Slashdot Mirror


Steve Jobs Hates Buttons

ElvaWSJ writes "While many technology companies load their products up with buttons, Steve Jobs treats them as blemishes that add complexity and hinder their clean aesthetics. The iPhone is Steve Jobs's attempt to crack a juicy new market for Apple Inc. But it's also part of a decades-long campaign by Mr. Jobs against a much broader target: buttons. The new Apple cellphone famously does without the keypads that adorn its rivals. Instead, it offers a touch-sensing screen for making phone calls and tapping out emails. The resulting look is one of the sparest ever for Apple, a company known for minimalist gadgets. "

35 of 713 comments (clear)

  1. Obviously... by gregarican · · Score: 5, Funny

    They should have had the Thing using one of the prototype iPhones in the first Fantastic Four movie when he was trying to call his girlfriend..."Damn buttons!!!"

  2. Problem is.... by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Buttons are intuitive.

    I design high end interfaces for home theaters (where the remote it's self costs around $2500.00US or more.) and the number one thing my customers like is not the fancy graphics, cool animations or nicely laid out controls on the touchscreen.. but the VOLUME CONTROL HARD BUTTONS built into the side edge. They like being able to without looking press volume up or down or mute instead of having to look at the screen and press a non tactile feedback graphical button.

    Buttons have their use, you cant get rid of them.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Problem is.... by Aladrin · · Score: 4, Informative

      I agree. There's a saying for it already: 'There's a time and place for everything.' Buttons, like everything else, have proper uses and can be abused. It's up to the designer to design it properly.

      I just checked with my friend who has an iPhone, and it -does- have hard buttons for volume on the side. So as much as he hates them, he didn't go crazy.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    2. Re:Problem is.... by paeanblack · · Score: 5, Funny

      No interface control is intuitive by itself.

      The nipple. All other interfaces are learned.

    3. Re:Problem is.... by Cadallin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Personally, I prefer a knob that's connected directly to a Potentiometer for volume control, but that's just me.

    4. Re:Problem is.... by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No offense or anything, but every time I look at my home theater interface I want to go after it with a hammer. I work with complicated crap for a living, and I don't get a 1/10th of the performance I could get out of my system, because the interface is cluttered, busy, poorly labeled.

      Buttons that have one label are used in conjunction with different modes to change properties not reflected in the labeling of the button...Basically, you have to memorize the manual because the interface is the opposite of intuitive.

      It's that way with nearly all consumer electronics. There will be ten buttons but there will be a need for 30 buttons, to follow that button-centric design philosophy, but you can't put 30 buttons on it so the 10 buttons have to have 30 buttons worth of functionality, which means some buttons toggle the functionality of other buttons.

      So, in a nutshell, though I am not completely fond of Apple's obsession with minimalist controls, they do an infinitely better job on their crappiest product than any piece of home A/V equipment I've ever seen. One look at a universal remote will tell you that.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    5. Re:Problem is.... by CaptDeuce · · Score: 5, Informative

      Buttons are intuitive

      The iPhone, just like the Mac, has plenty of buttons.

      There are just not many hardware buttons. Really. Bear with me...

      Compare the number of buttons in MS-DOS (or other CLI) interfaces against those on the Mac. The "menus" of a CLI interfacer are like menus at Chinese restaurant. Except, of course, with a CLI you can't point and say "I want this."

      But wait! There's more! A standard Microsoft alert dialog box -- Windows and Mac OS -- typically has a longwinded description of the problem and the same two buttons to respond with: No and Yes. I have an example right here from MS Word for Mac OS X:

      Continue with Save?

      This document may contain formating or password
      protection which will be lost when save in Text Only
      format. To preserve the original document, click No, and
      then save the document in Word format before converting.

      No Yes

      The line "Continue with Save" in itself is rather vague; the user must plow through a lengthly bit of prose (for a GUI) to ascertain just what is going to happen. I'm convinced that Microsoft if using FUD to bully the user to always save their documents in Word format. Changing from any other format to Word format never generates a scary warning.

      Contrast Microsoft buttons to Mac buttons using TextEdit. Changing an RTF document to text the dialog reads:

      Convert this document to plain text?

      If you convert this document, you will lose all text
      styles (such as fonts and colors) and document
      properties.

      Cancel OK

      The differences are striking:

      • The buttons Cancel and OK are used throughout the Mac interface and the meaning is always clear: OK means go and Cancel means stop.

        The meaning of Yes and No are only clear within context. In many, if not most, Microsoft applications, if you choose No, it may not stop, it may go on and do something different. I find most everybody tends to stop and read that lengthly prose to make sure what is going to happen if it's something they haven't done in a while; there's just too much information to gather in at a glance.
      • "Continue with save?" What's that going to do exactly? (This is one of the clearer Microsoft title question so it's not the best example).

        "Convert this document to plain text?" Ah, it's going to... well, the answer is in the question.

      Buttons? It's not how many that's important, it's how soft and clear they are.

      --
      "Where's my other sock?" - A. Einstein
    6. Re:Problem is.... by HarvardAce · · Score: 4, Funny

      Personally, I prefer a knob that's connected directly to a Potentiometer for volume control, but that's just me. Only if it goes to 11.
      --
      Note to self: Stop putting jokes in my insightful comments so I can get something other than +1 Funny!
    7. Re:Problem is.... by TheGreek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You aren't seriously putting remote controls up as an example of why buttons are good are you?

      Why not? The TiVo remote comes to mind as one of my favorites. It's instantly intuitive. I wouldn't see it working nearly as well as a touchscreen without tactile feedback....
      Why not? I'll tell you why not.

      The TiVo remote control is just that. A device that remotely controls another device. You're paying attention to your TV. You shouldn't need to take your eyes off it to change the volume.

      The iPhone isn't a remote control. It's the device you're using, so there's the presumption that you'll be looking at it with some sort of regularity while you use it.
  3. Blemishes by sjonke · · Score: 5, Funny

    Similarly, CmdrTaco considers editors to be blemishes that add complexity and hinder the clean aesthetics of Slashdot. He considers them to be blemishes that add complexity and hinder the clean aesthetics of Slashdot.

    --
    --- What?
  4. Alternate Keypad by Drew+McKinney · · Score: 5, Funny
    Funny Jobs hates buttons. Because you know what I hate? Alternate Keypads.

    From the Best Site in the Universe:
    On an iPhone, you have to press an additional button that opens up an alternate keypad that will allow you to type numbers and punctuation. So typing something as simple as elipses (...) requires you to tap your finger 9 times. Enjoy your phone, losers! People like me who have shit to do will stick to a keyboard that doesn't have its lips wrapped firmly to the user-interface equivalent of a throbbing dong
  5. Maddox's Take on the iPhone and... BUTTONS by madsheep · · Score: 4, Funny

    Note: This is *NOT* child or work-safe material, but is funny as hell whether you like the iPhone or not. If you haven't seen it and have a sense of humor..read on:

    http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=ip hone

  6. Fastest dupe ever by jsse · · Score: 5, Funny

    "While many technology companies load their products up with buttons, Steve Jobs treats them as blemishes that add complexity and hinder their clean aesthetics.....While many technology companies load their products up with buttons, Steve Jobs treats them as blemishes that add complexity and hinder their clean aesthetics. "

    CmdrTaco managed to break the record of fastest dupe by duping first sentence in the same headline.

  7. Buttons as Features by martyb · · Score: 4, Informative
    FTFS:

    While many technology companies load their products up with buttons, Steve Jobs treats them as blemishes [CC] that add complexity and hinder their clean aesthetics.

    I see his point, but OTOH, there are times when buttons ARE preferable. I can text a message on my cellphone without looking at the phone because there is a tactile reference to where each key is located. This is quite handy (pun intended!) Try texting a message inconspicuously at your next boring meeting.

    1. Re:Buttons as Features by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Funny

      I can text a message on my cellphone without looking at the phone because there is a tactile reference to where each key is located.

      So you're the guy who sent me the message "AKI( Ekdlu WO.T 67Grtgixool;"?

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  8. Of Course He Does by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Funny

    Freak button accident when he was seven.

    It's no coincidence that he always wears a mock turtleneck sweater with no buttons to kill him on the front and a pair of zippered jeans.

    You think Ballmer's a nut, you should see Jobs talk to his employees: "For every button I find on this interface, I shall kill you ..."

    --
    My work here is dung.
  9. chicken or egg? by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 5, Funny

    *looks into the future*

    How do you turn off the monitor?

    It's easy, you just use the touch screen button there.

    Oh, then how do you turn it back on? ...

    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
    1. Re:chicken or egg? by Himring · · Score: 4, Funny

      clap

      --
      "All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
  10. Re:Mrs. Jobs is a lucky woman by saider · · Score: 4, Funny

    He's still going to insist that the interface responds the way he wants it to when he touches it.

    --


    Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
  11. Tactile Feedback by iBod · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How can sight-impaired users make use of a buttonless phone?

    In the EU there is already legislation to make software, websites and devices accessible. The buttonless iPhone must score pretty low on the accessibility scale.

    1. Re:Tactile Feedback by Tom · · Score: 5, Interesting

      How can sight-impaired users make use of a buttonless phone? They can't.

      Why should the other 99% of the population abstain from it?

      I'm all for developing devices that make life easier for disabled people.
      I'm very strongly against making life more difficult or limited for the rest of us in order to cater to them.
      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  12. Re:Buttons!? by briggsb · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's why the next-generation iPod will have no user interface controls.

  13. Doesn't hate buttons. Hates Genericy by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Steve Jobs doesn't hate buttons at all. The iPhone comes with more buttons than any other smart phone on the planet. What Jobs (and people at Apple in general) hate is "Genericy" (if that is even a word), as in buttons that aren't really tailored for any one use but serve multiple masters.

    The iPhone does in fact have five physical buttons - a sleep/wake button, a home button, a volume up/down button, and a silencer (OK, technically that's a switch).

    But then you are discounting the noise less real, even if lacking physical feedback, buttons that appear on the screen in each application, tailored to each task. If these are not real buttons, than neither are membrane style buttons as on the Timex-Sinclair ZX-81 of old.

    That tailoring is what Apple really likes, being able to arrange input aspects just so for each task. Perhaps the best example of this is the keyboard for the web browser on the iPhone; why have a space bar when entering URL's? This is replaced by "/" and ".com" keys which makes a tremendous amount of sense.

    Apple loves task focused UI, and a mostly virtual button approach allows them to get closer to that than would be otherwise possible on a smaller consumer device built to perform a number of very different tasks.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  14. Seemed fast for me--here's why by snowwrestler · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've tried out a couple friend's iPhones and was very impressed at how fast the typing was. I've been thinking about why, and here's what I came up with:

    - No pressing required - Because I didn't need to press the buttons down--just touch them--it felt easier and faster to type. It's more of a smooth easy motion from button to button.

    - Predictive targetting - In the middle of common words, I was able to trigger the correct next letter even if I didn't nail the button image exactly. I even experimented with it a bit, going successively faster and sloppier (aw yeah), and it was surprising how imprecise I could be and still get the word right or mostly right.

    - Easy correction - With the touch screen and "magnifying glass" cursor control, it was easy to go back and correct mistakes after typing. So I found that it was best to just plow through typing the entire thing, and then go back and make corrections if needed.

    It's definitely a different style. For me, typing on phones usually works best if I get it exactly right as I type. The iPhone is more like touch-typing on a regular keyboard--just blast through and correct after the fact if needed.

    And like touch-typing, there is definitely a muscle-memory aspect to the iPhone. The keys don't have a feel to them, but they are always in the same place. I was faster after about 15 minutes because my fingers were "calibrated" to where the keys are. Those with good hand-eye coordination (gamers for instance) will have an easier time with this IMO.

    --
    Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
    1. Re:Seemed fast for me--here's why by soft_guy · · Score: 4, Informative

      It doesn't fix bad spelling. It fixes imprecise typing. These are two VERY different things. For example, if I am typing the word "example" and I'm a bad speller and I think it is spelled "exampal" the iPhone doesn't fix this - I get "exampal". However, if I know how to spell it correctly and I press down in the exact same spot for the p and l, I get "p" and then "l". In fact, when I tried typing this word in a very sloppy way, it was hard to get the iPhone to not recognize it correctly. I even intentionally missed the x by typing c instead and by the end of the word it had auto-corrected it. So, no, the iPhone doesn't ruin (or fix) your spelling.

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
  15. Re:How is the buttonless iphone to use by smitty97 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I hit the wrong buttons all the time. The beauty is, the iPhone corrects me. As long as you type real words, not abbreviations like wtf, omg, brb, and c u l8r, the software will get my sentence right. Don't stop to correct your mistakes. Don't even look at the typed words, look at the keyboard. Just keep typing, and you can be very fast. Use the force.

    --
    mod me funny
  16. Re:Problem is button abuse, not buttons by mveloso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're missing the point. Buttons are intuitive, until you have 85 of them, all of which do something obscure.

    The problem with buttons is they take up space - physical space and cognitive space. Watch a 65 year old try and use a modern A/V system remote, and they're totally lost. It's like looking at the cockpit of a 707.

    It's a problem, because while 90% of the people only use 10% of the features, you have to be able to access the other 90% of the features. How many times do you change the surround sound mode of your home stereo? I did it once per input, then never did it again. So why do those buttons still take up space on my remote?

    The harmony remote is one attempt at reducing the complexity - you trade complexity up front (you need to program the remote with your devices) for simplicity later. The above mentioned 65 year old had no problem watching TV with the harmony remote - on a system an order of magnitude more complicated than his.

    The higher-end models have almost no buttons; they have screens that overload. In fact, you really only need four or five for a TV remote: volume up, volume down, channel up, channel down, power, change input. Sure, the number keys are nice, but they aren't necessary.

    However, a more sophisticated remote costs more money. Simplicity always costs more up front, but pays off every day because there's less aggravation. Buttons are cheap. Removing buttons is expensive.

  17. Re:Buttons!? by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 4, Informative

    By the time products like iPhone become ubiquitous for the general public it will probably be illegal to use a mobile phone while driving, nearly everywhere.

    As for your texting with the phone in your pocket.....I'm not one to question the habits of others but that is a new one on me.

    --
    "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
  18. Re:Buttons!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Currently with my treo i can type out a phone number by feel while driving
    Here's what I want in a phone: a system that gives an electric shock in any imbecile who tries to use it while driving.
  19. You'd think so... by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Informative

    You'd think so, but ask any woman who has breastfed a newborn baby, and she'll tell you that you have to teach them to get it right...It's just that it's a...hem..."one button" interface, so it's pretty easy to learn.

    Pretty much every interface is a learned interface, but the simpler the interface, the easier it is to learn.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  20. Re:Buttons!? by pla · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So those of us who are able to drive and talk safely should suffer with the rest of you?

    Yes.

    Most people can drive safely under normal conditions on the phone. Most people can drive safely under normal conditions with a BAC up to 0.15 or even 0.20. Most people can drive safely at 20-30mph over the posted speed limit.

    Driving laws exist for the "not most" situations, however. Some people can't safely drive a monotonously straight road on a clear day while sober and well-slept. Roads occasionally get icy (in the North). Kids (or deer) sometimes jump out in front of your car with no warning (hey, I'd call that "Evolution", but the pesky legal system tends to call it "involuntary manslaughter"). People age and their eyes and reflexes get worse.

    Put bluntly, we cripple the majority rather than take away the licenses of the 10% or so who should never get behind the wheel in the first place.

  21. Re:Buttons!? by Yahweh+Doesn't+Exist · · Score: 4, Informative

    >...those of us who are able to drive and talk safely...

    scientific studies have proven that talking on a phone while driving is dangerous even when completely hands free. even more so than a real life conversation because the lower quality signal requires more concentration to process.

    these are scientifically proven facts. I notice that you, on the other hand, only seem to offer the fact that you haven't killed anyone yet as evidence of your super-human brain functions.

  22. Re:Yea, We Need More Thinking Like This... by syphax · · Score: 4, Informative
    Check this out:

    These data demonstrate that the phone conversation itself resulted in significant slowing in the response to simulated traffic signals, as well as an increase in the likelihood of missing these signals. Moreover, the fact that hand-held and hands-free cell phones resulted in equivalent dual-task deficits indicates that the interference was not due to peripheral factors such as holding the phone while conversing. These findings also rule out interpretations that attribute the deficits associated with a cell phone conversation to simply attending to verbal material, because dual-task deficits were not observed in the book-on-tape control. Active engagement in the cell phone conversation appears to be necessary to produce the observed dual-task interference.

    The principal findings for this experiment are that: (a) SPs that engaged in cell phone conversations missed twice as many simulated traffic signals as when they were not talking on the cell phone, (b) SPs took longer to react to those signals that they did detect, and (c) these deficits were equivalent for both hand-held and hands-free cell phone users.

    In sum, we found that conversing on either a hand-held or hands-free cell phone led to significant decrements in simulated driving performance. We suggest that the cellular phone use disrupts performance by diverting attention to an engaging cognitive context other than the one immediately associated with driving.

    Our data suggest that legislative initiatives that restrict hand-held devices but permit hands-free devices are not likely to reduce interference from the phone conversation, because the interference is, in this case, due to central attentional processes.
    --
    Simple Unexpected Concrete Credible Emotional Stories
  23. Re:Buttons!? by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 5, Funny

    However, I want a few dedicated buttons for important functions like volume, power, and send/hang up. I take it you're not a big fan of dragging your call to the trash when you're done talking.
    --
    It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  24. Re:Buttons!? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Also, when you're using the stereo headset, you can click and double-click the microphone button to answer, hang up, pause and jump to the next track. I know I've had phone conversations where I've wanted the other end of the conversation to jump to the next track at the push of a button.
    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?