Shortly after the iPad was launched Jakob Nielsen, the usability guru, released a study on the user interface design of the early iPad apps. His overall conclusion back then was that due to a lack of user interface design guidelines many apps had unique ways to wield them. A double-tap might do one thing in one app and quite another (if nothing at all) in another. As a result many users simply had to get lucky to truly understand the interactions that belie the various apps and their user interface designs. In all fairness it was more than just a lack of user interface design guidelines that was problematic but that developers only got their hands on the iPad at the same time as consumers, thus predicating a rush to ship apps.

A year later and Nielsen has revisited the user interface design of iPad apps. Naturally the user interface designs of iPad apps have improved but some findings are replicated in the new study.  The read-tap asymmetry still holds true. This is when text large enough to read is too small to tap thereby making the user interface design more frustrating. In the same vein touchable areas tended to be small and close to each other resulting in accidental activation. Navigation remains problematic though. Many users are not given enough indication of many of the tap-able links on the user interface design. The same goes for swipe-able areas whereby some users would swipe the wrong area and consider the app to be broken. On the positive side apps are now integrating back buttons, broader use of search, homepages, and other elements into their user interface designs. Considering how nascent the iPad is the signs are all-together promising.

According to the sleuths at Patently Apple, a blog dedicated to researching and postulating hypotheses based on patents filed by Apple, Apple has over the last couple of years filed several patents that strongly indicate the coming of the touchscreen iMac. Such a device would merge the iPhone’s touch-based interface design and capabilities with the iMac’s considerably larger screen size and processing power.

Along with images from patent applications unmistakably showing devices with user interfaces operated by the familiar touch screen technology, Engadget has reported that Sintek Photonics have been shipping Apple 20-plus-inch touch panels, which they have no doubt been experimenting with in the R&D department as future UIs of the next generation of computers. The question is will this concept, like scores of enticing concept cars, remain at the prototype level or will it actually evolve into a commercial product with an innovative combination of touch screen interface design and the familiar Apple features? Considering the iPad’s reality, the chances of interface design on desktops and laptops having to accommodate both the tiny mouse cursor and our thicker fingers seems all the more likely.

Certainly, the biggest clues to this possible iteration of user interface design of the Mac platform will be gleaned from the next version of Mac OS X. The more it borrows from or moves towards the mobile iOS will be most telling. A touchscreen iMac will have several implications for interface designs. Already the iPad’s screen size in relation to the iPhone has led Jakob Nielsen to comment, “An iPad user interface shouldn’t be a scaled up iPhone UI”. There is also the read-tap asymmetry where text big enough to read is too small to touch. This “fat finger” problem would only be exacerbated when jumping to the iMac’s screen size (which ranges from full HD to even more pixels). Apple would essentially have to revise long-standing Graphical User Interface Design guidelines to accommodate solutions to such problems. When or will a touch based Mac come out? Will it be practical for daily activities and business use? Only time will tell…

Palm, the fabled mobile devices company, released the original webOS to counter the threat coming from Apple’s iOS, RIM’s Blackberry and Google’s Android mobile platforms to name but a few. The tide had clearly shifted from hardware to software and although webOS 1.0 was roundly praised by critics for great functionality and interface design it failed to sell as anticipated, resulting in Palm almost going under. Until HP stepped in to acquire it for a tidy sum that is, largely on the strength of webOS.

The user interface design of webOS 2.0 is now cleaner due to some graphic elements being changed resulting in a more refined interface design that is also more legible. A good example of this is with the launcher and search apps (now dubbed Just Type). According to tech analyst Joshua Topolsky the launcher now has clearer navigational elements in its UI, and the search function now provides a “clearer delineation of sections” as well as more options that improve on the OS’ usability.

The overall navigation of the user interface design is improved with the introduction of Stacks as well as the aforementioned search app. The new Quick Actions API allows users to, for example, just type an intended status update in the search field and then through Quick Actions launch the Facebook app with all text transferred directly into the app’s UI. Stacks allows users to better organize their multitasking and overall navigation by grouping apps within the user interface. Users can create, for example, a social stack for social networking apps etc. Whatever you do in a stack that launches a new card, such as a new link or page, they remain grouped within that stack allowing users to easily navigate.

Options like these strengthen the notion that webOS is not merely trying to be a copycat of Apple’s iOS interface design features and functionality in a bid to play catch-up but instead focusing on innovating. As far as the software is concerned webOS is the underdog that matches and in some cases outdoes the competition. The goal for the company now would be to get as many developers on board as possible to take advantage of the OS and create apps with great UI designs and usability.

Digg, the social news-aggregation and recommendation site, recently re-launched as version 4.0 to a storm of controversy coming from a significant number of long-term users. Reworking and relaunching a website with a new user interface design is a delicate matter. Usually the goal behind such an overhaul of the UI design is to make it more attractive and easy to use for the website’s users. Often, changes are done iteratively to optimize the GUI. When done right consensus should be that the new interface design is a marked improvement and should lead to an uptake by new users. The fourth iteration of Digg’s user interface design takes a cue from Twitter and Facebook, something a number of social networks seem to be doing more and more of.  And with good reason too! The popularity of both websites cannot be put down to a mere fluke. These two websites are busy setting the pace as far as conventions on social networks go.

The revolt against the new interface design has already claimed casualties as Digg’s VP of engineering was fired. The biggest gripe users have with the new Digg, in terms of user interface design, is the lack of the ‘bury’ button. Now users can only ‘like’ a news story but cannot ‘bury’ it to make the news story less popular. The reasoning behind the lesion of the ‘bury’ button is that users abused the feature. Now users have the option to either report a story, should they find it offensive, or they can ‘hide’ a story. ‘Diggers’ became attached to the bury button and as such removing it was bound to backfire.

These apps are a quick and efficient communication method, and definitely lend themselves well to the objectives of social networking, not least due to their intuitive user interface designs, but naturally they engender questions about user privacy.  Making your location available to people seems intrusive and it is for this reason that these apps – a few notable exceptions aside – have seen more difficulties attracting conservative users than developers have hoped.  However, the fact that these apps have smartly coupled location information with other social desires—friendship, dating, discourse etc—makes them enticing and will likely lead to greater popularity.  Questions about security and intrusion should diminish given that users have a considerable amount of autonomy over the apps.  Users can choose who they disclose their information to and can control when they do it.  As long as users maintain a sense of jurisdiction over their information, then check-in apps are a harmless way for people to socialize and connect.

During the last year a new type of app has been popping up all over the mobile world.  These so-called “check-in” apps allow users to notify friends and colleagues about where they have been, where they are, or where they are going via their smartphone user interfaces.  App developers have also begun to use extant location-based social networks — such as Friendticker, Foursquare, MyTown, BrightLite, Gowalla and, most recently, Facebook Places — to create games, challenges, city guides and dating services all centered on user locations.
consumers.

The Samsung Galaxy tablet, set to hit the European consumer market in late autumn 2010, is the newest brave and ambitious challenger in tablet computer combat, a battlefield thus far dominated by the iPad, known for its easy-to-use user interface design and highly-praised usability.  The Galaxy is powered by Android and “consumers are able to experience PC-like web-browsing and enjoy all forms of multimedia content on the perfectly sized 7-inch display, wherever they go. Moreover, users can continuously communicate via e-mail, voice and video call, SMS/MMS or social network with the optimized user interface” (samsungmobile.com).   Since VoIP capacities are not supported by the iPad, it is clear that Samsung sees consolidating all possible features into one device as the best strategy for taking a bite out of Apple and gaining a competitive edge in the tablet computer mêlée.  In a metaphorical sense, this method of consolidation can be seen as a Chimera effect, the Chimera being a fire-breathing female monster of Greek mythology whose body was composed of parts from different animals.   The concept of amalgamating different features into one unified body creates a stronger and more fearsome monster.  The same could be true for the Galaxy as a technological competitor.  It remains to be seen how this consolidation will affect users in terms of the usability of the user interface design.