Minimalism, skeuomorphism, and wrong assumptions

Tech Life

A few days ago, a stunning new application for the iPad was introduced: Paper, by FiftyThree, Inc. While reading a few reactions on the Web and Twitter, I noticed how some people were praising the beautiful, well-designed UI of this drawing app especially for one important reason: it gets out of your way. It basically disappears so that you actually use the iPad as a sketchbook (more comfortably if you also use a stylus, but you can also use your fingers of course).

I really like this design approach, as I generally like interfaces that stay out of your way. I wouldn’t still be a Newton user after all these years otherwise. However, it seems that the recent debate on interface design is getting a little bit too polarised for my tastes. Those defending abstract, minimal interfaces appear rather vocal about their distaste for more skeuomorphic choices. As I said on Twitter, the argument that a design is bad because it’s skeuomorphic follows the same logic as xenophobia or racism (that person is bad because he/she has coloured skin, or is of Arabic descent, etc.). Folks, the only reasonable polarisation in a debate on UI design is about good design and bad design. Minimalism, generous use of white space, and Helvetica, aren’t necessarily the recipe for an inherently good design. Likewise, simulation of real-life objects, textures and imperfections isn’t necessarily the recipe for an inherently bad design.

A solid criticism of the use of skeuomorphic designs is the objection that some elements of an interface may trick the user into believing they behave exactly like the real-life elements they’re mimicking, while in reality they behave otherwise or are simply decorative finishes with no function whatsoever. In my previous article, Skeuomorphism and the eye of the beholder, I wrote:

What irks a user is a design that sets some expectations and then doesn’t fulfil them. A calendar app that emulates a paper calendar, but with pages that don’t turn or can’t be ripped away. What’s the point of presenting a beautifully rendered replica of a paper calendar, if you have to touch a Delete button to remove a page? True paper calendars don’t have Delete buttons. This is a dangerous mix of analogue and digital, a misleading mismatch of expectations and ultimately a small usability nightmare.

But minimal, abstract UI that stay out of your way may very well suffer from similar problems, for they can equally puzzle and bewilder the user. Let’s get back to the opening example, Paper for iPad. This is the main interface when you’re drawing (image taken from the app website):

Paper for iPad UI

Lovely, isn’t it? No buttons, no mysterious icons, no redundant chrome. It’s pretty straightforward: you pick a drawing tool and a colour and off you go. Now, suppose you haven’t watched the introductory video and you haven’t read the additional information provided on the developer’s website: how do you know there’s a specific gesture for Undo? How do you know that to ‘close’ the virtual notebook you’re drawing on, you have to perform a ‘closing pinch’ on the page? Some things can be discovered intuitively, you drag the palette down with your finger, and it goes away, leaving you free to draw on the whole visible surface. But how do you make it reappear? At first I instinctively tapped-and-held, but nothing happened. Then of course I tentatively swiped my finger upwards from the bottom edge where the palette disappears, and here it was again — but you really have to initiate the swipe gesture from the very edge, otherwise you end up leaving unwanted strokes on the canvas.

Or take the acclaimed Clear for iPhone. Its interface design is a tribute to minimalism itself, and employs innovative gestures and techniques to function as a really ‘interfaceless’ application. But are those gestures all obvious and readily discoverable if you don’t see some kind of introductory video or read a review of the app? Most of them, but I admit I had to make a few attempts before being able to properly navigate upwards in the menu hierarchy without accidentally creating a new item, for example.

So, once again: not all skeuomorphic interfaces are bad per se; and not all clean, minimal, abstract and non-skeuomorphic interfaces are good per se. What a skeuomorphic UI design shouldn’t do is deceive the user. What a minimal UI design shouldn’t do is provide non-obvious methods of interaction.

Ritorna Macworld Italia

Mele e appunti

Macworld Italia Apr2012

È tutto vero: dopo una pausa di un anno e qualche mese, e un cambio di gestione, Macworld ritorna in edicola. Ora viene pubblicato da PlayMedia Company, la stessa azienda che pubblica, fra l’altro, iCreate, iPhone e iPad magazine.

Scrive l’amico Lucio Bragagnolo nel post Eccezionalmente, pubblicità:

Non la farò lunga: faticaccia a mille per portare nuovamente in edicola Macworld Italia. Però ne è valsa la pena comunque andrà.

Per il momento non c’è nemmeno il sito, abbiamo solo Facebook e Twitter. Sta nascendo tutto letteralmente momento per momento (arriverà anche il sito).

Per il momento mi accontento di… spietatezza. Voglio sapere tutto quello che si può fare meglio. E molto probabilmente farlo meglio davvero sarà un gran lavoro; però avere la lista della spesa è comunque un enorme aiuto.

Lucio è persona dotata di grande sintesi, per cui ho praticamente citato in toto il suo post. La mia breve riflessione può essere vista come una risposta al suo appello, anche se in realtà è di ordine più generale.

Uomini nell’ombra

Io vivo in Spagna, quindi non ho avuto modo di andare in edicola ad acquistare una copia cartacea della rivista. Ho dato però un’occhiata alla versione elettronica disponibile su Zinio (è a pagamento, ma è possibile sfogliare le miniature delle pagine e sono disponibili 3 ingrandimenti gratuiti). Potrei aver visto male, ma nel colophon viene elencata tutta una serie di persone (redazione, amministrazione, responsabili, eccetera) tranne i nominativi di chi ha collaborato fornendo contenuti originali o traducendo articoli apparsi in precedenza nelle edizioni statunitense e britannica di Macworld. Fra quelle persone c’è il sottoscritto.

Se ci rimango un po’ male di fronte a cose del genere (già successe in passato e non solo con riviste di informatica) non è per vanagloria. Più semplicemente, inserire i nominativi di chi ha dato un contributo alla creazione di qualcosa mi sembra puro e semplice riconoscimento del lavoro altrui. Mi sembra una forma di rispetto.

Non so che immagine si facciano i lettori di una rivista di informatica dell’organizzazione del lavoro dietro le quinte. La realtà che conosco personalmente è fatta di un numero relativamente ristretto di persone, che lavorano all’organizzazione, realizzazione e adattamento di materiali per la rivista. Anche i tempi sono ristretti, e di conseguenza i ritmi sono a volte forsennati e gli orari decisamente non da ufficio.

Non voglio togliere alcun merito alle persone i cui nomi, invece, compaiono. Ci mancherebbe altro! Però aver messo mano a una ventina di pagine e non vedere nemmeno il proprio nome menzionato fra i collaboratori indispettisce. E non sto parlando solo di me, ma anche di altri “uomini nell’ombra” che hanno fatto la loro parte. Né si tratta soltanto di Macworld, ripeto. Sono cose che ho visto accadere nel mondo dell’editoria informatica italiana da quando ne sono entrato in contatto più di dodici anni fa.

Traduci un manuale di centinaia di pagine, e nella versione italiana compare (giustamente) il nome dell’autore dell’opera originale, mentre spesso il nome del traduttore non viene riportato, a favore di un più generico Traduzione a cura della casa editrice Pinco Pallino. Traduci gran parte dei contenuti di una pubblicazione, e poi trovi gli articoli tradotti sotto la firma generica della ‘Redazione’ (o senza firma alcuna). E tu, operaio anonimo, prendi questi quattro soldi e siamo a posto così.

Prima dicevo che l’origine di questa mia amarezza non è legata a ragioni di vanità personale. C’è però da fare un discorso di visibilità e, in fondo, di autorità. Alcuni anni fa mi sono ritrovato in una situazione un po’ imbarazzante: facendo una chiacchierata di lavoro in vista di una possibile collaborazione, mi sono sentito dire: Lei dice di aver tradotto tutti questi manuali e pubblicazioni, ma io il suo nome non credo di averlo visto da nessuna parte. È pur vero che davanti a una persona che pone questa obiezione si può reagire fornendole i nominativi di chi possa avvalorare le proprie referenze, ma al momento si ha la sensazione di essere trattati come dei truffatori, come quelli che ‘abbelliscono’ il curriculum per fare bella figura. E io, utente Macintosh dal 1989, scrittore tecnico dal 1998, collaboratore di Macworld Italia dal 2002, in quella occasione mi sono sentito trattato come uno sconosciuto, un pivello che probabilmente aveva farcito le sue credenziali. Tutto questo perché la mia autorità in materia non è direttamente verificabile e/o quantificabile. Tutto questo per essere un “uomo nell’ombra”.

Chiudo questa mia riflessione ribadendo ancora una volta che non si tratta di una polemica diretta a Macworld, che è appena ri-nata e — come dice bene Lucio — è ancora tutto un lavoro in corso. Anzi, ringrazio Lucio per avermi offerto la possibilità di collaborare. La mia intenzione è solo quella di sensibilizzare i lettori di riviste e manuali informatici, di far presente che spesso potrebbero trovarsi davanti il lavoro di persone che, appunto, rimangono nell’ombra per motivi indipendenti dalla loro volontà.

(Aggiornamento, 5 aprile: La situazione, nel frattempo, si è chiarita. Vi invito a leggere l’articolo Macworld Italia: chiarimenti per ulteriori informazioni in proposito. Grazie.)

These are surely long exposures

Handpicked

Museum of Modern Art 2001-2004

Quoting the Wikipedia as a quick reference, long-exposure photography or time-exposure photography involves using a long-duration shutter speed to sharply capture the stationary elements of images while blurring, smearing, or obscuring the moving elements. When a scene includes both stationary and moving subjects (for example, a fixed street and moving cars or a camera within a car showing a fixed dashboard and moving scenery), a slow shutter speed can cause interesting effects, such as light trails. Long exposures are easiest to accomplish in low-light conditions, but can be done in brighter light using neutral density filters or specially designed cameras.

Leaving your camera in a stationary position (on a tripod, for instance) with the shutter open for a relatively long interval can produce some very nice and unexpected effects. I’ve tried it myself sometimes, for periods as long as 30 minutes, to make some experiments while shooting at night. 

But how about leaving the shutter open for years? That’s what Michael Wesely has been doing for a while. This post on Petapixel.com, Photographs Captured Over Years with an Open Camera Shutter shows some examples. 

Michael Zhang writes:

In the mid-1990s, [Wesely] began using the technique to document urban development over time, capturing years of building projects in single frames. In 1997, he focused his cameras on the rebuilding of Potsdamer Platz in Berlin, and in 2001 he began photographing the Museum of Modern Art’s ambitious renovation project. He uses filters and extremely small apertures to reduce the amount of light striking the film, creating unique images that capture both space and time.

The results are breathtaking. The caption of the image I’ve chosen to repost here says: 9.8.2001 — 7.6.2004 — The Museum of Modern Art, New York. You can find more in his book, Open Shutter, available on Amazon. (I’m sure it was also available on the MoMA Store, but I can’t find it at the moment.)

A list of what’s still broken in iOS

Handpicked

I generally avoid reading blog posts in which the author outlines a feature wishlist or a list such as “this is what’s wrong and I want fixed”. That’s because more often than not wishlists turn out to be unreasonable demands to meet absolutely personal needs (there are people who want the Siri interface to use a serif font, I kid you not), and on a similar note, lists of what’s wrong typically express very personal points of dissatisfaction.

I made an exception for Chartier because I’ve been reading him for a long time and I know he knows better than doing such a thing. And his piece — I hope Apple gets back to basics in iOS 6 — doesn’t disappoint. 

I share David’s frustration especially when he writes:

The Camera Roll is a mess and Photo Stream is its drunk, belligerent cousin that just came out of the woodwork. Yes, even after 5.1. We need a way to take iOS screenshots that don’t pollute our Apple TV screensavers. We need to be able to actually move photos to albums so they disappear from the Camera Roll. 

(After five major iOS releases, I’m still baffled at the fundamental rudimentariness of the Photos app and the Camera Roll in particular).

And:

We need control over default apps

Safari, Mail, Calendars, Contacts, and Twitter are great, but so are plenty of other apps. It was time for Apple to let us pick our own default apps when it launched the App Store in 2008, and it’s still time in 2012.

[…]

Easier toggles

Sometimes you just gotta turn stuff like WiFi, Bluetooth, Personal Hotspot, and your VPN off. Or on. And it’s always been a pain in the ass in iOS. Maybe they can become buttons at the top or bottom of Notification Center, maybe they can show up as homescreen widgets. They just need to show up. 

Here, Apple could get some inspiration from webOS, as Lukas Mathis rightly suggested.

But this is where I agree with David the most:

AirDrop for iOS

There’s no easy way to send a document or photo from one iOS (or, really, any) device to another without signing up with some service, some ToS, some middle man that uses the internet (and no, Bluetooth file transfer doesn’t quite cut it). Apple applied an arguably post-PC solution to this problem in OS X by introducing AirDrop with Lion. AirDrop sure would make a good bullet item for iOS 6, and perhaps a great addition next to the “Open In” action arrow option. 

This is probably the most vocal complaint I’ve heard from friends who switched to the iPhone from a previous non-smartphone: “I want to just find your phone via Bluetooth or on the same Network and send you this photo or ringtone. I was able to do that with my old [Nokia / SonyEricsson / Siemens etc.] with other similar phones, but with the iPhone or iPod touch the process is so absurdly counter-intuitive and cumbersome. Why can’t I just use Bluetooth?” (Okay, I constructed their complaint in a more polite language, but that’s the gist of it).

A possible ‘AirDrop for iOS’ feature would be just a great idea and I really wish Apple makes it happen. (If it does, I bet it’ll keep the name for consistency’s sake). 

David, too, complains about Home screen management which, apart from the introduction of Folders with iOS 4, has essentially been the same since day one:

I have 172 apps on my iPhone, and while I’m sure that’s on the high end, I’m also sure I’m not the only one who feels that iOS’s options for managing all this could use… something. Whether it’s a new perk or two or a complete rewrite from byte one, I just hope Apple’s engineers are way ahead of me here. 

As I’ve said in Rebuilding the toy box:

My hunch is that the Home screen is still the way it is because it has come to a point where there’s little room left to innovate inside the current model. What’s faster than seeing an app icon and tap on it to launch it? We are back to my previous question: if the model has to change, what is a better (simpler, more usable, friendlier) model? When you think about possible alternatives, remember that there is a delicate balance at stake here, the balance Apple has been so good at maintaining so far: increasing functionality without complicating the user interface and user interaction. Remember that iOS’s interface is what has won lots of non-tech people and has shown them that computer and devices can be friendly, useful and fun to use. Any future innovative move has to take into account all these factors.

So I don’t really know what Apple can do to make things easier for those with hundreds of apps on their iOS devices. Apps are apps, the size of their icons is perfect for most fingers, the size of the iPhone screen doesn’t allow for more apps inside a page, the multitasking tray is already a viable shortcut for recently used apps, as is using the Spotlight screen. Short of using voice commands to launch apps, I don’t know if there’s a quicker way left to access iOS apps. Let’s see what kind of rabbit Apple will pull out of the top hat. Again, I’m fine with the current way of managing/accessing apps (I have ‘only’ 108 installed on my iPhone 4), so I’m not holding my breath for a change here. But David Chartier’s list of what’s still in need of a fix in iOS is definitely spot-on.

Mad Men Season 5 Premiere Recap

Handpicked

Source: “Mad Men” Recap: 501, “A Little Kiss”

Yes, yes, “Zou Bisou Bisou,” but we’ll get to that later. Of course, we will. 

If you love Mad Men, George Lang’s recaps are simply unmissable. His ability of mixing personal remarks, analysis and an episode’s synopsis makes for a powerful, witty, sometimes outright hilarious potion. I discovered his recaps while watching Season 3, and promptly added them to my list of regular reads.