5 ms·

He was wrong then, and he's wrong now. We know he is wrong because computers operate fine with 101 key keyboards just like they did 30 years ago. The million of

He was wrong then, and he's wrong now. We know he is wrong because computers operate fine with 101 key keyboards just like they did 30 years ago. The million of applications produced since haven't required a new button on the keyboard every time. Thankfully some sanity has reigned in car interiors and the manufacturers have realised the benefits to tactile feedback. He might be right when screens can reconfigure themselves with raised sections. Or mind control I guess.

chumali 8y ago
It's all well and good saying he was wrong but the principles he outlines have been largely vindicated by the market. Many things worked fine 30 years ago and yet have been immeasurably improved since - it's a tempting argument to not fix that which isn't broken, but ultimately a weak one. Also, there is little point in comparing computers, phones and car interiors. Incorporating physical buttons on phones involves a significant trade-off that is not an issue with computers. Car interiors are a different matter entirely. A more appropriate comparison might be conventional TV remotes vs the Apple TV remote. I've found the latter to be much more user friendly and intuitive.
- Tyrek 8y ago
  > it's a tempting argument to not fix that which isn't broken, but ultimately a weak one. I'm going to have to call shenanigans on this one. Sure, it's an alright attitude to have towards non-essential parts of your life/consumer experience, but imagine if mission critical stuff (like, flight consoles) changed on a regular basis - that would be completely insane.
  - zapzupnz 8y ago
    Fortunately they don't, and fortunately neither do smartphones. They've been roughly the same for the past 12 years, right around the time people started to actually use them en masse. People are already adept at understanding how to use the on-screen keyboard when it changes, such as when it only requires numerical input, or when filling out an email address it helpfully puts the at symbol on the main screen rather than behind a shortcut, or more recent changes like buttons to suggest filling in a saved password for an app or website. These are barely hardships on the scale of unfamiliar flight controls for experienced pilots.
zapzupnz 8y ago
I feel when people can make such blanket statements about what's right or wrong, they are only thinking about their own use case. Perfect example of what Jobs was talking about: the 101 keyboard works fine for the applications designed around it, but there are plenty of things for which something more optimised is a better fit. The argument about millions of applications not requiring specific buttons is a bit fatuous; there are plenty of examples of times when a physical keyboard could be insufficient for efficiently solving a problem on a smartphone without resorting to inventing a strawman set of millions of applications irrelevant to the specific domain of user input experience. I'll give you one example: A lot of HN users seem only to write in English. I write in three languages, one of which is very different from the other two. Using one keyboard is possible on a PC, but would make for a lousy experience on a smartphone where the ideal layout for high speed typing in that latter language has nothing to do with the typical keyboard layout. To transplant this language's layout on to a shrunken down imitation of a full keyboard would be a productivity loss. This is a scenario where a physical keyboard on the phone would be a hinderance, not a help. And that's not even considering many languages that are similar, use the same alphabet, or whatnot. They might be able to get away with the same physical layout, but now the manufacturers have to decide whether to print the legends on or near the keys with the standard US layout, UK layout, French AZERTY layout, and other layouts specific to each region, sometimes at great expense for relatively small markets. That is if they can fit all the legends in. Some languages will still need a visible set of Roman characters, so not only will the local language's characters be printed on or near the letters, but so will the standard QWERTY layout, taking up valuable physical space, possibly necessitating a smaller phone. I'm not mentioning what specific language I used that's quicker to type on a keyboard layout other than the standard PC one because it doesn't matter: it is within our capabilities to not have to manufacture a hundred different configurations of physical keyboard for smartphones and tablets for years, long before the arrival of the iPhone and iPad. Nobody needs to know what language it is because it doesn't matter: those who don't even vaguely consider the needs of international audiences as being first class, on the same level as the needs of US English users, don't have even the beginning of an understanding of designing products for international audiences. The whole /world/ uses smartphones with touch screens. Not just business users, not just executives on meandering lunch breaks with their Blackberries; every day actual people who don't want to be bothered with which SKU to get in order to fully support their language, who don't touch type on regular keyboards let alone tiny ones, children, grandparents, and everything in between.
thirdsun 8y ago
Car interiors are a wildly different use case. The safety concerns of operating a flat surface while driving and having to keep one's eyes on the road probably outweigh the benefits of a flexible UI design. In practice, however, the best approach seems to be a hybrid one: Keep basic, important functions physical, tactile, easily and blindly accessable while serving the details on a blank canvas. For phones and tablets I prefer the giant screen approach.

chumali 8y ago

It's all well and good saying he was wrong but the principles he outlines have been largely vindicated by the market. Many things worked fine 30 years ago and yet have been immeasurably improved since - it's a tempting argument to not fix that which isn't broken, but ultimately a weak one. Also, there is little point in comparing computers, phones and car interiors. Incorporating physical buttons on phones involves a significant trade-off that is not an issue with computers. Car interiors are a different matter entirely. A more appropriate comparison might be conventional TV remotes vs the Apple TV remote. I've found the latter to be much more user friendly and intuitive.

Tyrek 8y ago
> it's a tempting argument to not fix that which isn't broken, but ultimately a weak one. I'm going to have to call shenanigans on this one. Sure, it's an alright attitude to have towards non-essential parts of your life/consumer experience, but imagine if mission critical stuff (like, flight consoles) changed on a regular basis - that would be completely insane.
- zapzupnz 8y ago
  Fortunately they don't, and fortunately neither do smartphones. They've been roughly the same for the past 12 years, right around the time people started to actually use them en masse. People are already adept at understanding how to use the on-screen keyboard when it changes, such as when it only requires numerical input, or when filling out an email address it helpfully puts the at symbol on the main screen rather than behind a shortcut, or more recent changes like buttons to suggest filling in a saved password for an app or website. These are barely hardships on the scale of unfamiliar flight controls for experienced pilots.

zapzupnz 8y ago

I feel when people can make such blanket statements about what's right or wrong, they are only thinking about their own use case. Perfect example of what Jobs was talking about: the 101 keyboard works fine for the applications designed around it, but there are plenty of things for which something more optimised is a better fit. The argument about millions of applications not requiring specific buttons is a bit fatuous; there are plenty of examples of times when a physical keyboard could be insufficient for efficiently solving a problem on a smartphone without resorting to inventing a strawman set of millions of applications irrelevant to the specific domain of user input experience. I'll give you one example: A lot of HN users seem only to write in English. I write in three languages, one of which is very different from the other two. Using one keyboard is possible on a PC, but would make for a lousy experience on a smartphone where the ideal layout for high speed typing in that latter language has nothing to do with the typical keyboard layout. To transplant this language's layout on to a shrunken down imitation of a full keyboard would be a productivity loss. This is a scenario where a physical keyboard on the phone would be a hinderance, not a help. And that's not even considering many languages that are similar, use the same alphabet, or whatnot. They might be able to get away with the same physical layout, but now the manufacturers have to decide whether to print the legends on or near the keys with the standard US layout, UK layout, French AZERTY layout, and other layouts specific to each region, sometimes at great expense for relatively small markets. That is if they can fit all the legends in. Some languages will still need a visible set of Roman characters, so not only will the local language's characters be printed on or near the letters, but so will the standard QWERTY layout, taking up valuable physical space, possibly necessitating a smaller phone. I'm not mentioning what specific language I used that's quicker to type on a keyboard layout other than the standard PC one because it doesn't matter: it is within our capabilities to not have to manufacture a hundred different configurations of physical keyboard for smartphones and tablets for years, long before the arrival of the iPhone and iPad. Nobody needs to know what language it is because it doesn't matter: those who don't even vaguely consider the needs of international audiences as being first class, on the same level as the needs of US English users, don't have even the beginning of an understanding of designing products for international audiences. The whole /world/ uses smartphones with touch screens. Not just business users, not just executives on meandering lunch breaks with their Blackberries; every day actual people who don't want to be bothered with which SKU to get in order to fully support their language, who don't touch type on regular keyboards let alone tiny ones, children, grandparents, and everything in between.

thirdsun 8y ago

Car interiors are a wildly different use case. The safety concerns of operating a flat surface while driving and having to keep one's eyes on the road probably outweigh the benefits of a flexible UI design. In practice, however, the best approach seems to be a hybrid one: Keep basic, important functions physical, tactile, easily and blindly accessable while serving the details on a blank canvas. For phones and tablets I prefer the giant screen approach.