I haven't seen a Nokia phone that has the kind of intuitive, well-organized, attractive, and responsive UI that we see with the iPhone and Android phones. I have some friends who have expensive Nokia phones and like to brag about their capabilities, but when you actually see these phones in use, they just aren't as enjoyable to use due to the OS which seems unrefined (I'd go so far as to say it seems unfinished).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJpEuMidcSU is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. If you were to make a list with checkboxes, it would seem that the N97 is as good as an iPhone. But if you actually use it...
I don't think it's a U.S. vs Europe thing; it's just that Nokia had a headstart in Europe. I would bet that they're losing market share here in Europe as well. At least in France, it seems that everyone has an iPhone these days.
That having been said, I do think Nokia makes excellent hardware, particularly the actual phone functionality (voice quality, not dropping calls, etc). If they could just bring their OS up to par, they would see some attention and success in the US.
I have to echo this. In fact, I had the chance to use a N900 just a couple of days ago. I'm not going to lie, it's a gigantic piece of junk, let me enumerate the ways:
- Resistive touchscreen in this day and age? The light touches that I can use on every Android phone and iPhone turn into concerted screen-mashing on the Nokia. The drags and flicks that have become popular (and important) gestures are hard to do on the N900, if not impossible, because the hardware itself simply isn't up to the task.
- The UI was painfully, ridiculously slow. IMHO Android's UI on most current phones is already sluggish, but usable. Nokia's is just way into unusable-land. Button-press lag of over a second (sometimes several seconds) was common, and would elicit double-pressing by the user (which the OS will then happily process). Navigation of menus and other UI elements was just about completely impossible because of the slowness. How enjoyable would your computer be if every mouse click took a whole second to register, and you had no hint that the phone is actually working in the background? Couple this with an insensitive screen that would routinely miss presses in-hardware, and you can see where this is going.
- An insistence on animation on a platform that is clearly too slow for it. Apple's UI is a joy to use because of the transitions and animations that accompany many user actions. Android does this too, but the slight sluggishness makes this appear somewhat unrefined - but that's okay. The framerate I got on the Nokia apps was so slow that it became confusing if the machine is in the middle of a transition or just plain done.
The UI was also somewhat confusing - but I'm willing to let that one slide. Every platform has certain metaphors and paradigms that the user must learn, so having not used one on a day to day basis I can't really comment on whether or not the UI in fact sucks.
Have to say I own an N900 in the US and I love it. I prefer the resistive screen because it works better. I can use the web and click on very small links and buttons without having to zoom in and out all the time. It can run Firefox too, but the browser it comes with is so far superior I don't even need it. How do you use a capacitive screen for browsing? You have to zoom in and out all the time. It's a pain. The resistive screen is much better for browsing, and you can fit more detail on screens of all kinds of apps. No constant zooming needed, (although the N900's zoom works just fine.) I'd just rather not have to zoom all the time.
The problem is that no US carrier subsidizes the N900, probably because it has Skype built-in and the US carriers don't like that. Oh well. I only hope one day that Nokia can break into the smartphone market here, even if it means dropping Skype. (Which would suck, but that's better than no Nokia smartphones at all, which is the current situation.)
Well I'm typing this on a N900 and it's rather enjoyable. Not sure what might have been wrong with the model you tried, but the responsiveness on this one is easily on par with the iPhone or other Android phones. Better I might even say, especially while multitasking.
Regarding the resistive touchscreen, it only took me a couple of minutes to get used to and while I do miss multitouch, the accuracy is great. I am with you on the UI being a bit confusing though.
Having used Maemo/N900 for several months, I've never experienced a problem with click lag. It's easily as responsive if not more than iPhones and Android-based phones I've used.
It's difficult to assert that an interface in its entirety is unrefined or unfinished having only used it for a few minutes. I very rarely found myself confused or frustrated by the interface after using it for a day. Every devices has its flaws, every user his/her preferences and expectations. I bought it because I wanted a fully open Linux OS running in my pocket. Not to be snarky (ok, maybe a little), but if I wanted a Fisher Price toy, I'd buy an Apple product. The two devices decisively appeal to different crowds.
Comments
I haven't seen a Nokia phone that has the kind of intuitive, well-organized, attractive, and responsive UI that we see with the iPhone and Android phones. I have some friends who have expensive Nokia phones and like to brag about their capabilities, but when you actually see these phones in use, they just aren't as enjoyable to use due to the OS which seems unrefined (I'd go so far as to say it seems unfinished).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJpEuMidcSU is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. If you were to make a list with checkboxes, it would seem that the N97 is as good as an iPhone. But if you actually use it...
I don't think it's a U.S. vs Europe thing; it's just that Nokia had a headstart in Europe. I would bet that they're losing market share here in Europe as well. At least in France, it seems that everyone has an iPhone these days.
That having been said, I do think Nokia makes excellent hardware, particularly the actual phone functionality (voice quality, not dropping calls, etc). If they could just bring their OS up to par, they would see some attention and success in the US.
I have to echo this. In fact, I had the chance to use a N900 just a couple of days ago. I'm not going to lie, it's a gigantic piece of junk, let me enumerate the ways:
- Resistive touchscreen in this day and age? The light touches that I can use on every Android phone and iPhone turn into concerted screen-mashing on the Nokia. The drags and flicks that have become popular (and important) gestures are hard to do on the N900, if not impossible, because the hardware itself simply isn't up to the task.
- The UI was painfully, ridiculously slow. IMHO Android's UI on most current phones is already sluggish, but usable. Nokia's is just way into unusable-land. Button-press lag of over a second (sometimes several seconds) was common, and would elicit double-pressing by the user (which the OS will then happily process). Navigation of menus and other UI elements was just about completely impossible because of the slowness. How enjoyable would your computer be if every mouse click took a whole second to register, and you had no hint that the phone is actually working in the background? Couple this with an insensitive screen that would routinely miss presses in-hardware, and you can see where this is going.
- An insistence on animation on a platform that is clearly too slow for it. Apple's UI is a joy to use because of the transitions and animations that accompany many user actions. Android does this too, but the slight sluggishness makes this appear somewhat unrefined - but that's okay. The framerate I got on the Nokia apps was so slow that it became confusing if the machine is in the middle of a transition or just plain done.
The UI was also somewhat confusing - but I'm willing to let that one slide. Every platform has certain metaphors and paradigms that the user must learn, so having not used one on a day to day basis I can't really comment on whether or not the UI in fact sucks.
Have to say I own an N900 in the US and I love it. I prefer the resistive screen because it works better. I can use the web and click on very small links and buttons without having to zoom in and out all the time. It can run Firefox too, but the browser it comes with is so far superior I don't even need it. How do you use a capacitive screen for browsing? You have to zoom in and out all the time. It's a pain. The resistive screen is much better for browsing, and you can fit more detail on screens of all kinds of apps. No constant zooming needed, (although the N900's zoom works just fine.) I'd just rather not have to zoom all the time.
The problem is that no US carrier subsidizes the N900, probably because it has Skype built-in and the US carriers don't like that. Oh well. I only hope one day that Nokia can break into the smartphone market here, even if it means dropping Skype. (Which would suck, but that's better than no Nokia smartphones at all, which is the current situation.)
Well I'm typing this on a N900 and it's rather enjoyable. Not sure what might have been wrong with the model you tried, but the responsiveness on this one is easily on par with the iPhone or other Android phones. Better I might even say, especially while multitasking.
Regarding the resistive touchscreen, it only took me a couple of minutes to get used to and while I do miss multitouch, the accuracy is great. I am with you on the UI being a bit confusing though.
Having used Maemo/N900 for several months, I've never experienced a problem with click lag. It's easily as responsive if not more than iPhones and Android-based phones I've used.
It's difficult to assert that an interface in its entirety is unrefined or unfinished having only used it for a few minutes. I very rarely found myself confused or frustrated by the interface after using it for a day. Every devices has its flaws, every user his/her preferences and expectations. I bought it because I wanted a fully open Linux OS running in my pocket. Not to be snarky (ok, maybe a little), but if I wanted a Fisher Price toy, I'd buy an Apple product. The two devices decisively appeal to different crowds.
Most people find that fisher price toy a more practical device than your fully functional linux device.
Most people think the cow goes "quack"
I'm fairly sure they don't. But more to the point, personal usefulness is subjective, your counterpoint is objective.