For those of you who have been following along, my mom was seduced by Steve Jobs' iPhone. This was and is an astonishing thing, since my mom is very far away from being a techie.
On the day of the iPhone launch, she waited in line at an AT&T store (and I waited with her) to get her new phone.
My mom loves her phone, but one issue came up which triggered an interesting thought. She had a hard time using the phone initially because of her fingernails.
My mom does not have big garish fingernails, but they were longer than any man's fingernails, extending perhaps a quarter or a half inch beyond her fingertips. The problem is that the iPhone screen requires touch by skin. the tip of a fingernail will not work. This is a problem because it means that the angle that your finger touches the screen at is such that the you end up making contact with the screen with a very large imprecise area of your finger. In short, my mom kept missing the intended screen buttons.
Now in reality, my mom clipped her nails and everything was fine. But I guess my question is whether that is a reasonable expectation in the product design. Were there any women on the product team? We're there any *girly* women on the product team -- women that like the idea of painted fingernails that extend a bit beyond the fingertip?
I am sure many of you will say that is the price of technology. But I myself wonder if there were some equivalent male focused impediment if it would have been considered acceptable.
I am not sure that this is the perfect example, but this whole episode just got me thinking about design issues for men vs women. How many other, perhaps more subtle issues like this are there that I and other product designers/developers don't think about? It is indeed striking that such a basic issue for the iPhone, as far as I can tell, really has not been discussed at all. Will most of my male readers, or readers in general, argue that such issues are irrelevant?
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
This is a very valid concern, and I hadn't thought of it before. Especially when it comes to "ergonomic" or usability design, it's the little things like this that really count.
For example, when companies design jackets for skiiers/snowboarders, they expect the individual to be wearing gloves, so instead of a tiny zipper they usually offer a large pull in addition to the zipper. This demonstrates clear awareness of the predicament of the target user.
This is the first time I'd heard that the iPhone screen only reacts by skin touch. Frankly, that seems like a very bad idea. Not only will people (mostly women) who have long nails experience difficulty using the iPhone, what about people in cold climates?
Yes, the iPhone was released during the summer for pretty much all of its markets that I can think of (US, Europe, Japan). What is going to happen to these poor iPhone souls when the weather gets cold and they put on their gloves, only to realize that they can't even answer the phone? Maybe I should invest in companies that make fingerless gloves...
A similar point could be bad for a variety of things. As a woman, I have trouble using full-sized keyboards because my hands are entirely too small to reach all the keys properly. Not to mention that your typical raised keyboard can have the problem of fingernails getting in the way - you have to indent the keys so much that longer fingernails can easily be caught by the key above it. Myself (and my female friends as well), tend to invest in laptop keyboards that better fit our smaller hands and have keys that indent far less, which means nails aren't nearly as much of a hassle.
That being said, you have to have some target group, and the iPhone tends to appeal more to the tech types and those in business, which is predominantly male.
In my experience on the ski hill, the iPhone is no good in subzero temperatures anyway - the temperature makes the screen very power hungry and the battery will be dead in seconds. iPods have similar problems, except for the Shuffle.
And the iPhone also discriminates against the obese, whose larger fingers might mash several keys at the same time. What about amputees who may not even have fingers? Plus the blind can't even use its interface since it relies absolutely on sight. The poor can't afford it. People in Amazonian tribes that have never had contact with the outside world would probably be spooked by the the Magic Box.
I'm being facetious but not every device is perfect for every person. That's the beauty of a wide variety of choices. If the woman with long nails can't use the iPhone, she can decide to not give Apple her money. Or I suppose she can whine about the sexism of Apple, who are obviously designing their products specifically so that she can't use them.
Another great example of designing for men vs women are divots for hair in the back of some automobile headrests. I remember seeing a Volvo concept car from more than five years ago that had these.
Without them, women (or men) with ponytails couldn't sit comfortably with good posture in their car. It's such a little, simple thing but it could make a huge difference for some customers without negatively affecting the traditional customer base.
You can buy a Bluetooth earset that reads brainwaves and causes the iPhone to select your intention, without using your finger at all. It's pretty fast and not subject to interference, either. I use one all the time on the transit. I leave my iPhone in my briefcase and no one can even see it. Then I just browse my favorite sites and listen to what I want, and the iPhone just responds to my thoughts. They come in a variety of designs and can be worn unobtrusively so your mom wouldn't mind.
If you were a nice man, you would buy one for her.
Come on, man. "sexist" is a loaded word implying unfair discrimination. Anthropomorphism aside, products can't be sexist.
Product designers can, but let's be realistic: product design is all about filling a desire, under constraints.
You could choose to replace the capacitive touch screen with a resistive, pressure-sensitive one, but then you lose (or make more awkward) most multi-touch usability and you have a Treo with better software...an OK product, but not an exciting one.
Jony Ive is clearly a climatist, however. Designing products that only people in good-weather climates can comfortably enjoy year round is definitely on my list of "unfair" things in the world. :)
This issue was identified by Wendy Cheng, who in her video review shows how she has to operate her iphone with the side of her finger.
http://www.iphonematters.com/article/the_iphone_is_just_mediocre_374/#When:18:47:00Z
I'm reminded of The Office when Phyllis and Stanley can't operate the Blackberries.
Hank,
That this issue got you to thinking is certainly not unusual. I do agree, however, that the word "sexist" is a loaded term and I was very surprised to read you using it in this context. It's something I would expect from someone trolling for hits by including the word "iPhone" and some inflammatory phrase in the title of their article.
Most women who are even remotely fashion-conscious have early on realized that there are certain concessions associated with wearing skirts & dresses, high-heeled shoes, and, yes, long fingernails. Most have accepted these concessions as the price of "femininity" in this society. Apparently, your mother felt giving up a little part of her perceived femininity was worth the utility gained from her iPhone. Women make dozens of these choices, large and small, in their lives, and mostly they don't run screaming "sexist," as I'm guessing your mother didn't.
Erik says he was not aware that the iPhone requires skin touch and that "this seems like a very bad idea." But only until you understand that this is not an ordinary PDA-variety "touch screen," which would respond to a stylus or a fingernail. "Multi-touch" requires the skin contact to operate the pinch and swipe movements which make it unique. Do you forgo this kind of innovation because the long-nailed or cold climate dwellers won't be able to utilize it? If the weather is so cold you can't take off your glove for long enough to dial a number, making a phone call is probably amongst the least of your worries. The phone is probably not operating optimally in that environment anyway (and neither is the person, for that matter).
Hank, as I'm sure you understand better than most, engineering/design always involves compromise and concession. Apple did not feel that making the iPhone more accessible to the “digitally” challenged was worth omitting certain innovations. Consumerism is very similar. You can, and do, choose the product which most nearly fits your set of most important criteria. People with nails, or who live near the Arctic Circle, are free not to choose the iPhone. And I would venture to say that Apple is perfectly fine with that choice.
Sounds like a market opportunity: conductive nail polish. ;)
In all seriousness - given that capacitive touch is clearly the superior technology for this application, it's certainly not a decision -motivated- by misogyny.
And the practicality of it -- being (literally) insensitive to an aesthetic preference -- isn't anywhere near the same as being incompatible with an inalienable part of her identity.
So it seems a bit 'off' to place that quarter-inch of nail on her dominant index finger in the same class as race, religion, etc.
(Actually, I'd be surprised if there -isn't- a suitable conductive ink or glue already out there, that one could apply to the edge of their nail.)
So how do women [or anyone] with extremely long fingernails operate any other tech device?
Last I looked, Blackberries, cell phones, Sidekicks and other every day items are not exactly long-nail friendly, or are they?
Can I propose that the root of the sexism is that women, and not men, should have long fingernails? As has been pointed out, long fingernails makes a lot of things difficult. It is sexist that society expects women to maintain long fingernails. The iPhone is just one of many fingernail-unfriendly devices.
I found this page because I was all excited about my fiance's android phone and I was thinking of getting my own but I had a hard time using the touch screen and I wanted to see if this problem was documented. My nails aren't 'extremely long'. They extend less than a quarter of an inch and don't interfere with typing or other day to day activities. It seems like a product that won't work well for like a 3rd of consumers would have been tested and they would have found something more practical. For the android, even a place to keep a stylus would have solved the problem.
I have the iPhone and I have not experienced any problems with the touch screen. (I am a female... with rather short fingernails.) I think that the phone only reacting to skin touch is a brilliant idea. I can put my phone in my purse or pocket and not worry about it rubbing up against things and activating an application (a problem I had with a previous open face phone). It is a hassle when I have to take a gloves off if I have to make a call or the like, but in the long run, it is a feature I am happy with.
Post a Comment