I got over technology toys a long time ago; and my usual reaction to anything that is hyped runs the gamut from skepticism to downright aversion. Nevertheless, I found myself wondering, along with just about everyone else, whether or not the new Apple iPhone would even come close to all of its advance promotion, most of which seemed to be delivering that message that the iPhone would do to the cell phone what the Macintosh had done to the personal computer. Of course, if that was the message they really wanted to deliver, they should have come up with a commercial as mind-blowing as the "1984" Macintosh ad, rather than a demonstration of all the things an iPhone could do that looked more like a sleight-of-hand trick (with images that most of us knew were enhanced) than an actual demonstration.
Fortunately, May Wong, Technology Writer for Associated Press, was able to dig up a more authentic demonstration before the sales frenzy began and wrote about it in the story she filed:
On NBC's "Today" show, co-host Meredith Vieira ran into problems trying to get the iPhone to work, laughing that "this is why gadgets drive me crazy."
With a team of Apple representatives hovering off-screen, Vieira was supposed to receive a call from co-host Matt Lauer in London. The iPhone — billed by Apple as the most user-friendly smart phone ever — displayed the incoming call, but she couldn't answer it.
Apple spokeswoman Natalie Kerris declined to comment.
One assumes that Ms. Vieira is pretty good at handling a cell phone; so if she fumbles her first "engagement" with an iPhone, where all she had to do was connect to an incoming call, then the Apple evangelists had better come up with a better explanation than calling her an idiot. (On the other hand, Ms. Kerris' "silent strategy" is not much better, since it means that she could not say anything about the user trials conducted before the device went to market.) This leaves me with one question: Even if the iPhone can do all those cool things show in the commercial (even without all that deceptive speed and high resolution), do I really want a mobile phone that just can't do a very good job of being a mobile phone? For me this may be an unfair question, since my current cell phone usage is about as minimal as one could get; but I know this puts me in a minority. I just hope all of those heavy cell phone users out there give my question serious consideration, though; and, the more they depend on their cell phone, the more seriously they should ask the question!
3 comments:
I have to say, I just saw the Vieira snippet and I cannot for the life of me figure out how someone could not figure out how to answer the phone. I'm going to need a lot more touch points than that one because everything I hear, the iPhone is phenomenally usable. My sense this was the case of user error (big time) and the Apple rep took the high ground. Just my take.
I just ran into May Wong in my elevator. It turns out she is the daughter-in-law of my neighbors. She told me that Apple pressured Associated Press to drop the TODAY portion of her story. That does not sound like high ground to me! I agree that this was a story about user error, but I think it needs more analysis before getting dismissed as a statistical outlier!
I've been using my iPhone since Saturday afternoon. To add my 2 cents to this thread...
I've never had a new mobile phone (new in the sense that it was a quite different device from my prior ones, like when I got my first Treo after using a low end/plain vanilla Nokia for a couple of years) where I didn't have some uncertainty at first about how to do X, Y or Z, including answering the phone -- especially if it was in hold/lock mode).
I am not someone who first reads the user manual and only then tries to use the device. Instead, I just start using it, figuring that (1) I can learn now to do things quicker and (2) the device's value will be in large part be determined by how easily I can do (1). Of course, I haven't tried to do this on national television. Anyway, the very first time I received a call on my iPhone I did indeed have to pause for a few seconds to figure out how to answer the call. I seem to remember it was the slider unlock that had now appeared on the screen that threw me. I guess I assumed that the device would be giving me the 'answer' versus 'ignore' options my Treo offered, rather than me first having to unlock the phone and then answer the call (the Treo unlocks its controls -- all managed via keyboard or stylus) automatically when a call comes in, if it is powered on). Again, this was a 'new device with different protocols' issue, and very quickly solved. But I was (naturally) a bit confused at first, maybe even like Vieira.
As for the iPhone's ease of use more generally, it has been a real joy, basically. The touch screen keypad, for example, which received a lot of skeptical attention when first announced, was as easy if not easier to use than my Treo keyboard once I worked with it for a few hours. And I have been using a Treo for over five years. The absence of cursor keys annoyed me at first, but I rather quickly got the hang of the iPhone's 'touch the area you wish to edit to first magnify that screen region and then maneuver the cursor marker with that same finger until it is positioned where you want it' method. It is different, for sure, but it works almost as well for me now as the keyboard cursor method did on the Treo. The most important reason the touch screen keypad works well, though, is the predictive input feature. It's cool, it does not get in the way at all, and it works remarkably well.
Post a Comment