Judging a Book By Its Cover
September 8, 2008
The debate rages whether Apple’s iPhone is as revolutionary a device as Apple claims it to be - with certain feature omissions (copy/paste and MMS being the two most-often mentioned) providing plenty of fuel for criticism.
Less open to debate is the point that the iPhone offers what is probably the most beautiful user interface on any electronic device to date. Even the most rabid iPhone haters tend to concede that the software and the large, super-responsive touchscreen provide an immensely enjoyable way in which to interact with the device, and Apple’s competitors are scrambling to cobble up their own “less offensive than before” interfaces. Including HTC’s valiant “pay no attention to the Windows Mobile behind the curtain” TouchFLO paint job.
For the sake of this post, let’s assume my “iPhone’s most beautiful interface” argument is legitimate. So say you’re about to roll out a new app to millions of interface-conscious iPhone users who have been wowed by its beautiful visual design. You hope this new app, though inexpensively priced, will net you a handsome profit via the magical power of volume. How do you make your critical first impression? Why, you have an 8-year-old design your icon and splash screen in Microsoft Paint, of course!
Now, I won’t speak for you, but I’ll tell you exactly what this visual design mess tells me: the developer doesn’t care one whit what I think about him or his app. And it tells me (whether accurately or not) that he probably spent as much time working on the functionality of the app as he spent on its visual presentation. Which is to say, not much.
He couldn’t even decide whether the title of his app deserved proper capitalization (my opinion: no).
Worth my time or my measly 99 cents? Not a chance.
Frankly, the vast amount of shovelware/crapware that is suddenly flooding the iTunes App Store is disconcerting to me, to say the least. There are a great many brilliantly designed, powerful, and beautiful apps available (BeatMaker being a stunning example). Particularly for the App Store being a mere two months old. But for every one of those, there are ten (or more) that may have been fit for the Windows 3.1 world, but are not even remotely in the same star system as the iPhone world. I had high hopes that the iPhone would bring beautiful design to the masses. But instead, the masses are bringing their horrific design to the iPhone.
You can judge a book by its cover. What does the visual design of your eLearning courses tell your learners?
I stand by my claim that the iPhone will revolutionize mobile eLearning. But not if your mobile eLearning looks anything like Car Finder (or Car finder, natch).
Sidenote: had I been the App Store reviewer who received this submission from the developer, I would have rejected it. Immediately. With extreme prejudice.
Posted in Apple, Presentations, Rants, eLearning Design
content
I'm an eLearning developer and presentation designer looking for (and striving to create) eLearning and presentations that delight as well as educate and inform. Please join me.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
dude. a little harsh are we…. if this app is by the same guy I see many hits for on Google this kid is FIFTEEN years old. give him a fucking break. ugly as it is.. if it works, so be it.. this could be useful if you’re in a city that you’re not familiar with or one of those mega parking lots.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Mark: harsh? Yes. Deservedly harsh? Yes.
If what you say is accurate, the guy is 15. Not 6. If he’s old enough to program an iPhone app (and sell it in Apple’s store), for crying out loud, he’s old enough to give the interface more than a preschool-level attempt. I’ve seen some great stuff done by developers that are this age.
This app may be as useful as you say. But most users will never know because they won’t try it. Why? Because it looks illegitimate. That’s just life. This should never have been released in its current state.
Software (and eLearning) development ain’t lemonade stands.
September 12th, 2008 at 10:40 am
You sound like a snob, pal. There are worse items on the store to grind your axe on. Why don’t you take on the review system? That could use a revamp. Oh, wait. Your review here is exactly like a large portion of app reviews for the iPhone. Judging by book cover or by ideology instead of actually reviewing the app. Get serious.
September 12th, 2008 at 10:59 am
@ Abe:
Yes, there are plenty of bad ones to single out. I chose Car Finder.
Yes, it most certainly could use a revamp. But my blog isn’t about software reviews, it’s about eLearning design. And the point of this post is that if you can’t take the time to add visual polish to your work, you can’t expect people to take the time to check it out or take it seriously. “God is in the details” - Mies van der Rohe.
Again, my blog is not about reviewing apps, and my post about Car Finder is not an app review. Some people may consider high expectations in design to be “snobbishness.” I simply consider it to be mandatory in today’s competitive marketplace.
Car Finder may be a spectacular app. But most users will never know because it doesn’t appear to be at first glance. And when you’re competing with thousands of other apps, that first glance may be all you get.
And if you roll out eLearning that is visually sloppy, your learners my be tuning out mentally after the first screen or two. That’s just the harsh reality.
September 13th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Hi,
I’m the developer of Car Finder, Ian Cinnamon. Thank you for your objective review of my app. There are a couple things I would like to address:
1) “Now, I won’t speak for you, but I’ll tell you exactly what this visual design mess tells me: the developer doesn’t care one whit what I think about him or his app. And it tells me (whether accurately or not) that he probably spent as much time working on the functionality of the app as he spent on its visual presentation. Which is to say, not much.”
This is completely wrong. I do care about what my users think. So much, in fact, I have hired a graphic designer to do some images for the new update. You can see screenshots at cinndev.com. The update was released to Apple and will be out shortly.
2) I do agree with you that many apps on the app store need a better GUI. But that is not grounds for rejection from the app store.
– Ian Cinnamon
cinndev.com
September 13th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
It’s good to see some spirited discussion on this topic, even if that discussion is not eLearning-related.
Ian, I appreciate your perspective as the developer. A couple of comments to the points you made:
As I mentioned in my earlier comment, this wasn’t an app review, nor did it pretend to be.
I believe you. The problem is, the lack of detail implies to potential customers that you don’t. Unfair to you? Sure. But that’s the reality. That’s why I entitled the post “Judging a Book By Its Cover.” We’re not judging people here, we’re judging products.
I look forward to seeing the revamped interface. Though hiring a graphic designer probably wasn’t even necessary. A half hour playing with an indie graphic design app, like Intaglio (vector) or Pixelmator (raster), probably would have resulted in completely acceptable visuals. You obviously have the tech savvy. Mastering the basics of one of those apps would have been cake for you.
The problem is this: launching the app before it was visually polished resulted in some poor review scores, which dragged your average down. Is it fair that reviewers ranked it solely based on appearance? No. But it happened. And now you have an uphill climb to get your ratings where you want them.
As they say, you only get one chance to make a first impression. And anyone who thinks that only snobs care about look and feel (Abe) will never be a great salesman. Software developer. Or eLearning designer.
September 16th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
1. I agree. Design = Communication. The original design may not have sent all the right messages to potential app users.
2. It’s amazing that technology allows anyone/everyone to create something that can possibly be used by thousands of people, without many barriers to entry. When the [fecal matter] hits the fan, the result is a well fertilized field.