ipod versus pda

the prolific geeks at slashdot are penning opinion on why the ipod is so successful but pda’s are not. i think they’re pretty much right on. one key comment is that more complicated, more flexible devices are just too much for people, to obscure, or too confusing. the ipod does one major thing well and simply, it plays music. there are other features, you can do many more things with it, but those are bonuses. whereas the typical pda is a tiny computer that does many things, it’s not clear to someone what it does well.

this is the same basic conversation i’ve had many times with engineers while designing a product. there’s something about the engineer mind that wants to make a general purpose, flexible product. a platform that does many things. i have in the past countered with the ipod as my counter example, that simple and clear, straightforward and easy to communicate uses will win over a flexible platform. people need to know what it does, and at a glance.

you could argue that the PC does not follow this maxim. it is flexible and general. i would only suggest that people need a complete solution, a PC plus particular software that was simple and clear. visicalc was the key piece of software for the original IBM PC. without it, the PC could do many things but it wasn’t a killer application. then visicalc showed the business world why the PC was invaluable. and the initial visicalc interface had depth, you could write complex equations if you wanted to, but typically you didn’t need that. just basic equations, numbers, and a recalculate button.

If you're new here, thanks for visiting! Please subscribe to my RSS feed and consider visiting my personal blog and my meditation-related blog.