One of the most common remarks about the Apple iPad is that it’s just a bigger iPod Touch. To me, this shows that Apple has got it right.
As happened with the iPhone, when we get to use an iPad we won’t only intuitively know how, we also won’t be burdened by a visible operating system. We won’t have to think about file structures, file types or where documents are kept as we do in a desktop environment.
We see the operating system as an environment and mechanism that has its frustrations and deficiencies but is something we understand and can work with.
A techie might worry about the lack of system-wide file structures and support for applications to open files created by other applications. But users just want to perform a task without worrying about the housekeeping. The invisible operating system and the fact it’s more like an iPhone than a Mac is what will make the iPad a success.
This isn’t a new idea. The visionary user interface designer Jef Raskin foresaw digital devices that were perfectly suited to specific tasks. He thought the interface should reflect what a user was trying to do rather than how it represented an application. We often talk of this as the goal of user-centred design but it’s within the construct of and tacit acceptance of the desktop metaphor. Guidelines developed to ensure consistency across the user interface and between applications have created consistent models. But these models are reflections of the operating system not the tasks.
Of course an operating system is still a necessary evil. However, it seems that the iPad, by removing the obstacle to users interacting with the operating system, has realised Raskin’s dream.
Tunde Cockshott: Creative Consultant, Amaze.