Each app could register as a search provider - responding with content relevant to the app itself. The search system would aggregate the content from search providers. If there were multiples then it would even track the historic popularity of each provider in order to prioritise the results. (For example there are providers for your music, contacts, text messages, google search, mint etc)
There is a settings page where you can turn individual providers on and off. I added this functionality to the apps I developed. Here is the API/usage documentation: http://developer.android.com/guide/topics/search/index.html
Note how it starts out saying it is a core feature. So core that the search button no longer exists with software buttons, although to be fair search can be shown in the action bar. And I never met a single Android user who actually used the search functionality! Many people did have a dedicated search widget on their device, but that was a Google search, rather than the phone search. The current Android 4.2 homescreen search puts google search results at the top of the screen and device search below which is mostly covered by the keyboard and requires additional clicks to see it all anyway.
This is a long winded way of saying that it seems to me that search turned out to be a dud on the platform by the king of search. I just tried search on my iOS device and it turned out to be very laggy, poorly performing and useless (eg clicking on an email search result opened the email app but not the relevant message!) This leads me to believe search isn't used much on iOS either!
As you say, in-app search does seem to work well across all platforms and apps. It looks like a system based generic search just fails to work on current generations of hardware, operating systems and user interfaces.
So no, not a misconception. Many Android devices don't have it because of apple.
What is bad is the fact that Gmail doesn't support it. But it pulls up tweets, apps, chrome history, music, etc. Rather neat, in my opinion.
Btw.: On phones that have hardware buttons (but no dedicated search button, like the European version of SGS2) you can open search by long pressing the menu button on the home screen.
I am using Galaxy sII which still has a dedicated search button. just checked sIII and it is indeed gone! to me this is a major feature loss
I'll repeat that even though I think we all know this already: if you don't want to use Metro apps, you don't have to use Metro apps. It is really that simple.
So, if you're a power user and want to stay away from all of that nonsense, then click on the "Desktop" tile and you're done. Sure, you have to return to metro when you search or for a few other minor scenarios but overall it should not be a big deal.
And then for a lot of the other complaints (e.g. hidden interface, icons that you don't think you can click) it is just a matter of time before people learn it. Then it will become a non-issue.
If OP claims he is a fan of Win7, then he should also like Win8 as the desktop and core OS is very much improved.
That's not how usability works.
I'm no UEX expert but all of the above seem to be things that many people know how to do, yet would not seem immediately obvious at first.
I am quite confident that "swiping in from the right to reveal charms/commands/options" will join the ranks of the above. It'll just take a few months of mass use. It's a pretty convenient gesture IMO.
Then let me enlighten you. Your ctrl-alt-delete example is poor due to the fact and this is backed up by a Bill Gates interview that that command was meant for debugging and was not supposed to ship in the final product. People started using it and they had to leave it in.
Some music players do not use space for pause/resume.
As for clicking and zooming, these things are so intuitive that children can learn on their own how to do these simple tasks. OLPC and other organizations air drop laptops into Africa and people who have never a seen a computer get them and teach themselves how to use it and how to read.
The argument here was "well, if Apple can assume that users are going to learn a list of shortcuts, why can't Microsoft."
The answer is because the keyboard shortcuts on OS X are actually shortcuts, not required for using the operating system. The gestures Microsoft has incorporated in to Win8 are the only way of doing things, whereas I can do things a few different ways on OS X.
Let's stick with closing an app. Apparently the gesture is swiping from top to bottom on Win8. On OS X, I can do that by clicking the red button (arguably the most intuitive method), by going to the File menu, or the keyboard shortcut, Command-W.
How about Command-Tab? There's only one way to access that functionality. How do you capture a screen in OS X without the secret "shortcut" keys or the command-line? How about ejecting a secondary optical drive? Zooming in and out?
There are a bunch of ways to eject a drive: 1. little eject button in Finder, 2. Right click on drive on desktop -> Eject, 3. Drag drive from desktop to Recycle Bin (this one is weird, but intuitive for long-time Mac users I guess). I admit I may be misinterpreting what you mean by "secondary" optical drive.
System-wide zoom is mega-situational. I'm sure it's useful for those with visual impairment, but I've never seen anyone use it nor have I had use for it myself. This is like complaining that high-contrast mode in Windows does not have an easy-to-access menu.
If I had two disk drives, I'm not sure which it would eject. I suspect that this is what WayneDB was referring to.
Capture a screen? Grab.app
Eject secondary drive? Drag it to the trash can.
You got me on the zoom in/out. I don't know that one. But I could make an argument that this one is not a shortcut, but the only command, as it falls under accessibility.
Whenever someone refers to something being "obvious" it can always boil down to a philosophical question of what obvious actually means. Nothing is truly obvious, and we've obviously conditioned from our surroundings. While we've obviously adopted conventions to interact with computers, they've offered affordances (or forced us) that hint at a function.
Gestures in general offer a challenge from a human factors perspective. Gestures can be very convenient and compelling sources of interaction that can enhance UX. Unfortunately, users are working in flatland, with very little affordances. The biggest problem here and with gestural interfaces in general is the lack of hints they give to an interaction. A physical button has a clear affordance (you can argue this is conditioned/learned) baked into the interface. There are also many issues related to the lack of universal gestures within and across applications and operating systems.
In a lot of cases, Gestures are like keyboard shortcuts. Many people discover them because they are told about them (ie. CTRL+C in the copy interface), but physically trying many different keyboard combinations just isn't something people do.
Apple has recognized the problem with gestures while pushing hard to make them standard. They still keep the home button on the iPad, even with system wide gestures that can accomplish the same thing. Overall, I agree with your sentiment that particular interactions join the ranks of some ubiquitious interactions you noted, but it will take more than a few months of use from one particular operating system and there are many challenges, no matter how convenient it is.
you are so right. I did this exactly once, when I discovered that <Win>+<some other key> did special things in Windows, so at some point I decided to just try them all. I learned the <Win>+<Tab>, doing the silly 3D task switcher, that way (I already knew the useful ones like <Win>+<E>, <D> and <R>).
There's considerable risk in this approach, you don't know what the commands are going to do. I just did it because I was 1) very curious and 2) didn't have important things open and 3) kind of assumed they would not put a "really mess up your computer" command behind a single shortcut key.
Now that I think of it, I learned the <Win>+<number> commands from a blog somewhere, so I didn't even discover that tremendously useful shortcut :)
And even if you do reduce that to a minimum (which is possible), it's still stupid - here you are working with 4 windows open on something, completely forgetting that you're on 8, you want to do some random simple operation and BAM - METRO IN YOUR FACE! :-)
This is said over and over again, and everyone has to keep reminding them that it's not about what is currently happening, but the fact that Microsoft is GOING IN THIS DIRECTION. The "Desktop" is slated for execution - just because they have it now doesn't mean it's going to exist forever. It's obvious that MS (and other companies) believe that this "power user" feature is unnecessary going forward.
I don't think Microsoft thinks that Metro apps or the metro environment do or ever will offer the same level of extremely high productivity that desktop apps and the desktop environment provide.
I think we will have a much better idea of Microsoft's POV on Metro if/when they release Office apps on it. Quite simply put, if Metro Office does not have 1:1 feature parity with the desktop apps then that backs my point. If I were to bet, I would say that Metro Office will be more aligned with the web apps. I would be quite surprised if they aligned more to the full desktop clients.
Why? Because the desktop is an environment suited for mouse and keyboard where you can have super high levels of productivity. Metro will not replace that as it excels in other use cases. Can you be productive with Metro? I'd argue you can. Just as productive as in the desktop? With some apps, perhaps. With others, absolutely not.
- Discoverability
- Easy payment processing/distribution
- Automatic updates
- Being able to easily re-download it later
- Consistent purchase, install, update experience
- Some confidence on the part of the end user that what they are downloading works on their system and isn't going to harm their computer
The simple listings for non-metro apps really only benefit from the first item, and they don't really change my argument.
It's very important for them to have the metro environment flourish and for that they're going to need lots of metro apps and blah blah blah. Metro IS important. It just isn't replacing the desktop any time soon.
I just think that app stores are going to be more and more important to the ecosystems they exist in. For the reasons I mentioned above, I think more and more software is going to be procured via app stores (although, in big businesses it will probably be fairly small), and that is going to influence what developers build.
I probably wouldn't have built and sold a Mac app if there weren't an app store, and as I look at porting it to Windows, trying to replicate the infrastructure that I get for free with an app store isn't very appealing for the amount of money I'd likely make, so my choices are: make a metro-style app so I can use the Windows app store or not make the app at all.
> Perhaps that is simply something we'll agree to disagree on?
Fair enough :)
I understand that time and budget constraints make it hard to offer both in either mode, but that's definitely an area to improve.
But the people in the usability study were no power users. They were the intended audience. Besides, I don't think the performance issues OP describes would be appreciated by non-power users either.
Of course this isn't strictly true as the article mentions how people got confused with "double desktops" but given the rest of the article, it just seemed like people were forced to use apps that they otherwise wouldn't have used and thus gave plenty of complaints.
For example, his section on multiple windows seemed bizarre to me. Yes it is true that Metro does not support multiple windows but to say that Windows no longer supports them is simply incorrect. If a user wants to "collect, compare and choose" among multiple web pages then they can easily do that as they always have through the desktop. I think the important question here is "were they unable to find the desktop" or "were they told to only use Metro browsers"?
I think we should have faith in users to choose the correct tools for the task. Forcing them to do something the arguably "incorrect" way simply to have them struggle seems to simply be a self fulfilling prophesy.
And hey - I think a study proving that Metro on the desktop is less than ideal is perfectly okay. In fact I'd say I probably agree most of the time. But to label this study as Windows 8 as a whole as opposed to simply metro on a desktop I think is a little unfair.
Many of the arguments I find come from people forcing new users to only use the Metro style UI, which would obviously be confusing (much as my mother would have problems switch from a PC to a Mac).
I'm sure people will praise windows 9 for being so much better than windows 8, even though windows 8 took all the risk and windows 9 simply applied some polish.
Whether you like it or not, you will likely be using Metro apps on a regular basis in a year or two.
>>already: if you don't want to use Metro apps, you don't
>>have to use Metro apps. It is really that simple.
>>...then click on the "Desktop" tile...
I'm sorry, clearly you don't see it this way but the irony of the above is just... Well... My ghast is flabbered.
Is it really that hard for a company like Microsoft to find 100 software companies / developers and entice them to port 100 quality apps on their App Store, such that those apps are available when Win8 launches? Answering no to this question ignores the reality. Microsoft can do this and the fact that they didn't shows that they are losing their core competency.
And let's be honest here - Microsoft is late from all perspectives. Microsoft is late in the mobile game, being a distant fourth, behind Android, iOS and even Symbian. Microsoft is also late in delivering an App Store for the desktop. Their only "innovation" is this hybrid Windows that can run on both tablets and the desktop, except for their sad reality that consumers expectations have already been set by iOS and Android to the point that consumers don't expect their mobile devices to run the same desktop apps they've been using ... and if those apps won't be optimized for Windows 8, then it's going to be a shitty experience anyway, hence why your apologetic argument is not acceptable for Microsoft.
On a desktop drag from top to bottom or bring up the appbar on the left and right click on the app that you want to close.
EDIT: This describes a metro app's life cycle: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/hh46492...
The basic idea is that if you aren't using an app it receives a "suspend" event allowing it to save its state so that it can resume where it was. If the system is low on resources it will start terminating suspended apps that you have not used -- though as far as I gather they should still have the ability to re-launch and read in whatever they saved at the time they were suspended.
So the general idea is that closing apps isn't something you should be concerned about as a user.
To reiterate though: the only thing the user would have to learn is to forget about having to close apps themselves because it will be done for them as needed. This would not prevent you from working on something over a period of multiple days, on and off, so long as the developer implemented their app correctly. The app simply gets a clear request to save it's data to disk so that when it gets resumed or re-launched it can load it back and pretend it was running the whole time. This whole thing is pretty much transparent to the user with the exception that you might see the "splash" screen when going back to an app you haven't used in a while. I have not used metro extensively, but I have not experienced any problems with this approach when playing around with win8. If anything I actually kind of liked not having the care about having too many apps open and doing "cleaning" sessions like I do with regular running applications I stopped using.
Anyway, said behavior only applies to metro apps, desktop apps still operate as you'd expect.
The BIG difference is the lack of visual indication. You get a red X over the icons in iOS, and holding down app icons is a means of interaction throughout the OS (and you're given an introduction to this on first login).
The way to close apps in Win8 is not visually indicated and relies on an action that the average user most likely won't discover on their own, or will only by sheer accident.
I cannot speak for Android, not being a regular user, but I have never, ever seen a first-party on iOS get its own UI stuck. It may crash rarely, but it will never get itself into a state where the user is powerless to do anything with it (short of killing it).
Most iOS users I've met aren't aware of the kill-app functionality, and they don't need to, because first-party apps don't have egregious enough bugs like "button to return to main menu reacts but does nothing".
- About every day (sometimes much more frequently) a tab will just die. You'll click a link or enter a url, and the indicator in the top left corner will start spinning, but nothing ever happens. The only way to fix it is to close the tab and open a new one.
- Less frequently - maybe every few weeks or less - large blocks of web pages will just not render, instead of text or graphics or whatever should be there, there are just giant square white chunks. The only way to fix this is completely reboot the iPad.
I've also had a number of weird problems with the iTunes app that have required finding a way to force the app to quit or reboot the device to fix.
I like my iPad, but Apple's stock apps have quite a bit of room for improvement.
Have they ever used the Facebook client before the ObjC rewrite? My girlfriend had to learn both force-killing and pull-to-refresh because of all the bugs (on an iPad if that makes a difference).
In windows XP, Vista and 7, if you click the magical red X on a misbehaving program, Windows will offer to kill if after something between 5-50 seconds. Non-tech-savvy users _do_ use that functionality.
This would've been very useful as part of the animated tutorial on your first boot that you can't skip (and that I've seen 3 times this week thanks to setting up new machines).
The idea was supposed to be that you wouldn't have to do this yourself as the OS would terminate metro app processes itself if you did not use them for some period of time.
EDIT: Apparently this is the long/manual way of doing it.
But if you have a keyboard, you can do ᴀʟᴛ + F4, or kill it in the task manager…
When WinPhone first came out with the Metro UI I was a fan - there's a visual simplicity to it that's very appealing. After you use it for a while though the weaknesses become pretty glaring and hard to accept. It is often very hard to tell what UI elements are interactive and what are purely informational because they are so plain. There's no way to visually discern a non-interactive icon vs. an icon that is also a button.
The lack of shading and UI chrome also means that UIs frequently become jumbled. Sections of UI blur together where on any other platform they would've been separated by a visual line, shading, or something else.
The simplicity in this case has gone too far.
It's also very true that many of the first-party apps have ludicrously low information density, almost as if they expect these devices to be toys. This is in stark contrast to MS's stated goal of shipping something that is more serious, more productive than iPads and Android tablets, which up until now have been seen as leisure devices.
People often accuse Apple of taking style over substance, but Win8 IMO is a far, far more egregious violator.
There's another big issue: the first party apps suffer from some pretty serious performance problems. It doesn't bode well for your platform when your own internal teams can't ship best of breed apps. The People app, for example, takes literally 6 seconds to load your recent notifications on a Surface RT - all the while without displaying any loading indicator. You literally tap the button, wait, figure it's broken, and just as you're about to move on it pops into existence - and of course the performance is so poor that it just magically appears on screen without transition.
The entire OS is littered with sloppiness of this variety - as well as apps where touchability has clearly never been comprehensively addressed. You will move from places with gloriously comfortable touch targets (like the home screen) to apps that have 9pt text links you're expected to hit.
The "search" charm is also poorly thought out. Just take a look at Amazon, eBay, iTunes, and what have yous that have substantial search functionality - Windows expects everyone to cram their search needs into a single freeform text input. In fact, the eBay app on Win8 builds its own search page. Surprise, search is complex, context dependent, and not all apps can pigeon-hole it into your paradigm. Oops.
[edit] Extra rant: I was able to get the Windows Store app completely stuck today on the Surface. I visited an app's detail page, and tapped the Back button to get back to the search results. Nope. Back button would visually indicate interaction but do nothing. Waited, nope. Sloppy bug.
So here's where it gets good. On any other platform (and in old Windows land) I could just go kill it. Except I have no idea how to go about quitting an app on Windows 8. Apple at least has the courtesy of allowing you to kill an app very quickly - if someone knows how to do it in Win8 I'd love to know, because clearly their own first-party apps are not good enough to be trusted to take care of themselves.