Force Touch... Apple has gone 180 and is now making things worse!
I liked my first gen iPad. It was as simple as advertised. Given hardware limitations at the time it did all of the things I expected it to. It had all of the physical buttons it needed. I didn't lament the lack of a hardware camera button... because there was no camera, and I wouldn't regularly use something so large as a camera anyway.
Like many of Apple's standalone products this took an existing concept, made it nicer looking and also made it simpler.
MacOS by contrast is bloody nonsensical and the same sort of nonsense is now being applied to touch devices with Force Touch.
And don't defend MacOS. I was helping a family member who owned a Mac get things setup and had to search how to do certain things because they required you to hold the Command button. There were ZERO UI cues that the command button should do anything. In fact, on one screen, the text of a button changed. A change you wouldn't even notice if you weren't staring at it. And the changed text didn't even actually tell you what difference clicking that button would make. In fact, I had to click the command button several times before I even realized that the button text changed.
There is no comparison between that and the first gen iPad, or iPhones of the same era.
Force Touch is pressure sensitive Command button for touch surfaces. Much like the command button, its effect is context sensitive and there are typically no UI cues to help identify when you can use it or what it will do. Furthermore, if you can force touch something, there is no indication as to whether or not varying degrees of force will alter the behavior.
I've seen methods in code with 300 lines of IF statements. This is the UX equivalent of that. You're trying to make one button or one surface do as many damn things as possible. And you're trying to do it without providing the user any information.
And, for full transparency, I've also long been against the long-press paradigm in Windows Phone for the exact same reason. Force Touch takes the problem with long-press and complicates them further.
As a side note: long press on Windows 10's Win32 apps is totally fine. The difference is, these are apps designed for use with mouse and keyboard and the UX paradigms on when to right-click and what to expect are well established. The long-press on both Windows Phone and Windows 10 is touch equivalent of a right-click. Windows Phone, and also UWP apps however are touch first apps, and while the long-press generally adheres to right-click paradigms consistently, users of touch first devices, using apps designed for touch don't think to attempt to right-click or long-press, often leaving critical functionality un-discoverable.
That also highlights another problem with Force Touch. There is simply no damn consistency AT ALL in what it does or how it functions. EVEN in 1st party experiences. People espousing their love of it rave about how they can use to preview a web link without opening it, or fast-forward and rewind with pressure sensitive speeds, or to open context menus or preview information. People who follow Apple will know the functionality is there. But hand that same product to someone who has never heard the words Force Touch before and see how many actually discover it exists. Probably about the same number of people who actually found the long-press functionality in Windows Phone un-assisted (my wife couldn't change her start screen layout for several days because of this BTW, and she is quite smart and tech savvy).
Basically, the point is, Apple started an amazing trend in the early 2000's with products like the iPod, and iPhone and eventually the iPad. These products made device interactions simpler. Force Touch and 3D Touch do the exact opposite.
I hate to say it again... but Steve Jobs would never have endorsed Force Touch or 3D Touch. I suspect that faced with a perceived need or demand for these features he would have instead reversed his position on eliminating buttons. Some times I feel like the current Apple is still battling the specter of Jobs and choosing to make bad decisions instead of overturning some of Jobs' edicts (while inexplicably ignoring others entirely; see rant on iPad size, phone size, stylus, etc...).
Like many of Apple's standalone products this took an existing concept, made it nicer looking and also made it simpler.
MacOS by contrast is bloody nonsensical and the same sort of nonsense is now being applied to touch devices with Force Touch.
And don't defend MacOS. I was helping a family member who owned a Mac get things setup and had to search how to do certain things because they required you to hold the Command button. There were ZERO UI cues that the command button should do anything. In fact, on one screen, the text of a button changed. A change you wouldn't even notice if you weren't staring at it. And the changed text didn't even actually tell you what difference clicking that button would make. In fact, I had to click the command button several times before I even realized that the button text changed.
There is no comparison between that and the first gen iPad, or iPhones of the same era.
Force Touch is pressure sensitive Command button for touch surfaces. Much like the command button, its effect is context sensitive and there are typically no UI cues to help identify when you can use it or what it will do. Furthermore, if you can force touch something, there is no indication as to whether or not varying degrees of force will alter the behavior.
I've seen methods in code with 300 lines of IF statements. This is the UX equivalent of that. You're trying to make one button or one surface do as many damn things as possible. And you're trying to do it without providing the user any information.
And, for full transparency, I've also long been against the long-press paradigm in Windows Phone for the exact same reason. Force Touch takes the problem with long-press and complicates them further.
As a side note: long press on Windows 10's Win32 apps is totally fine. The difference is, these are apps designed for use with mouse and keyboard and the UX paradigms on when to right-click and what to expect are well established. The long-press on both Windows Phone and Windows 10 is touch equivalent of a right-click. Windows Phone, and also UWP apps however are touch first apps, and while the long-press generally adheres to right-click paradigms consistently, users of touch first devices, using apps designed for touch don't think to attempt to right-click or long-press, often leaving critical functionality un-discoverable.
That also highlights another problem with Force Touch. There is simply no damn consistency AT ALL in what it does or how it functions. EVEN in 1st party experiences. People espousing their love of it rave about how they can use to preview a web link without opening it, or fast-forward and rewind with pressure sensitive speeds, or to open context menus or preview information. People who follow Apple will know the functionality is there. But hand that same product to someone who has never heard the words Force Touch before and see how many actually discover it exists. Probably about the same number of people who actually found the long-press functionality in Windows Phone un-assisted (my wife couldn't change her start screen layout for several days because of this BTW, and she is quite smart and tech savvy).
Basically, the point is, Apple started an amazing trend in the early 2000's with products like the iPod, and iPhone and eventually the iPad. These products made device interactions simpler. Force Touch and 3D Touch do the exact opposite.
I hate to say it again... but Steve Jobs would never have endorsed Force Touch or 3D Touch. I suspect that faced with a perceived need or demand for these features he would have instead reversed his position on eliminating buttons. Some times I feel like the current Apple is still battling the specter of Jobs and choosing to make bad decisions instead of overturning some of Jobs' edicts (while inexplicably ignoring others entirely; see rant on iPad size, phone size, stylus, etc...).
Comments
Post a Comment