on it and the "disk" opens you will have the application in there and one of two options
1) If it's an installer in there, double click to run the installer and it will probably install into your Applications folder. That's pretty much like Windows.
2) Just drag the application where you want it. That's it. Obviously I used applications usually, but you can put it anywhere.
Neat trick for non-mac users, when you drag it from the window (it being the application) just hover over the applications entry in the side bar of finder, after a couple of seconds it will flash and open the applications folder, where you can drop the icon. All in a single operation.
I'm so glad I switched.
bugfaceuk said:
You can just drop it into the sidebar, you don't even have to open the apps folder.
First rule of design: NEVER BLAME THE USER.
The very fact that large numbers of people find the app installation process in macs difficult, BY DEFINITION settles the question: is it difficult or easy. Answer: if large numbers of people (as f.ex. the OP, who used macs for 14 months still had problems understanding the process!), find it hard THEN IT IS HARD. Over. When a company does a usability study, and they consistently get complaints about a PARTICULAR process, then the design is A FAILURE for that process. They don't say, well, those users are idiots.
Here's a clue: there are many other processes in macs that pretty much everyone finds easy. You don't find folks asking about it on message boards. That's easy. And that's how it should be with app installation. When you get to that point, you achieve design success. When a particular process is consistently singled out by large numbers of people as troubled, THEN IT IS TROUBLED. You want to get to the point where there are no complaints - as HAS BEEN DONE FOR MANY OTHER PROCESSES.
That's how you get praise for an intuitive user interface design - that' s why iPods have a better UI than many competitors. Of course, the "iPod competitor" is welcome to say "It's easy for me and my buds, those other users are idiots", but they end up having their design called "bad" and a corresponding market share.
Oh, and to the guy who said "idiot who shouldn't belong behind a computer period" - you have no idea what a walking cliche you are. One of my friends is a systems administrator for a large organization. She works with other sys admins. She regularly describes for me how CERTAIN admins have the exact attitude you describe. And you know what? It's those admins with that attitude who are the idiots - she often points out to them, that the users whom they denounce as idiots, have PHDs and degrees far in excess of the admin who calls them idiots - in fact, many are brilliant physicists, mathematicians etc. And many have computer experience - but so many processes are so screwed up in Windows, that your high IQ won't help you. IT IS A DESIGN FLAW. The user can have a very high IQ and even computer knowledge on many platforms and still be confused BY BAD DESIGN. Yes, the admin will find it easy - and when I studied languages, native Hungarian speakers would tell me "but Hungarian is EASY, see, I speak it", while linguists agreed that Hungarian is one of the more difficult languages around.
Look it's really not controversial - if large numbers of people complain, then it's a problem with the design, not the people, and it says nothing about the IQ or computer savvy of those who find it unintuitive. People's intuition works differently. There are complex programs that I run, which I find intuitive, but many complain about. I don't say to myself "those folks are idiots, and this program is WELL DESIGNED", I reserve the label "well designed" for a program that is found intuitive FOR ALMOST EVERYONE. That emphatically is NOT the case for the app installation process in macs. It IS true for many other processes in macs - THOSE ARE WELL DESIGNED - better designed than windows, f.ex., but it is NOT true for the installation process.
The same "clever" guy who denounced me for an idiot, goes on to say there's a READ ME file explaining how to install... this is quite ironic. You see, a really well deigned process is INTUITIVE. Intuitive means, that you don't even have to refer to a manual in order to use it (would you like to have a refrigerator that needs a manual to figure out how to open its door?). Apple prides itself on this design attitude - use it out of the box, you don't need thick manuals - and for the most part they succeed... on this particular issue they dropped the ball. Apple understands what makes a good design (even if they don't suceed 100% of the time, but who does). Many linux developers, back at the beginning had the same attitude "go back to windows you idiot, it's so simple, you just drop to the command line blah, blah, blah" - fortunately, most have caught on (interestingly, they've been learning from Apple - f.ex. the HIG for GNOME apps was inspired by Apple). So it is highly ironic for an Apple user to insult other users as idiots and urge them to go back to windows. That's the opposite of the very Apple ideal that's at issue.
I spent time trying to explain not just that the process is difficult - that's a given by definition (see above). Of course it is difficult and a failure of design (rare for Apple). Instead, I was trying to pinpoint WHAT in the process is difficult. It is not helpful at that point to be denounced as an idiot... when a usability engineer explains to a developer WHERE in the process the program is difficult, the developer shouldn't insult the usability guy as an idiot. May as well reverse the situation - Windows guy "You can't understand the wonderful Windows design? You're an idiot!".
In fact, did you consider that maybe it is YOU who doesn't see the issue and not I? Just like the native Hungarian speaker, you DO NOT HAVE THE INSIGHT to understand what is difficult about Hungarian - that's YOUR failure, not the failure of the linguist who points out that the Hungarian grammar is more difficult than in other languages due to f.ex. multiple tense modes which are far simpler in other languages. You see, the ability to look at the process from the point of view of the user is an attribute of a good usability designer - not being able to do that would make you a FAILURE as a designer. "I don't understand what you find confusing" - means you don't understand user design. I'm being helpful by pointing out what is difficult - denouncing me misses the point. And yes, I am still confused by the process here. And the final irony - I'm quite sure that Apple will eventually rework this process - because unlike some - they believe in good usability design... and thank heavens for folks like that, or else we'd still be using hand-cranks to start cars ("You just crank like this, see! Works for me! You're an idiot, why can't you crank?!").
The very fact that large numbers of people find the app installation process in macs difficult, BY DEFINITION settles the question: is it difficult or easy. Answer: if large numbers of people (as f.ex. the OP, who used macs for 14 months still had problems understanding the process!), find it hard THEN IT IS HARD. Over. When a company does a usability study, and they consistently get complaints about a PARTICULAR process, then the design is A FAILURE for that process. They don't say, well, those users are idiots.
Here's a clue: there are many other processes in macs that pretty much everyone finds easy. You don't find folks asking about it on message boards. That's easy. And that's how it should be with app installation. When you get to that point, you achieve design success. When a particular process is consistently singled out by large numbers of people as troubled, THEN IT IS TROUBLED. You want to get to the point where there are no complaints - as HAS BEEN DONE FOR MANY OTHER PROCESSES.
That's how you get praise for an intuitive user interface design - that' s why iPods have a better UI than many competitors. Of course, the "iPod competitor" is welcome to say "It's easy for me and my buds, those other users are idiots", but they end up having their design called "bad" and a corresponding market share.
Oh, and to the guy who said "idiot who shouldn't belong behind a computer period" - you have no idea what a walking cliche you are. One of my friends is a systems administrator for a large organization. She works with other sys admins. She regularly describes for me how CERTAIN admins have the exact attitude you describe. And you know what? It's those admins with that attitude who are the idiots - she often points out to them, that the users whom they denounce as idiots, have PHDs and degrees far in excess of the admin who calls them idiots - in fact, many are brilliant physicists, mathematicians etc. And many have computer experience - but so many processes are so screwed up in Windows, that your high IQ won't help you. IT IS A DESIGN FLAW. The user can have a very high IQ and even computer knowledge on many platforms and still be confused BY BAD DESIGN. Yes, the admin will find it easy - and when I studied languages, native Hungarian speakers would tell me "but Hungarian is EASY, see, I speak it", while linguists agreed that Hungarian is one of the more difficult languages around.
Look it's really not controversial - if large numbers of people complain, then it's a problem with the design, not the people, and it says nothing about the IQ or computer savvy of those who find it unintuitive. People's intuition works differently. There are complex programs that I run, which I find intuitive, but many complain about. I don't say to myself "those folks are idiots, and this program is WELL DESIGNED", I reserve the label "well designed" for a program that is found intuitive FOR ALMOST EVERYONE. That emphatically is NOT the case for the app installation process in macs. It IS true for many other processes in macs - THOSE ARE WELL DESIGNED - better designed than windows, f.ex., but it is NOT true for the installation process.
The same "clever" guy who denounced me for an idiot, goes on to say there's a READ ME file explaining how to install... this is quite ironic. You see, a really well deigned process is INTUITIVE. Intuitive means, that you don't even have to refer to a manual in order to use it (would you like to have a refrigerator that needs a manual to figure out how to open its door?). Apple prides itself on this design attitude - use it out of the box, you don't need thick manuals - and for the most part they succeed... on this particular issue they dropped the ball. Apple understands what makes a good design (even if they don't suceed 100% of the time, but who does). Many linux developers, back at the beginning had the same attitude "go back to windows you idiot, it's so simple, you just drop to the command line blah, blah, blah" - fortunately, most have caught on (interestingly, they've been learning from Apple - f.ex. the HIG for GNOME apps was inspired by Apple). So it is highly ironic for an Apple user to insult other users as idiots and urge them to go back to windows. That's the opposite of the very Apple ideal that's at issue.
I spent time trying to explain not just that the process is difficult - that's a given by definition (see above). Of course it is difficult and a failure of design (rare for Apple). Instead, I was trying to pinpoint WHAT in the process is difficult. It is not helpful at that point to be denounced as an idiot... when a usability engineer explains to a developer WHERE in the process the program is difficult, the developer shouldn't insult the usability guy as an idiot. May as well reverse the situation - Windows guy "You can't understand the wonderful Windows design? You're an idiot!".
In fact, did you consider that maybe it is YOU who doesn't see the issue and not I? Just like the native Hungarian speaker, you DO NOT HAVE THE INSIGHT to understand what is difficult about Hungarian - that's YOUR failure, not the failure of the linguist who points out that the Hungarian grammar is more difficult than in other languages due to f.ex. multiple tense modes which are far simpler in other languages. You see, the ability to look at the process from the point of view of the user is an attribute of a good usability designer - not being able to do that would make you a FAILURE as a designer. "I don't understand what you find confusing" - means you don't understand user design. I'm being helpful by pointing out what is difficult - denouncing me misses the point. And yes, I am still confused by the process here. And the final irony - I'm quite sure that Apple will eventually rework this process - because unlike some - they believe in good usability design... and thank heavens for folks like that, or else we'd still be using hand-cranks to start cars ("You just crank like this, see! Works for me! You're an idiot, why can't you crank?!").
bugfaceuk said:
I think this is one place that folks get tripped up: Sometimes it's not obvious which of these two options you've got.
bugfaceuk said:
Love that trick too, great when you need to drop something in a folder that's not currently visible.
You mean, you and the original poster? Everyone else who's posted here hasn't had any problems understanding the process.OldCorpse said:
Heck, I've been using Macs for 5 days now ... I understood exactly what to do immediately. Even my wife, who always bugs me with questions about windows even after using it for almost as long as I have, was able to install an app on our iMac this morning without any problems.
It seems like you have a problem with this. This is my suggestion, try to forget everything you think you know about installing apps using dmgs. Start with a clean slate.
Download an application ... any application, e.g. from versiontracker.
Don't do anything with it for a while. Just look at the dmg on your desktop. Don't go diving in.
Take a deep breath and double click the dmg icon. Still don't do anything. Just look at the file(s) present.
When you're ready, drag the application icon you see to the Applications entry in your finder. Now drag the dmg to the trash.
Take another deep breath. Now, go to Applications and drag the new app to your dock.
You are now done. You now know your app is installed. You know where it is. You know you can open it from the dock at any time. You know you can remove it from the dock by dragging the icon onto the desktop. You know you can uninstall by moving the icon from Applications to the Trash.
Before opening the app, try to savour the simplicity.
Anyway, as someone who sees the difficulty, what would you do differently?
Example
Here's an example for those who say "it's simple!" and don't understand why it OBJECTIVELY is not.
You say: "just drag the icon to the App folder".
OK, that's very, very, very unintuitive. Take these two scenarios. You click on an icon with the name of your FBARapp.
Scenario 1:
You click on the FBARapp icon - a dialogue appears "Do you want to install FBARapp to your computer - click the appropriate button" and under that, two buttons - a green one with the word "YES", and a red one with the word "NO". When you click YES you may be prompeted for your password (takes care of the security objection). You enter it, click - dialogue appears "You have installed FBARapp to your computer".
Scenario 2:
You click on the FBARapp dmg. An icon of a drive appears.
Now, take anyone who is platform agnostic, or simply a person off the street - go ahead, take a person with a very high IQ. Tell me, for the user, which process is simpler? Scenario 1 or scenario 2? Seems to me, Scenario 1 is failsafe compared to 2. Scenario 1 is SELF EXPLANATORY.
But scenario 2... I still don't know what am I supposed to do with this drive. Is it really intuitive? So now, a user must FIGURE OUT to click the drive (scenario 1, no "figuring" - the process is transparent).
But wait, that's not all. So, now you've clicked (already an extra unintuitive step compared to scenario 1, where you don't have additional drives appear). You click and here's what you see: A folder opens with several files. OK, now think from a usability point of view. What is the man off the street supposed to think? I tell you what he thinks: OK, here's a window with a bunch of files... NOW WHAT??? My friend, no matter what you say, it SIMPLY IS NOT INTUITIVE or reasonalbe to expect the man off the street to think: "why, it's obvious, YOU DRAAAAAG an icon to a FOOOOOLDER, no, not this icon, that icon" - yep, how intuitive - NOT.
What happens in scenario 2, assuming he even gets so far as to click on this bizarre drive that appears for no particular reason ("I clicked on the icon - why doesn't it install, why does it give me this strange other drive" - situation does not occur in scenrio 1) - what happens is the user then stares at a bunch of files not knowing what the next step is supposed to be. That's what happens. It is an extra and totally unintuitive step to DRAG an icon to a folder in order to install - this is not a paradigm of natural behavior. You have to KNOW that to install you DRAG a SPECIFIC icon to a specific FOLDER. Sorry, nobody is born with that knowledge -
IT
IS
NOT
INTUITIVE!
No amount of denouncing users as idiots changes that fact. Nor does swearing that it's easy changes that FACT.
Contrast that with the scenario 1, where every single step (of which there are only 2) IS *SELF* explanatory.
To you dragging an icon seems so simple - so you conclude, it's a simple process.The fact that you don't have the insight to realize that dragging an icon is not intuitive is merely an indication that you have no insight into how human perception works. Look how easily you stepped over this difficulty not even perceiving that there may be a problem! You are not a usability designer. This is just ONE small example in this particular process.
And that's hardly the end of this nightmare process of installation on macs - there's dmgs that work like apps, there's drives to mount and unmount, files to clean and remove and on and on and on. Every step a guessing game, totally unintuitive AND NEEDLESSLY COMPLEX. That is why, the whole process is BROKEN in macs. One day, it will be fixed by Apple. Meanwhile, many will insist that living in caves is just fine and dandy and those folks who find cave dwelling to be not optimal are just complaining idiots.
Here's an example for those who say "it's simple!" and don't understand why it OBJECTIVELY is not.
You say: "just drag the icon to the App folder".
OK, that's very, very, very unintuitive. Take these two scenarios. You click on an icon with the name of your FBARapp.
Scenario 1:
You click on the FBARapp icon - a dialogue appears "Do you want to install FBARapp to your computer - click the appropriate button" and under that, two buttons - a green one with the word "YES", and a red one with the word "NO". When you click YES you may be prompeted for your password (takes care of the security objection). You enter it, click - dialogue appears "You have installed FBARapp to your computer".
Scenario 2:
You click on the FBARapp dmg. An icon of a drive appears.
Now, take anyone who is platform agnostic, or simply a person off the street - go ahead, take a person with a very high IQ. Tell me, for the user, which process is simpler? Scenario 1 or scenario 2? Seems to me, Scenario 1 is failsafe compared to 2. Scenario 1 is SELF EXPLANATORY.
But scenario 2... I still don't know what am I supposed to do with this drive. Is it really intuitive? So now, a user must FIGURE OUT to click the drive (scenario 1, no "figuring" - the process is transparent).
But wait, that's not all. So, now you've clicked (already an extra unintuitive step compared to scenario 1, where you don't have additional drives appear). You click and here's what you see: A folder opens with several files. OK, now think from a usability point of view. What is the man off the street supposed to think? I tell you what he thinks: OK, here's a window with a bunch of files... NOW WHAT??? My friend, no matter what you say, it SIMPLY IS NOT INTUITIVE or reasonalbe to expect the man off the street to think: "why, it's obvious, YOU DRAAAAAG an icon to a FOOOOOLDER, no, not this icon, that icon" - yep, how intuitive - NOT.
What happens in scenario 2, assuming he even gets so far as to click on this bizarre drive that appears for no particular reason ("I clicked on the icon - why doesn't it install, why does it give me this strange other drive" - situation does not occur in scenrio 1) - what happens is the user then stares at a bunch of files not knowing what the next step is supposed to be. That's what happens. It is an extra and totally unintuitive step to DRAG an icon to a folder in order to install - this is not a paradigm of natural behavior. You have to KNOW that to install you DRAG a SPECIFIC icon to a specific FOLDER. Sorry, nobody is born with that knowledge -
IT
IS
NOT
INTUITIVE!
No amount of denouncing users as idiots changes that fact. Nor does swearing that it's easy changes that FACT.
Contrast that with the scenario 1, where every single step (of which there are only 2) IS *SELF* explanatory.
To you dragging an icon seems so simple - so you conclude, it's a simple process.The fact that you don't have the insight to realize that dragging an icon is not intuitive is merely an indication that you have no insight into how human perception works. Look how easily you stepped over this difficulty not even perceiving that there may be a problem! You are not a usability designer. This is just ONE small example in this particular process.
And that's hardly the end of this nightmare process of installation on macs - there's dmgs that work like apps, there's drives to mount and unmount, files to clean and remove and on and on and on. Every step a guessing game, totally unintuitive AND NEEDLESSLY COMPLEX. That is why, the whole process is BROKEN in macs. One day, it will be fixed by Apple. Meanwhile, many will insist that living in caves is just fine and dandy and those folks who find cave dwelling to be not optimal are just complaining idiots.
OldCorpse said:
The flaw in your logic here, BrokenRecord (or whatever your name is) is that most software developers place readme files with their apps because some people are clearly too inexperienced with computers to even be able to do something as simple as drag and drop. Perhaps you should refer to these files more often before you start posting on forums ranting about how poorly the system works.
First rule of design? So lets say a man gets drunk and crashes his brand new BMW, kills himself as well as a few children in the process, you'd blame that on BMW? Nice logic you have there.
plinden said:
Sorry, search the message boards - there are TONS of users with these problems. Heck, there are chapters in books devoted to the installation process and practically every message board has a thread pinned as a permanent fixture "How to install apps in macs". That tells you there is a SERIOUS ISSUE. Yes, some users will have an easy time, and developers on Linux can roll their own. But it is comical that you don't see that it is complex - this is not a point of pride (there are complicated programs *I* find easy to run, but I don't take that as meaning it is objectively well designed) - this is a point of failure to understand USER DESIGN PRINCIPLES - you have no insight into how a human being perceives... that represents YOUR FAILURE to understand, your failure to perceive where a step is intuitive and where it is not! I have no doubt whatsoever that one day it will be as easy as IT SHOULD BE. And today's methods will seem as quaint as hand cranking a car to start it is seen today. Once upon a time, it also seemed "natural" to handcrank - thank God, we've moved on.
dmgs
here is what you do. you install your application. eject the the disk by either draggin it to the trash or ctrl click eject it, then delete the dmg file by dragging it to the trash and emptying trash, easy as done.
here is what you do. you install your application. eject the the disk by either draggin it to the trash or ctrl click eject it, then delete the dmg file by dragging it to the trash and emptying trash, easy as done.
I see using disk images as being more consistent than Windows installers by a long shot.
When you put in an installer CD what happens? A drive appears on your desktop. When you launch a .dmg file what happens? A drive appears on your desktop. Some installers are not intuitive, Carbon Copy Cloner comes to mind only because it was a recent addition to my computer. Many installers I have seen have large Icons and a pretty blatant message telling you to either "Double Click to Install" or "Drag this to your Applications Folder to install." But this can happen with a download or a CD there is nothing special about one or the other.
The drag apps to the Applications folder is an extremely intuitive step for installing software (copy the files to your computer). You know exactly where the application is and it is easy to move around to suit or organizational needs. However years of installers on Windows have conditioned us to look for the installer application that properly distributes files all over the HD so that apps can run, but it also doesn't give much indication as to exactly where the application executable is installed and if you opt out of the shortcuts you might have a bit of trouble finding it. The whole process is also confused by the fact that Mac apps are inconsistent in that some are drag and drop and some require an installer (the latter being the more insidious).
The drag and drop apps are great since they have a very intuitive removal option simply trash the application (just try to do that with a Windows program) however if the app required an installer it may require an uninstaller, now how is an average user supposed to remember which apps can simply be trashed and which ones need to be un-installed.
Personally I am of the opinion that all applications should be standalone files, heck even a folder will do, that can be moved anywhere without affecting their functionality. If an app requires special options there should be a separate set of system installers (extensions) which can be managed from a control panel to remove. That was one thing I loved about OS 7-8 (I was off in PC land when 9 was about) is that I could go through the system folder and find anything and everything I wanted and could move anything and everything around to my liking and eventually learned what everything did without ever really breaking the system. I'm figuring out OSX slowly but I doubt I will ever understand what all of the extensions and system folder items are doing like I did on my old OS 8 box.
edit: for clarity...
When you put in an installer CD what happens? A drive appears on your desktop. When you launch a .dmg file what happens? A drive appears on your desktop. Some installers are not intuitive, Carbon Copy Cloner comes to mind only because it was a recent addition to my computer. Many installers I have seen have large Icons and a pretty blatant message telling you to either "Double Click to Install" or "Drag this to your Applications Folder to install." But this can happen with a download or a CD there is nothing special about one or the other.
The drag apps to the Applications folder is an extremely intuitive step for installing software (copy the files to your computer). You know exactly where the application is and it is easy to move around to suit or organizational needs. However years of installers on Windows have conditioned us to look for the installer application that properly distributes files all over the HD so that apps can run, but it also doesn't give much indication as to exactly where the application executable is installed and if you opt out of the shortcuts you might have a bit of trouble finding it. The whole process is also confused by the fact that Mac apps are inconsistent in that some are drag and drop and some require an installer (the latter being the more insidious).
The drag and drop apps are great since they have a very intuitive removal option simply trash the application (just try to do that with a Windows program) however if the app required an installer it may require an uninstaller, now how is an average user supposed to remember which apps can simply be trashed and which ones need to be un-installed.
Personally I am of the opinion that all applications should be standalone files, heck even a folder will do, that can be moved anywhere without affecting their functionality. If an app requires special options there should be a separate set of system installers (extensions) which can be managed from a control panel to remove. That was one thing I loved about OS 7-8 (I was off in PC land when 9 was about) is that I could go through the system folder and find anything and everything I wanted and could move anything and everything around to my liking and eventually learned what everything did without ever really breaking the system. I'm figuring out OSX slowly but I doubt I will ever understand what all of the extensions and system folder items are doing like I did on my old OS 8 box.
edit: for clarity...
I really don't think this automated app installation is a good idea. I mean, in one step we're expecting our browser to work out what the file is and then where to put it. Do you really want Safari putting all your documents in the Documents folder, pictures in the Photo folder, movies in the Movie folder and apps in the Applications folder without any intermediate steps?
I'm lucky enough to find the default app installation method intuitive. No amount of argument will convince me otherwise but I respect the fact that others would prefer it be done differently. Does anyone else feel we're going in circles?
I'm lucky enough to find the default app installation method intuitive. No amount of argument will convince me otherwise but I respect the fact that others would prefer it be done differently. Does anyone else feel we're going in circles?
Tel said:
I just described a process for you (post where I have scenario 1 and 2) where you cannot fail to install, no matter your level of experience. Try to understand this:
1)It is the Apple ideal - and a good user design principle - to design a process in such a way that THE USER NEEDS NO MANUAL. Such processes exist - Apple does it all the time. I even described in scenario 1 how it could be achieved. So excuses about READ ME files being there for inexperienced users don't work - it is a FAILURE by Apple standards, by design principles and by a concrete example I showed where you don't need it.
2)The BMW example is silly - here the user is behaving in an impaired way. But with software, the folks having problems are not impaired - many are highly intelligent, and even experienced on other platform computers - it is the PROCESS that is unintuitive... such bad designs exist, you know. Oh, and funny thing is - one day, yes, you will be able to blame BMW. We'll have cars which detect alcohol on the breath of a driver and prevent him from starting a car (they already exist for some situations). So that BMW will be a modern one that saved lives even with a BAD user. And the old BMW, will be denounced as an old design, that wasn't FAULT TOLERANT and people died. By the way, you'd do well to introduce yourself to the concept of "fault tolerance" - that is A GOOD DESIGN principle, that when doing something by an easy mistake can have catastrophic consequences, you design to COMPENSATE. That's why you don't put buttons for "start" and "eject" next to each other on airplanes, as a simple mistake can be a disaster... guess what, the design that puts those buttons next to each other is a BAD design. So too in software, sometimes you have warning dialogues "you are about to wipe out your hard drive" in order to prevent mistakes with devastating consequences. But that is all beside the point - because in THIS CASE, the user is NOT making a mistake - he is behaving naturally, and acutally the design is NOT INTUITIVE. The example I'd give here is a BMW that's so designed that a normal IQ (or high IQ) user that is sober needs a freakin MANUAL in order to do the 50 steps to start a car.
mad jew said:I really don't think this automated app installation is a good idea. I mean, in one step we're expecting our browser to work out what the file is and then where to put it. Do you really want Safari putting all your documents in the Documents folder, pictures in the Photo folder, movies in the Movie folder and apps in the Applications folder without any intermediate steps?
I'm lucky enough to find the default app installation method intuitive. No amount of argument will convince me otherwise but I respect the fact that others would prefer it be done differently. Does anyone else feel we're going in circles?
Why can't that be an OPTION? Why can't we have default installation, and then for the power users an OPTION to install elsewhere? That's the entire point of defaults. When there are "intermediate" steps that impede the ordinary user, that's a FAILURE. Have you ever read the Apple HIG (HUMAN INTERFACE GUIDELINES)? They take a lot of time and effort to design the default to be the simplest they can, and yet allow power users their options. It is all about design. The installation one, is a failure here, unlike most other designs from apple.
I think the whole process could be modified to suit everyone's needs with the simple addition of two scripts to each .dmg/CD installer.
One script entitled "Double click here to install XXXX or drag the XXXX Icon to your Applications folder"
One other entitled "Double click here to remove XXXX or drag the XXXX Icon to the trash"
where XXXX is the name of the application. And the install script (a simple apple script to copy the files automatically copies the uninstall script and the app to a folder XXXX in the Applications folder. Anything that requires a full blown installer could simply remove the or drag... portion of the script title and any app folder without the uninstall file can simply be trashed to uninstall or it will tell you that quickly.
One script entitled "Double click here to install XXXX or drag the XXXX Icon to your Applications folder"
One other entitled "Double click here to remove XXXX or drag the XXXX Icon to the trash"
where XXXX is the name of the application. And the install script (a simple apple script to copy the files automatically copies the uninstall script and the app to a folder XXXX in the Applications folder. Anything that requires a full blown installer could simply remove the or drag... portion of the script title and any app folder without the uninstall file can simply be trashed to uninstall or it will tell you that quickly.
OldCorpse said:
Hmm, I don't think I've ever said that I take it as a point of pride that I can understand this complex process. I just don't see it as complex.
Nor do I think you're being stupid. I just think you originally approached this in the wrong way and are stuck with some preconceived notions about installing on Macs that you'll have to get rid of before you get past this. I've been in the same position with other tech related stuff and I've just had to unlearn what I thought I knew.
What's more, even if you don't originally understand the process, and you ask on a forum how to do it, and someone walks you through the steps, why is it not easier the next time? Why is it so confusing? The process is easy to understand when you've learned how, and the learning curve is very shallow, for most people.
As for tons of people asking about this ... Apple are selling 1,200,000 Macs a quarter, a large percentage of which are sold to new Mac users. If 1000 of those users ask about this, it looks like a huge number of people are having difficulty because all you're seeing are those who are having problems.
And no, I am not a usability expert. I'm a Java/webapps developer who leaves the design up to our usability experts. I know UIs designed by engineers tend not to usable to anyone outside the team, since I've sat behind the one-way mirror watching people off the street trying to use a UI we've done without any input from usability designers. But in this case, I know five people who've switched to Macs in the past year (myself included) and not one of us has had problems with installing applications.
OldCorpse, your comparison to Windows isn't without fault either. Its actually more confusing. You see when you download a program off the internet and it comes in a zip file, whats a windows user to do? Even better, what if its self extracting archive? Did that install it? Now assume it is a zip then you need to get a zip utility or use the one built into Windows, right? Then what? Double click the installer or extract the files? If I extract them, where did they go? Do I run install.exe, setup.exe or launchpad.exe? What about .msi and runnable .jar files that will install applications too - what do I do with those? Oh...I need a JRE - whats a JRE??!??! arrrghgh. Wait, what if you need to uninstall a program? How do you do that...oh yeah...goto the control panel (wheres that again?) and run add/remove programs...What do you mean it won't install? How can I know for sure all the files were removed??!?!?!? Its all complex.
Its a frickin computer - for petes sake. If you need easy - return your iBook and go get yourself a LeapPad - but I am guessing you will find those difficult to work with too...
The fact you find installing programs complex really made me giggle, but in all honesty, anyone could find any task complex if they thought hard enough about it...
Its a frickin computer - for petes sake. If you need easy - return your iBook and go get yourself a LeapPad - but I am guessing you will find those difficult to work with too...
The fact you find installing programs complex really made me giggle, but in all honesty, anyone could find any task complex if they thought hard enough about it...
atszyman said:
Great suggestion!
I find it annoying that on both platforms (mac and pc) the installation process can vary so greatly from one application to another. I guess this step is primarily up to the software developer.
Arguing against "Readme" files seems a bit odd because: a) they're more common on pc programs (in my experience) and b) they usually give you info about the program (e.g., version notes, license info, etc.) not instructions on how to install it.
plinden said:
OK, this is going to be my last post on the subject, cause it's just going in circles, and prolly a bore for most readers.
No, it has nothing to do with my coming from a different platform. The process is not intuitive, I described why not (opening a window with a bunch of files, and expecting the user to magically know that you DRAG a PARTICULAR icon to a particular FOLDER is NOT, repeat NOT intuitive - regardless of which platform you came from or any platform indeed).
You asked, and I described HOW it could be made easier (scenario 1) - in fact "fail-proof". Bingo. You don't need to learn/unlearn/memorize/consult/instruct/habituate/adjust/become co-dependent/drink kool-aid/kill a chicken. That's the ideal - zero learning curve. Now, I'm not saying my proposal is it - it's just an example off the top of my head, to illustrate a point, but it works.
Can one learn the process the way it is done in macs? Sure, as one can for Linux, Windows, or any other platform. That is not the point. My point is: it is badly broken in macs - yes, you can learn a broken process, but it is still broken.
Oh, and I'm not the only one who has noticed this... more than one tech writer has remarked on this - the app installation process on macs is broken compared to the rest of their elegant interface.
OldCorpse said:
Exactly, you cannot fail to install, what if the user wishes to test the application to see if it meets their needs before they decide to permanently add it to their computer?
If Apple were to set up a system such as yours then every software developer would have to make their software simple to use too. Considering that some software deals with some very technical stuff, not having the ability to have a readme file with your download would actually make the whole process a lot harder.
How is he to know that he isn't allowed to drink and drive unless he has read a good deal of documentation on the laws?
As Billy Bragg once sung:
"And sometimes it takes a grown man a long time to learn
Just what it would take a child a night to learn."
Also, Abraham Lincoln once said:
"You can please some of the people some of the time, but
you can't please all of the people all of the time."
The fact is that people are different, what might be easy for a child may prove difficult for a man with a very high IQ, this is why we have readme files, so that no matter what, you can read a file and have the same understanding about something as everyone else.
Well said mad jew, kingjr3 and Tel. I think we're just going around in circles.
Could you explain to me what a "FOOOOOLDER" is, and while you're at it what DRAAAAAGING is?
OldCorpse said:
Could you explain to me what a "FOOOOOLDER" is, and while you're at it what DRAAAAAGING is?
Man, so worked up...
I can understand how it could be made more automatic, and I'm not calling anyone stupid, I just like the way it works. I don't want the system to install it for me, I WANT to drag it there myself. It just feels cleaner to me, and I like having a certain level of control.
I like the disc image concept, maybe because I make and use lots of disc images in cd and dvd burning. I can understand that it's not intuitive to everyone, but to me it seems right.
Windows just burned me too many times with the installers/uninstallers, I don't want the mac system to change. Just my opinion.
I can understand how it could be made more automatic, and I'm not calling anyone stupid, I just like the way it works. I don't want the system to install it for me, I WANT to drag it there myself. It just feels cleaner to me, and I like having a certain level of control.
I like the disc image concept, maybe because I make and use lots of disc images in cd and dvd burning. I can understand that it's not intuitive to everyone, but to me it seems right.
Windows just burned me too many times with the installers/uninstallers, I don't want the mac system to change. Just my opinion.
huck500 said:
All fine and well but understand that you are looking at it from the "me" perspective. You are proficient in MAC - with 5-6% market share it is obvious there is a vast untapped user base out there. Sometimes it's these little things that turn off new MAC converts. If I had a dollar for every time I've seen a MAC for sale by a newbie who wants to go back to PC because he couldn't get use to it. I'm certainly not saying PC is better. I do believe the MAC is far superior. What I'm saying is there are some things in Windows that work better for the average consumer.
To test my theory I cruised over to my neighbor who is also a relatively new mac convert. I checked out some of the apps on his iMac and sure enough some of them he inadvertently runs them from disk image. And he did not have any clue this was happening. He did say he was unsure why the disk icons would show up on his desktop. There is nothing wrong with creating 2 options.. One for a power user and one wizard based for the REST OF US mortals.