Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac OS vs. Windows usability [split]

there's no such thing as overly simplistic - it's usually a very big effort that is needed to make things simple, as it is far more easier to just make things than to make things right. so software engineers continue to make things and there's always a need for someone that says which operations are unnecessary.

simplicity adds productivity. this is where all usability experts agree, to my knowledge.

in this system prefs example i defend my point about it being a lot faster to access one centralized system from one way only (the apple menu), because when it is used regularily (at least more often than any single shorcut), there is a clear memory path for even the not-so-power users - compared to a shortcut here and there, when user tends to learn shortcuts and their functions instead of associating the shortcut into where it points.

to prove my point, let's take my father for example. when he had windows laptop, he called me every week just to ask how he can change this and that setting, and no matter how hard i tried, he never knew the concept of control panel, and was afraid of using it. he however had no trouble using the display control panel because he wasn't using the control panel in his mind, but rather just "display settings changer widget". now that he has an ibook, he never calls me about these things and uses system prefs boldly. he can now see that there's a collection of system settings that he can change without making things blow.

or my father-in-law who constantly asks my wife where his documents are, because he cannot associate the (windows) file system at all - he thinks that when he saves pictures from digital camera to a location called "my documents", it must be a different place than where he drags all pictures he has saved from the net - to "my documents" in the desktop. he cannot learn that the folder in the desktop is a shortcut to an actual folder somewhere else. interestingly enough, when his pc broke and we loaned him our spare imac, he instantly figured where he should look for his files. this is real. simplicity. i cannot say it loud enough.
 
JFreak said:
there's no such thing as overly simplistic - it's usually a very big effort that is needed to make things simple, as it is far more easier to just make things than to make things right. so software engineers continue to make things and there's always a need for someone that says which operations are unnecessary.

simplicity adds productivity. this is where all usability experts agree, to my knowledge.

in this system prefs example i defend my point about it being a lot faster to access one centralized system from one way only (the apple menu), because when it is used regularily (at least more often than any single shorcut), there is a clear memory path for even the not-so-power users - compared to a shortcut here and there, when user tends to learn shortcuts and their functions instead of associating the shortcut into where it points.

to prove my point, let's take my father for example. when he had windows laptop, he called me every week just to ask how he can change this and that setting, and no matter how hard i tried, he never knew the concept of control panel, and was afraid of using it. he however had no trouble using the display control panel because he wasn't using the control panel in his mind, but rather just "display settings changer widget". now that he has an ibook, he never calls me about these things and uses system prefs boldly. he can now see that there's a collection of system settings that he can change without making things blow.

or my father-in-law who constantly asks my wife where his documents are, because he cannot associate the (windows) file system at all - he thinks that when he saves pictures from digital camera to a location called "my documents", it must be a different place than where he drags all pictures he has saved from the net - to "my documents" in the desktop. he cannot learn that the folder in the desktop is a shortcut to an actual folder somewhere else. interestingly enough, when his pc broke and we loaned him our spare imac, he instantly figured where he should look for his files. this is real. simplicity. i cannot say it loud enough.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing that simplicity in software design is a bad thing - I'm saying that your and Nielsen's arguments are overly simplistic.

As I said before, by your logic, we should remove keyboard shortcuts from software, since we already have access to the "resources" via menus and mouse input.

Simplicity in design is one way to look at the goal of usability. Another is transparency - beginning users have the support they need and advanced users can easily learn how to perform more efficiently with the program getting out of the way.
 
Rower_CPU said:
As I said before, by your logic, we should remove keyboard shortcuts from software, since we already have access to the "resources" via menus and mouse input.
Click to expand...

actually, no. if for example an app has a "save" function, there is no difference if i access that function by clicking the menu with a mouse or pressing two buttons via the keyboard. or saying a magic word "save" through a microphone, or pressing my index finger to a special device that is programmed to execute the save command each time it reads a correct fingerprint. it's all the same.

now if the app would pop up a window every five minutes asking if i wish to save already, that would be another way to access that function - meaning, a software-driven (pull) method versus a user-driven (push) method.
 
Skiniftz said:
..not the point. It protects by DEFAULT. If you want to go disabling parts of the system that protect you against problems then that's your lookout.
Click to expand...

not the point either. if you need what can best be described as a "kluge" (that can be disabled, no less!) to prevent the OS from screweing itself up from everyday activity like installing apps, then there is a problem with the OS design.

longhorn hopefully will address this issue.
 
JFreak said:
actually, no. if for example an app has a "save" function, there is no difference if i access that function by clicking the menu with a mouse or pressing two buttons via the keyboard. or saying a magic word "save" through a microphone, or pressing my index finger to a special device that is programmed to execute the save command each time it reads a correct fingerprint. it's all the same.

now if the app would pop up a window every five minutes asking if i wish to save already, that would be another way to access that function - meaning, a software-driven (pull) method versus a user-driven (push) method.
Click to expand...

So what's the difference between the "save" function being accessed multiple ways and your problem with the Display settings in Windows being accessed multiple ways? I'm not seeing the distinction.
 
Rower_CPU said:
So what's the difference between the "save" function being accessed multiple ways and your problem with the Display settings in Windows being accessed multiple ways? I'm not seeing the distinction.
Click to expand...

the difference is that if save function is accessed via the keyboard or via mouse or via microphone or via fingerprint reader, it is one function in one place and it is up to user what input device he wishes to use. the same thing would be to open the system prefs via the keyboard shortcut (is there any?) or via mouse or via microphone or via some other specialized device that is made only for the purpose of opening the system prefs.

but...

if you put a shortcut into the system prefs, then you are not anymore accessing the system prefs from one LOCATION but two instead, and that's the difference. in windows side one clear example would be the "my documents" folder that usually has a shortcut on the desktop. many users tend to think these are two different locations although the desktop one is only a shortcut to the real folder.

the difference should be clear; different input methods versus different locations. the former is ok, and it is up to os what input methods it supports and up to user which of the supported he wishes to use. but different locations just confuse user and alienates him from what is original.

btw. the dock also breaks this simplicity rule. to add confusion i have a shortcut to "applications" folder placed into the dock, in addition to few apps (8 to be exact, of which at least four are always running), so in my config i can access few applications from three different locations. basically, that's breaking the rules.
 
JFreak said:
the difference is that if save function is accessed via the keyboard or via mouse or via microphone or via fingerprint reader, it is one function in one place and it is up to user what input device he wishes to use. the same thing would be to open the system prefs via the keyboard shortcut (is there any?) or via mouse or via microphone or via some other specialized device that is made only for the purpose of opening the system prefs.

but...

if you put a shortcut into the system prefs, then you are not anymore accessing the system prefs from one LOCATION but two instead, and that's the difference. in windows side one clear example would be the "my documents" folder that usually has a shortcut on the desktop. many users tend to think these are two different locations although the desktop one is only a shortcut to the real folder.

the difference should be clear; different input methods versus different locations. the former is ok, and it is up to os what input methods it supports and up to user which of the supported he wishes to use. but different locations just confuse user and alienates him from what is original.

btw. the dock also breaks this simplicity rule. to add confusion i have a shortcut to "applications" folder placed into the dock, in addition to few apps (8 to be exact, of which at least four are always running), so in my config i can access few applications from three different locations. basically, that's breaking the rules.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but that's a completely arbitrary distinction. To the user, there is little difference between accessing a function via multiple means in a program and accessing folders/settings/etc. via multiple paths.

Novice users can access things via the typical/slow route and power users learn and use shortcuts - that is good usability.
 
Rower_CPU said:
Sorry, but that's a completely arbitrary distinction.
Click to expand...

that arbotrary distinction is very real among the older people. we younger users know that the "my computer" folder is located on the hard drive and the icon on the desktop is only a shortcut to it. but for the older people, these are two different things. they see a "my documents" and "my computer" on the desktop and see them as two separate entities - and therefore when they open "my computer" and see the "my documents" in there, they don't connect it to the shortcut icon on the desktop. sad but true, that's how the human mind operates.

it's different thing to be able to access something from two locations than being able to access it via multiple devices (mouse, keyboard, voice, biometrics...) as i stated.
 
JFreak said:
that arbotrary distinction is very real among the older people. we younger users know that the "my computer" folder is located on the hard drive and the icon on the desktop is only a shortcut to it. but for the older people, these are two different things. they see a "my documents" and "my computer" on the desktop and see them as two separate entities - and therefore when they open "my computer" and see the "my documents" in there, they don't connect it to the shortcut icon on the desktop. sad but true, that's how the human mind operates.

it's different thing to be able to access something from two locations than being able to access it via multiple devices (mouse, keyboard, voice, biometrics...) as i stated.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see a study or something by a third party stating what you do above. Shortcuts are a basic aspect of computing - yes, they take some getting used to - but it makes more sense for a user's reaction to seeing something with the same name (eg. "My Documents" on desktop and in "My Computer") to be "that must be the same thing".

You're also not addressing the importance of advanced methods for users to access once they move past the novice stage. Don't you think that's important to usability?

Anyway, try to point to some articles/research/etc to help me see where you're coming from. :)
 
If anyone cares, I'm doing some testing between my cube running the latest Mac OS with a similarly equipped PC running it's latest OS (both Windows and Linux). I don't care about power, just usability--the computer has to be able to do commmon things. You can find the results so far if you dig around my blog--though I'm not done yet. So far the Mac OS is kicking Windows' ass.

Basically, I'm forming the opinion that if Windows was free that one could forgive most of its shortcomings--it's usable. You get what you pay for, after all. But for free I doubt anyone would use it (except for Microsoft's manhandling of the industry/world). Linux is also free, just about as easy to use, and just plain better. Windows should be the OS that comes with your PC that you ditch as soon as you get home. $400 PC's would come with Windows, but good ones wouldn't. That's how I see things anyway.
 
Rower_CPU said:
Anyway, try to point to some articles/research/etc to help me see where you're coming from. :)
Click to expand...

well, i try to, but not today i'm afraid. for now you have to just take apple osx for an example ;) there's no "documents" folder on the desktop. why? i remember seeing an article at apple.com about it, but have to search for it a little.

have i stated that all shortcuts are bad? i'm just making a point that multiple locations for same resource is bad, and quite specifically making an example of the "my documents" case. that is completely diifferent case than the keyboard shortcut of ctrl-s versus mouse click on a menu bar. in my point of view those two address the same resource the same way, the only difference being the device being used. now what if for some reason the keyboard and mouse was taken off the computer and the only input device would be the microphone? the voice command equals the mouse click or the keyboard stroke, there's no difference.

but you're right, i have some studying to do regarding shortcuts. specifically the dock i already mentioned, and the finder sidebar. those shortcuts are useful and most importantly: it is up to the user to use them or not, or to customize the way one likes. but how to fit it into the theorems, that needs a little more thinking by myself; however, i keep defending my point i made earlier, whereas every resource should be accessible from only one location. (to be strict, the desktop is also a folder. that's why i tend to keep the desktop empty, and if there's something, it is there temporarily because i want to have it there for a moment, thus i'm using the desktop as a specific tool and i never access the desktop folder via the finder.)
 
I studied GUI design (HCI) as part of my major, and I remember the principle JFreak is referring to. I can't find the book we used though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back