This is a very well made video that shows a common situation faced, not only by engineers but, by almost everybody that has a logical and analytical mind when confronted by people that think they know your job better than you do. Enjoy :)
I just finished reading The Emotion Machine: Commonsense Thinking, Artificial Intelligence, and the Future of the Human Mind by Marvin Minsky It was a really interesting book which I really recommend. I would like to highlight this part from the first chapter “Falling in Love”
On the surface such statements seem positive; they’re all composed of superlatives. But note that there’s something strange about this: most of those phrases of positive praise use syllables like ‘un–’, ‘–less’, and ‘in-‘un-’, ‘-less’, and ‘in-’—which show that they really are negative statements describing the person who’s saying them!
—— (I can’t figure out what attracts me to her.)
I scarcely can think of anything else.
—— (Most of my mind has stopped working.)
Unbelievably Perfect. Incredible.
—— (No sensible person believes such things.)
She has a Flawless Character.
——(I’ve abandoned my critical faculties.)
There is nothing I would not do for her.
—— (I’ve forsaken most of my usual goals.)
Positive statements might hide what we really are thinking about. Did you heard in a wedding someone saying “He’s a very lucky man for marring her”? What that person probably meant was something like: “He’s lucky because I can’t understand how a woman like her could marry a man like him” or “He’s lucky because she could find a better man”
Reading about iOS7 Design Resources in the iOS Human Interface Guidelines I found a similar approach comparing iOS 7 and iOS 6. Look at the screenshot:
This looks wrong. One thing is to talk about the improvements of iOS 7 and the changes they made, and another thing is to trash your previous product. They are not doing it explicitly, but they are doing it indirectly.
- Deference. The UI helps users understand and interact with the content, but never competes with it. (The previous design competed with the content and wasn’t clear)
- Clarity. Text is legible at every size, icons are precise and lucid, adornments are subtle and appropriate, and a sharpened focus on functionality motivates the design. (Icons weren’t precise and adornments were not appropriate)
- Depth. Visual layers and realistic motion impart vitality and heighten users’ delight and understanding. (Previous design lacked vitality and was hard to understand)
These three positive statements would be just fine if they were announcing iOS 7 as a new product for the first time. In that case the listener wouldn’t have a previous model to compare with and would use the hidden negative statements on the competition. But comparing in this way your current product with the previous one is just trashing your previous work. That damages the credibility of what Apple continually claims about their products, depicting them as the best in the market. How could they say they have the best Mobile OS if they are trashing it when the next version comes out.
I think that the right thing to do should be to avoid direct comparisons between your own products and only point out the evolution, the improvement, the new features instead of sending subliminal messages to costumers saying “today we sell you gold and tomorrow we will call it shit”.
I installed Mavericks over Mountain Lion on a MacBook Air early 2011. Let’s first start with the good stuff I found so far:
- More disk space. Before the installation I had 22GB free and now I have 34GB free. I have no idea what stuff was occupying 10GB of space, anyway it’s gone!
- Faster! Yes surprisingly it’s faster than Mountain Lion and Lion. I was a little bit afraid about the speed, specially after seeing how bad iOS 7 is doing on the iPhone 4 and the iPad 2.
- All my important apps work. So far I tried: TrueCrypt, VirtualBox, Chicken, Google Earth, LightRoom, Photoshop CS4, Illustrator CS4, AptanaStudio 3, Libre Office, TextWrangler, Audacity, VLC, JEDict, CyberDuck, Skype, go2Shell, Temperature Gauge.
- Leap Motion drivers work.
- Full screen works as indicated by Apple. I finally have my top bar enabled on the second monitor so I can now work full screen without sacrificing one monitor. I had one pretty bad issue that will be explained later in the post.
- The american voice Samantha is sexier than before.
- Disk utility didn’t crash until now…
- Battery had a better performance. I didn’t measure the charge time, but it discharges at a slower pace.
- I can’t rotate the second monitor. I used it at 90 degrees rotation but I can’t use it now. It was very handy specially to see the iPad/iPhone simulator working on it… Look at the image. This is ridiculous:
- When I activated the second monitor in LightRoom it worked fine. But the second one’s top bar overlapped the maximized Lightroom’s second view. I can adjust that by making the second view a window but there should be no overlap of the content.
- Sometimes you get something like this. I was in the launchpad and the app behind got an alert. The mouse pointer was operative with the launchpad icons but the content of the program overlapped the launchpad view. I had to click outside the window to get rid off the launchpad and respond to the message. If this is not a bug, it’s poor design
- In Lightroom I don’t get the right colors on the controls. Look at the image on the left is from Lightroom running on Mountain Lion and the right one on Mavericks. Don’t you see something is missing?
- I also had an issue with the keyboards. I have a Japanese keyboard which I use most of the time. I also installed an Italian and Spanish keyboard when I have to write in those languages. The problem is that the Japanese keyboard, when is set to Romaji, it means to write in roman characters, thinks that the previous used keyboard is the default romaji. So I ended up with a Spanish keyboard when I want to use the Japanese distribution. This didn’t happen with Mountain Lion. I fixed it by installing the US keyboard which maps the Japanese one. This is conceptually wrong, because based with the previous schema, the US keyboard should match an US keyboard distribution instead the Japanese one. Finally I gave up all the keyboards and I followed the advice of my friend @rcivit Now I use shortcuts to create characters like éáñ and so forth. Anyway I still have to install the US keyboard on a Japanese keyboard to have the right mapping…
So far so good, I won’t rollback to Mountain Lion mainly because Mavericks seems faster and more battery friendly. Anyway I wouldn’t use it for your production machine after at least 5 or 6 months.
iOS 7 is here. I’ve been using it since the first beta. As far as user interfaces are effective, I don’t care too much about aesthetic, also because it’s totally subjective. What is ugly for you is beautiful for someone else. In a previous post I shared a couple of screenshots showing the difference between icons in Xcode 3.2, 4.6 and 5.0. You can see a progressive simplification of the interface. First flatting colors then flatting depth. The challenge with this design is to avoid reaching the point of maximum simplification. Let’s look at the icons in detail:
Symbols don’t have any meaning by themselves, we give meaning to symbols and icons which simply are symbols, ideograms, pictograms. If we keep the design around the first icon on the left, it’s possible to change its look without changing its meaning. It’s not a practical need, but an aesthetic one, and I understand that’s more a marketing choice than a practical one. Even if nothing really changed inside the application, a new look gives you the idea that you have a new and fresh product.
The problem with the icon on the right is that simplification reached the limit. It’s so simple, so minimalist, that a change of its design means also changing the symbol and therefore removing the meaning. Symbols are powerful and that’s why many people over the years in history tried to steal symbols and change their original meaning, like the the Nazis did with the swastika. We should avoid changing symbols too often, because that removes semantic consistency in the interface and creates confusion.
The icon in 5.0 is a simplification of the correspondent in 3.2. The icon in 4.6 is a change in the previous symbol, creating confusion and inconsistency. Then they changed it back again to the original one. The new one has very little room to evolve or change without changing the symbol. It’s the extreme simplification of the original one.
I think that iOS 7 and the OSX interface and design are great. They are simple, effective, intuitive and fun but over simplifying hides the potential risk of reaching a point where simplification cannot be accomplished anymore and the only possible choice is changing the symbol, therefore breaking consistency.
I’m curios to see if, at this point, they will be able to update the design in the future without breaking the symbolic consistency.
Xcode 4.6.x had already some sort of flat design. They removed the colors and everything was flat and grey but at least it had some sort of depth. Look at these screenshots:
Now look at the new Xcode 5.0 flat design. I don’t see an improvement. It looks like an old fashioned GUI of the 90’s. It’s even hard to understand what the icons mean. It’s so abstract that someday we’ll need an ideogram dictionary to understand what those icons mean.
Now look at a very old version of Xcode 3.2.x and tell me which one do you prefer. Honestly I don’t see an evolution in the look and design from colorful and self explanatory icons to cryptic flat ones. Flat design is not bad and it doesn’t even matter if it’s flat or not. The point here is that an user interface should be self explanatory, an icon should be worth a thousand words.