Apple lost something big when they lost Jef Raskin.
The genius behind his one-button mouse was not that it looked simple, but that it was simple. You could do one thing. Click. And it was easy to see that that was all you could do.
Looking at the Magic Mouse, it's entirely unclear what operations are afforded to the user. Can I click? double-click? scroll? swipe? Without prior knowledge of Apple products, one is forced to read an instruction manual to determine the sundry operations this device is capable of. (Has the design team misplaced their copy of Psychology of Everyday Things? This violates rule #1.)
Visibilty of affordances was the reason Apple pioneered the GUI to begin with. Hiding the affordances of what is arguably the main input device on a computer is more than a step backward.
I agree with you that good UI should have affordances that are easy to use. But, you are missing a bit point in why this mouse is good for UI; The single button is still there in primary action without any need for tutelage. The things that people may need help on is the advanced features that most people will not use. I agree with PoET in things that you don't use everyday should be easy to grok without a minimum of effort but I think that with something so essential to the modern computing experience that we are OK with making some features harder to understand to for the novice in making the device that more valuable to the advanced user. (But really, other than moving the cursor, the mouse only has 5 things it can do if you count the swipe gesture as two operations.)
Good point. I think you nailed my problem, that I am not an every-day user of OS X :) but I expect there to be affordances for "advanced" features. This is really no different from their current trackpad offerings -- when I use a friend's MacBook, I'm usually befuddled enough by the trackpad that I stick to basic point+click+keyboard.
There needs to be some balance between discoverability and usability. The most discoverable interface, after all, is a black screen that does nothing. It doesn't do anything, so it's easy to learn. It's also completely useless.
Remember mice before they had scroll wheels? Neither do I -- my brain has blocked out that painful memory. (It may have been "hard to learn to use", but once you learn a simple motion it makes every day significantly easier. Multi-touch may be similar, or it may not be... I can't say since I avoid the mouse now.)
Comments
Apple lost something big when they lost Jef Raskin.
The genius behind his one-button mouse was not that it looked simple, but that it was simple. You could do one thing. Click. And it was easy to see that that was all you could do.
Looking at the Magic Mouse, it's entirely unclear what operations are afforded to the user. Can I click? double-click? scroll? swipe? Without prior knowledge of Apple products, one is forced to read an instruction manual to determine the sundry operations this device is capable of. (Has the design team misplaced their copy of Psychology of Everyday Things? This violates rule #1.)
Visibilty of affordances was the reason Apple pioneered the GUI to begin with. Hiding the affordances of what is arguably the main input device on a computer is more than a step backward.
I agree with you that good UI should have affordances that are easy to use. But, you are missing a bit point in why this mouse is good for UI; The single button is still there in primary action without any need for tutelage. The things that people may need help on is the advanced features that most people will not use. I agree with PoET in things that you don't use everyday should be easy to grok without a minimum of effort but I think that with something so essential to the modern computing experience that we are OK with making some features harder to understand to for the novice in making the device that more valuable to the advanced user. (But really, other than moving the cursor, the mouse only has 5 things it can do if you count the swipe gesture as two operations.)
Good point. I think you nailed my problem, that I am not an every-day user of OS X :) but I expect there to be affordances for "advanced" features. This is really no different from their current trackpad offerings -- when I use a friend's MacBook, I'm usually befuddled enough by the trackpad that I stick to basic point+click+keyboard.
There needs to be some balance between discoverability and usability. The most discoverable interface, after all, is a black screen that does nothing. It doesn't do anything, so it's easy to learn. It's also completely useless.
Remember mice before they had scroll wheels? Neither do I -- my brain has blocked out that painful memory. (It may have been "hard to learn to use", but once you learn a simple motion it makes every day significantly easier. Multi-touch may be similar, or it may not be... I can't say since I avoid the mouse now.)