The paradox of the touch of a mobile device begins with a sliding unlock

Article Description: So what if a device doesn't have a keyboard or an attachment like a mouse? When the iphone,ipod touch and the ipad appeared, the problem seemed more meaningful.

As far as traditional concepts are concerned, computers are largely considered to be a proxy device. In the process of using a computer, there is almost no direct input from the user, and all operations are done through the keyboard, mouse or touch pad. Because of these proxy type input way, people already developed a kind of digital mode of thinking. Just like when we think of a folder, we naturally take it as something that needs to be clicked on--and we use each mouse click as our true, natural input.

So what if a device doesn't have a keyboard or an attachment like a mouse? When the iphone,ipod touch and the ipad appeared, the problem seemed more meaningful.

Apple's ipad market is now almost assumed to be: "It can be used" or it allows you to touch the application, or the interface of the application, which is a "magic thing". I also agree with that, the ipad is changing our traditional view of computers and how we use computers. And I think that this shift will go on--through a simple, basic concept: touch.

The entire computer industry has struggled to find answers to complex questions.

Present situation

First of all, now that you have such a real, touch software experience, how should we design them?

This is a question that has not been answered (and in essence it is also a problem that has no real "right answer"). But we can now see that there are two distinct camps for this problem.

On the one hand, it is thought that since all things can be touched, it is now necessary to simulate a real-world interface. In other words, the idea of this camp is that we have to connect gestures and movements to a simulated world and create something to simulate.

Another group, on the other hand, thought that limiting thinking to such a simulated state might make things boring and meaningless. Their point is: if we are in a time when we can actually "touch" software, why do we have to pretend we're still in the past?

It is clear that Apple is leaning toward the first camp-they want to bring a real-world experience to people. Their ebook-reading apps ibooks and visually extend the Bookshelf concept. This app gives people a reading experience similar to real books. When you read through it, you can see books with different "pages", animated pages, and animations to open and close books. At the same time, Apple has used similar ideas to design Ical/calendar for Macs (using lion systems) and ipads. They are designed to look and feel the same as the real calendar (Calendar, weekly) or schedule (shown in daily form).

These two different apps highlight the pros and cons of simulating real-world design. The advantage of ibooks is that it has a fine page background, a smooth and sensitive animation display, and also provides a familiar bookshelf view for the current electronic books.

Ical/calendar, on the other side, reveals some of the drawbacks of this design. The calendar on the ipad takes up the entire screen and looks like a real calendar, but you can't turn the page with gestures. Although this design embodies the real world calendar appearance, but Apple ignores the real world the most basic way to flip, and using a completely digitized way to replace the gesture page.

The calendar looks good, but it doesn't work very well.

Other applications use a number of completely different digital methods to match the ipad's unique input mechanism. One example is omnifocus--, which is a powerful dream tool for/GTD (time management) advocates.

The Omni team has redesigned the Mac and iphone family design and has created a new experience for ipad users. This app allows users to interact with their daily activities in an unprecedented way. OmniFocus only when it comes to Apple's flagship tablet computer can it show such a fully integrated and powerful function. If you want to use applications to simulate these features in the real world, you need a lot of notebooks, a personal assistant, a location map, and a nagging girlfriend (to ensure that each project is completed).

The focus of the future

How can designers figure out which way they should use? Do their apps need to simulate something in the real world? Or should these applications be exclusive to the ipad? I believe that in any case, a calendar application is impossible and the traditional calendar to bring people the same experience, but anyway, there are some important principles to note:

1. A good design is a good design.

2. Do not sacrifice functionality for appearance, the role of computer is to bring convenience to life, rather than complicate people's lives.

3. Stick to your ideas. Do not simply create a beautiful calendar application, and does not meet the user want to page the desire. Not just because it doesn't make sense, but because it allows users to rethink whether the "ipad stuff" is worth the money it takes.

Another thing to consider about real-world design principles is that people are in the real world all day. Because everyone is very accustomed to how these things work in such a world, that is to say, we have a preconceived notion-and the concept is fundamentally unshakable.

People know that when they push something, they move on. And there is no such thing as a "procrastination" or an intermittent animated display of the simulated world. Everything is going to work, except for the emotional drag-and-drop action that happens as they do in the real world.

One of the drawbacks of the Kindle app is its flip-through animation design. Its design can not be compared with ibook in the degree of fluency and simulation. I would like to remove these animations because it will distract me by flipping the pages.

Perhaps the greater possibility is to go along with its logical development trend. For some things, the simulated world spends a lot of time trying to make its design and feel more perfect. And when we "live in the Future", we must remember that we live in a very exciting period of turbulence. The concept of touch in the computer has changed the way we think about this thing. And this concept has led to a whole new era that is completely different from the past.

Beginning and end

The paradox of touch begins with a sliding unlock, but we have no way of seeing how it ends. But anyway, it's going to be an exciting process.