3 ms·

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

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.