TweetFollow Us on Twitter

Interface 7
Volume Number:8
Issue Number:7
Column Tag:Interfacial relations

Interfacial Relations

Popular Sentiment: The Emperor's New Clothes or Can You Tell a Book By Its Cover?

By Joost Romeu, San Francisco, California

Once, the Macintosh interface solicited wonder and amazement. Current sentiment is much less enthusiastic. Despite notable exceptions, multi-platform vendors seem more interested in completing interfaces that subscribe to platform standards than constructing interfaces that complement their users’ need. But what is even more disappointing is the reaction of intelligent observers who-rather than decrying the decline of interface values-speak of them as no longer relevant.

Interfacial Relations confronts this critical backlash and the sentiment it has provoked; probes for reasons behind the sentiment; and discusses how this new conservatism might affect developers’ willingness to create responsive interfaces in the future.

Apple's Core

During MacTutor's resurrection and relocation, Apple introduced impressive hardware updates (the Quadra and the PowerBook), previewed revolutionary hardware technology advancements (pen based computers and consumer electronics), introduced fascinating software capabilities (QuickTime), and promised a radical commitment to RISC. With all of this activity, you'd think there would be more action in the interface arena, the area Apple's best known for. However, today's interface seems less an achievement than an Apple afterthought.

Recently, Tog Tognazzini, Apple's chief interface proponent and staunchest defender of the metaphorical grail-and a number of people from his Advanced Technology group at Apple-left en masse for Sun Microsystems.

What's does this exodus say about the Macintosh interface? Has Apple gotten too large to be innovative? Can Apple no longer see past its laurels? Have Apple’s interface litigations so indentured it to its past achievements that it can't afford to change?

The Macintosh Graphical User Interface (GUI) is not dead. Compare it to Microsoft Windows and it's clear that the legacy still works. But look at Microsoft Excel (as Interfacial Relations will do in the future) and you see that some developers are still intent on pushing the interface envelope.

Developing interfaces in the nineties is going to require a restructuring of the product development process. More trust is going to have to be placed in the vision and skill of the UI designer. More heed is going to have to be paid to the user through usability testing and a careful reconsideration of the developer/customer and the marketing/customer relationship. And we are going to have to recommit ourselves to basic interface fundamentals that we seem to have swept under the rug.

Backlash

Late last year, a flurry of articles took the GUI to task-not to criticize its approach, appearance, or implementation, but to challenge its raison d'etre (reason to be).

I suspect these criticisms came about because of frustration with a GUI that seems a bit dated. But I'm bothered by the mixed messages these criticisms leave in their wake.

What they all have in common is that they imply the foundations of GUI are bogus. What they seem to presume is that interface design is a cut and dry procedure. Interface design isn’t as opaque as accepting an algorithm just because it comes up with the right answer. (Code implementation isn’t even such a deterministic process.) Accuracy is essential, but just as programming solutions aren't implemented only because they’re accurate, interface designs take more effort than just following a style manual. Interface design can be made more efficient but it can’t be drawn-and-quartered.

The roots of the problem

Dedication to a cause requires belief in the principles underlying that cause. One may survive paying lip service to these foundations. But a long run solution requires a developer committed to underlying principles and willing to call up the extra effort required to address those principles.

Challenging foundations is a valid and necessary activity, but it should be done responsibly. Criticisms that depend on gratuitous assertions or faulty logic may do permanent harm, squelching some of the basic foundations upon which good interface design was founded.

I contend that these examinations speak more of lazy, noncritical attitudes on the part of the critic than they speak to a particular interface's ambiguities and shortcomings. Unfortunately, because these examinations concentrate on buzzwords such as “user friendly” and “intuitive” they tend to gain more credence than they may deserve.

And because they’re in popular publications addressed to the general user, they're likely to influence the developer.

What these criticisms fail to consider is that GUI development is a developing discipline and not a plug in procedure. To think differently is to undercut the developer and underrate the technology. It leads to software strong on similarity and stripped of personality-software’s version of the emperor’s new clothes.

The critics

Frank Romano says that “user friendly” is a computer oxymoron and implies that the prototypical “rest of us” is a superset of specialists; John Dvorak asserts that “intuitive” is nonsensical; countless others contend the “paperless office” is an infeasible fantasy.

How should developers respond? Should they abandon the effort required to design engaging software and concentrate on bare bones essentials or should they just provide a set of interface construction tools and let the user sort out whatever interface might come to him/her?

unfriendly

Frank Romano’s editorial, “Too Many Tools,” recognizes that many GUI's are still less than friendly. However, he chooses to blame this on the GUI's underlying foundation rather than a particular program’s flawed interface implementation. He begins:

“The term “user friendly” is totally meaningless. The only thing easy to use is something that does nothing. Absolutely nothing.”

He then argues that rather than simplifying tasks by integrating subtasks, computer programs that adopt a modular approach force the user to customize the software to the work environment.

The article goes on to bemoan the fact that ”today’s tools are mind-boggling in their capability” and summarizes: “We have come very far in the last five years but we have a long way to go.”

This editorial accurately describes problems associated with a transition from a traditional approach to solving a problem to a technological approach. It touches on issues of integration, complexity, and program responsibility. But in confusing technical achievement (the tools technology has provided) with technological advance (the ways technology might change the way we work) the article seems content to find fault with the general principle of “user friendliness” rather than criticize the way a particular interface has implemented a function the user needs.

Intuition

Rather than accusing the Mac GUI of being counter-intuitive, John Dvorak’s diatribe in the December, 1991 MacUser, questions whether there is a relationship at all between intuition and computer program users.

He does this by citing various examples which are apparently meant to prove the non-intuitive nature of computers (and technology). They include:

• A secretary who didn’t understand why waving a mouse in the air shouldn’t cause the cursor to move.

• A (StarTrek) movie in which one of the actors mistook a mouse for a microphone.

• The atypical responses of “African primitives” who, confronting television screens, wonder where the people went when they walked off the edges of the screen.

Citing these refutations says more about their author than it does about intuition. Mr. Dvorak errs when he fails to recognize that what he sees to be “mistakes” may actually be part of the natural trial-and-error learning experience a user needs to undergo to adopt any tool. He fails to recognize that what he sees as a mistake, someone else might recognize as a valuable suggestion-a way technology might be expanded to encompass new experiences and expectations. (A gyroscopic 3D mouse incorporating sound is not a far fetched idea.)

Glibly throwing this material out as evidence that interface design tenants are bogus fails to recognize that general principles like “intuitive” enable us to confront the things we encounter (like mice) with an open yet responsive mind tempered by some sense of direction.

Popular sentiment

What differentiates these editorial opinions from serious criticism is that they unfairly deprecate rather than seriously challenge. What gives them unfair advantage is that criticizing a few general principles is an easy way to affect many particular implementations of those principles as well as affect popular sentiment.

Are buzzwords ever meaningful?

“User friendly” and “intuition” are highly charged and overused buzzwords. Nonetheless, they continue to be viable ways we can compare interface designs and judge competing alternatives. The fact their definition is not completely airtight enhances, rather than detracts from their relevance and viability.

Buzzwords have a bad reputation. But they’re better suited to general discussions of context and intent than the strictly-defined scientifically-charged terminology by which scientists attempt to evade the vagaries of context.

Take “user friendly”:

• The draw program that displays the ongoing construction on screen is more “user friendly” than a package that accepts coordinate input and leaves the user guessing what the drawing is going to look like until it's been compiled and printed.

• User friendly isn’t meaningless. For example, though predictability and speed may be considerations when the term is used, it more likely to be applied to a program’s general responsiveness than to either it’s raw speed or obvious predictability.

Or “intuitive”:

• Wielding a device that controls a pointing cursor is a more intuitive way to point to a visible object than using a device that accepts any language command line input.

• An intuitive approach (like Nisus’ well designed Find dialog) may not unambiguously supply you with the right answer on the first try, but it usually holds your interest far longer than a non-intuitive yet logically correct and unambiguous approach (like grep) that requires you understand a specialized language designed to define any ambiguities that may creep into the relationship.

Description vs distinction

In a by-the-numbers “bottom line” world, interface descriptors like “user friendly” and “intuitive” may not be as precise as “response time” and “mouse click count”, but they are more advantageous ways of talking about interface design problems and solutions.

Different people use these terms in different ways.

Marketing refers to them to identify with a prospective buyer’s inclinations and desires. Because they don’t have to be numerically substantiated, almost anybody can use them as part of their argument. But having to qualify opinions with facts and figures is a relatively recent historical phenomena that’s better suited to some activities (e.g., science) than others (art, philosophy, design).

This terminology-and the principles it espouses-can be especially valuable to the developer. These words represent goals which the developer can stride toward. They’re the rubric through which the designer can frame the principles he/she feels are necessary for a computer program to assure the user it's a cooperative agent rather than just a dumb machine. They allow the developer to relate to the user as a human being rather than just an “operator”.

Developers and Buzzwords

To the developer, user friendly should neither be an obvious nor required attribute. One designer may consider the user friendly environment as a visually attractive interface; another might consider functionally engaging as the user friendly prerequisite; yet another may equate animation or audio cues with user friendliness. To the person developing a game or secured environment that attempts to foil a user, user friendly may be something to consciously avoid. And finally, to some designers, user friendly may not be a concern at all.

Like the term “user friendly”, the way you may choose to define the term “intuitive” may involve stimulus-response, cause effect, and a bit of hocus-pocus. However, it doesn’t imply that a totally new “intuitive” experience will be instantaneously understood or immediately accommodated. It’s a pliable way of gauging the ability of a program to provide enough cues and feedback to hold the interest of a user. And it’s a way of talking about how-within a reasonable amount of time-your user might be able to skillfully interact with his application.

User friendly, intuitive, and a plethora of other terms represent elusive values. But they’re no different than most of our moral values (compassion, honesty, etc.) and political ideals (democracy, communism). It’s precisely their elusive richness that allows us as developers to use them to better relate to our audience. Terms like user friendly and intuitive, when responsibly qualified are exemplary ways to introduce users to advanced concepts and changes.

Why are these foundations being questioned?

We’ve discussed what the criticisms are, why they come about in the popular media, and how they might affect developers and the industry. But why are they being levied now? What concerns are behind this foundation bashing and are those concerns valid?

Concern 1: is something ever nothing?

Is it true that “the only [thing] easy to use is [something] that does nothing?” or is it just a glib way of saying something meaningless? (Try replacing the bracketed terms with some real thing like “tool”. )

What’s annoying is that there is something in the assertion that seems plausible. Like many glib statements, it conveys a first impression that's hard to shake. In a world in which we don’t have the time to look at matters in depth, it’s too easy to take a statement like this at face level. If you accept this, you might be willing to submit to a similarly meaningless statement such as: “the best interface is no interface at all.”

“So what”, you say, “I’m bright enough to see past the patter.” Well it's more than just a matter of rhetoric. It plays into the concept that interface is an unfortunate intermediary-a necessary evil, so to speak-between a-program-and-its-data and the-user-and-his/her-task. It promulgates a misconception that the way to design software is to disregard interface. Why? Because the only thing user is willing to admit is easy is “no-thing”.

Concern 2: computer alienation?

Do critics who bemoan the term “user friendly” and “intuitive” expect a computer interface to miraculously transform a neophyte into an expert capable of turning out relevant, quality work with a modicum of effort or are they confusing “computer user” with “expert”?

Technically as well as skillfully, the print industry demands difficult judgment calls. So Mr. Romano is right when he contends that even with (today's) computerized assistance, generating color separations remains a complex activity.

But the complexity that affects this and most industries can never be completely addressed by a computer. Even though the technicalities might be able to be unambiguously (or at least adequately) defined and described and assigned to a computer, that program will not be able to completely address issues of relevancy.

One difference between the technician and the expert is that the technician can rely on past experience and knowledge to arrive at a quality decision whereas the expert must add to these considerations a skill at balancing current contextual relevancies (currently appreciated norms, customer color preferences, etc.) to assure that the decision is relevant as well as qualitatively accurate. Typically, a computer is better equipped to address technical problems.

A computer may eventually supplant the technician. It may provide the non-expert with technical skills and the opportunity to accumulate, within a protracted time period, the experience necessary to become an expert. But it cannot assume the role of expert itself or miraculously transform an idiot into an expert. On the other hand, it might be argued that the expert cannot remain an expert for long without a computer. Because the world of information is moving at breakneck speeds, it can be argued that without a computer, today’s experts can quickly lose their edge and therefore, their “expertise”.

The legal profession is a case in point. Why? Because among other things, an attorney can be sued for supplying an inadequate defense because he didn’t use information pertinent to the case. Though still a hardcopy dominated profession, lack of a computer is rapidly making it impossible to be a responsible litigator.

What’s Metaphor’s role?

There are many possible reasons why people are bashing the principles rather than the products. Industry frustration and vested interests may be partially behind the critical diatribes. But there are technical reasons as well. The more obvious include: the continued difficulty of convincing management that interface is as important as functionality; the difficulty of gauging and dealing with the human factors that need to be addressed by a responsive interface; and the time required to adopt a unique interface solution into a multi-platform environment.

However, I feel that an inordinate dependence on metaphor is largely to account for our inability to address these user concerns.

Few people consider interface design a done deal. However, many subscribe to the school of thought that says interface design is a two-step conformity task. The first step involves standard conformance; the second metaphor identification, description and conformance.

Step one is to design in conformance to menu, widget, dialog box, etc. standards. Presumably, if you have satisfied the standard conditions of one platform you’ll be able to plug your design into a program which will automatically transfer these design decisions into equally serviceable solutions that address the requirements of the other platforms.

The other step is to design icons, terminology, etc. according to constraints determined by the metaphor you are trying to emulate. Thus, if you’re designing for an artist you pick up an art supply catalog, learn the lingo, copy the pictures and paste them on the interface.

If you believe this approach adequately defines the user interface design process then it’s easy to see “non-intuitive” or “user friendly” as irrelevant. You’ve done your task as an interface designer and you can switch the blame for any user problems to the users because they don’t adequately understand the platform standards or haven’t adequately acquainted themselves with the program’s underlying metaphor.

The Interfacial Relations series has not had kind words for metaphor. It sees design-by-metaphor (the way it has typically been understood by the computer industry) as akin to designing a book by its cover. Metaphorically designed GUI may attract neophytes, but eventually it can severely confine the developer who is trying to improve, rather than merely replicate the real world.

Metaphor reconsidered

Does the professional, the person who has had extended experience in the industry and who is at home with computers find metaphorical interface as engaging as the computer neophyte Apple was initially trying to attract with its desktop? Does the computer sophisticate? Why participate in an interface that mimics the real world when the feedback that interface provides can’t have the richness of physicality the real world can supply and often carries a lot of extra baggage particular to the computer environment.

And there’s another reason why metaphor is inadequate. When GUI was being invented, computer technology was trying to catch up with the real world. Now the real world is struggling to keep pace with computers. Computer control changes the workplace; it places greater demands on the professional. It’s rapidly replacing the metaphor.

Metaphor is important, but it isn’t the endall. What we want out of interface is a workflow environment that's a characterization rather than a charade.

Contemporary metaphor

Tog Tognazzini's monthly Apple Direct column, “Human Interface” represented the Apple myth at its best. Tog seemed the bastion of convention, the person you would ask to deliver a speech on the merits of orthodoxy and standardization. Searching for new interface solutions but conscious that interface guidelines be maintained, “Human Interface” confidently walked a fine line between the proven and the possible.

Case Study: One or More Buttons, described a success story that gave the reader the impression Apple is an endless reservoir of lucid ideas that are meticulously researched, responsibly tested, and-with an AHA! insight or two-gracefully resolved. But what impressed me most about this article was how it identified contemporary metaphor.

“Case Study’s ” problem was to design “something like a cross between radio buttons and check boxes, allowing users to select as many options as they want, but always keeping at least one selected”. Tog stated the problem, outlined tentative solutions, prototyped, tested, and built on the results.

His development environment seemed ideal: everyone had interesting suggestions, the project moved along at a productive clip. In fifteen hours a convincing solution had been realized.

But the climax was what caught my attention. The AHA! factor the project turned on pivoted (you've guessed it!) on a metaphorical point. But the metaphorical reference took a decidedly different tack than the way we commonly perceive metaphor.

Rather than attempting to configure and assign literal tool functions to computer tools so that the computer would appear to directly emulate its real world referent-rather than be an end in itself-Tog employed it as a learning tool, a stage in a development process.

Searching for a button check that would “travel” rather than appear or disappear, Tog associated the action he wanted with the performance of a bead of mercury when it was pressed. The mercuric metaphor was useful, not because it provided a literal tool, but because it enabled him to visualize, understand, and explain a problem in an alternative way.

He used metaphor to solve an abstract problem; not to emulate a real world thing. This is an example of metaphor at its best.

The real problem

Phil LoPiccolo’s Computer Graphics World editorial, “Wimpy Interfaces ,” succinctly states the real problem user interface faces:

“...the next generation of user interfaces...remain distant goals The evolution of interface technology has all but stalled. Instead of concentrating on the implementation of new interface models - which may include new metaphors as well as voice input and other emerging technologies - for the most part vendors have chosen to copy the familiar desktop, or WIMP (windows, icons, mouse, and pointing) metaphor first introduced by XEROX Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) in 1973 and popularized by the Macintosh in 1984.”

Why these strong words?

He continues: “Ironically, despite such rallying around this standard style of computing, the penetration of computers into most professions is still minuscule Indeed, at a recent closed-door industry roundtable...the item identified as the main obstacle to greater acceptance was that computers continue to be far too difficult to use for even the most technically sophisticated professionals.”

Conclusion

Every active development effort should encourage and sustain constructive criticism. It's a sign of frustration and stagnation when critics choose to invalidate developer intentions rather than study their implementations, or suggest alternative goals and aspirations.

Our goals need to continue to inspire and challenge. The fact “user friendly,” “paperless office,” “intuitive,” and “WYSIWYG” continue to dangle slightly beyond our reach should serve as a challenge rather than a reason to deem them unattainable or irrelevant.

 

Community Search:
MacTech Search:

Software Updates via MacUpdate

NetShade 6.3.1 - Browse privately using...
NetShade is an anonymous proxy and VPN app+service for Mac. Unblock your Internet through NetShade's high-speed proxy and VPN servers spanning seven countries. NetShade masks your IP address as you... Read more
Dragon Dictate 4.0.7 - Premium voice-rec...
With Dragon Dictate speech recognition software, you can use your voice to create and edit text or interact with your favorite Mac applications. Far more than just speech-to-text, Dragon Dictate lets... Read more
Persecond 1.0.2 - Timelapse video made e...
Persecond is the easy, fun way to create a beautiful timelapse video. Import an image sequence from any camera, trim the length of your video, adjust the speed and playback direction, and you’re done... Read more
GIMP 2.8.14p2 - Powerful, free image edi...
GIMP is a multi-platform photo manipulation tool. GIMP is an acronym for GNU Image Manipulation Program. The GIMP is suitable for a variety of image manipulation tasks, including photo retouching,... Read more
Sandvox 2.10.2 - Easily build eye-catchi...
Sandvox is for Mac users who want to create a professional looking website quickly and easily. With Sandvox, you don't need to be a Web genius to build a stylish, feature-rich, standards-compliant... Read more
LibreOffice 5.0.1.2 - Free, open-source...
LibreOffice is an office suite (word processor, spreadsheet, presentations, drawing tool) compatible with other major office suites. The Document Foundation is coordinating development and... Read more
f.lux 36.1 - Adjusts the color of your d...
f.lux makes the color of your computer's display adapt to the time of day, warm at night and like sunlight during the day. Ever notice how people texting at night have that eerie blue glow? Or wake... Read more
VirtualBox 5.0.2 - x86 virtualization so...
VirtualBox is a family of powerful x86 virtualization products for enterprise as well as home use. Not only is VirtualBox an extremely feature rich, high performance product for enterprise customers... Read more
File Juicer 4.43 - Extract images, video...
File Juicer is a drag-and-drop can opener and data archaeologist. Its specialty is to find and extract images, video, audio, or text from files which are hard to open in other ways. In computer... Read more
Apple MainStage 3.2 - Live performance t...
MainStage 3 makes it easy to bring to the stage all the same instruments and effects that you love in your recording. Everything from the Sound Library and Smart Controls you're familiar with from... Read more

ReBoard: Revolutionary Keyboard (Utilit...
ReBoard: Revolutionary Keyboard 1.0 Device: iOS Universal Category: Utilities Price: $1.99, Version: 1.0 (iTunes) Description: Do everything within the keyboard without switching apps! If you are in WhatsApp, how do you schedule a... | Read more »
Tiny Empire (Games)
Tiny Empire 1.1.3 Device: iOS Universal Category: Games Price: $2.99, Version: 1.1.3 (iTunes) Description: Launch cannonballs and blow tiny orcs into thousands of pieces in this intuitive fantasy-themed puzzle shooter! Embark on an... | Read more »
Astropad Mini (Productivity)
Astropad Mini 1.0 Device: iOS iPhone Category: Productivity Price: $4.99, Version: 1.0 (iTunes) Description: *** 50% off introductory price! ​*** Get the high-end experience of a Wacom tablet at a fraction of the price with Astropad... | Read more »
Emo Chorus (Music)
Emo Chorus 1.0.0 Device: iOS Universal Category: Music Price: $1.99, Version: 1.0.0 (iTunes) Description: Realistic Choir simulator ranging from simple Chorus emulation to full ensemble Choir with 128 members. ### introductory offer... | Read more »
Forest Spirit (Games)
Forest Spirit 1.0.5 Device: iOS Universal Category: Games Price: $2.99, Version: 1.0.5 (iTunes) Description: | Read more »
Ski Safari 2 (Games)
Ski Safari 2 1.0 Device: iOS Universal Category: Games Price: $1.99, Version: 1.0 (iTunes) Description: The world's most fantastical, fun, family-friendly skiing game is back and better than ever! Play as Sven's sister Evana, share... | Read more »
Lara Croft GO (Games)
Lara Croft GO 1.0.47768 Device: iOS Universal Category: Games Price: $4.99, Version: 1.0.47768 (iTunes) Description: Lara Croft GO is a turn based puzzle-adventure set in a long-forgotten world. Explore the ruins of an ancient... | Read more »
Whispering Willows (Games)
Whispering Willows 1.23 Device: iOS Universal Category: Games Price: $4.99, Version: 1.23 (iTunes) Description: **LAUNCH SALE 50% OFF** - Whispering Willows is on sale for 50% off ($4.99) until September 9th. | Read more »
Calvino Noir (Games)
Calvino Noir 1.1 Device: iOS iPhone Category: Games Price: $3.99, Version: 1.1 (iTunes) Description: The film noir stealth game. Calvino Noir is the exploratory, sneaking adventure through the 1930s European criminal underworld.... | Read more »
Angel Sword (Games)
Angel Sword 1.0 Device: iOS Universal Category: Games Price: $6.99, Version: 1.0 (iTunes) Description: Prepare to adventure in the most epic full scale multiplayer 3D RPG for mobile! Experience amazing detailed graphics in full HD.... | Read more »

Price Scanner via MacPrices.net

Big Grips Lift Handle For iPad Air and iPad A...
KEM Ventures, Inc. which pioneered the extra-large, super-protective iPad case market with the introduction of Big Grips Frame and Stand in 2011, is launching Big Grips Lift featuring a new super-... Read more
Samsung Launches Galaxy Tab S2, Its Most Powe...
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. has announced the U.S. release of the Galaxy Tab S2, its thinnest, lightest, ultra-fast tablet. Blending form and function, elegant design and multitasking power,... Read more
Tablet Screen Sizes Expanding as iPad Pro App...
Larger screen sizes are gaining favor as the tablet transforms into a productivity device, with shipments growing 185 percent year-over-year in 2015. According to a new Strategy Analytics’ Tablet... Read more
Today Only: Save US$50 on Adobe Elements 13;...
Keep the memories. lose the distractions. Summer’s winding down and it’s time to turn almost perfect shots into picture perfect memories with Elements 13. And get the power to edit both photos and... Read more
1.4GHz Mac mini on sale for $449, save $50
Best Buy has the 1.4GHz Mac mini on sale for $50 off MSRP on their online store. Choose free shipping or free local store pickup (if available). Price for online orders only, in-store price may vary... Read more
12-inch 1.1GHz Gold MacBook on sale for $1149...
B&H Photo has the 12″ 1.1GHz Gold Retina MacBook on sale for $1149.99 including free shipping plus NY sales tax only. Their price is $150 off MSRP, and it’s the lowest price available for this... Read more
27-inch 3.3GHz 5K iMac on sale for $1849, sav...
Best Buy has the 27″ 3.3GHz 5K iMac on sale for $1849.99. Their price is $150 off MSRP, and it’s the lowest price available for this model. Choose free shipping or free local store pickup (if... Read more
Worldwide Tablet Shipments Expected to Declin...
Does Apple badly need a touchscreen convertible/hybrid laptop MacBook? Yes, judging from a new market forecast from the International Data Corporation (IDC) Worldwide Quarterly Tablet Tracker, which... Read more
Continued PC Shipment Shrinkage Expected Thro...
Worldwide PC shipments are expected to fall by -8.7 percent in 2015 and not stabilize until 2017, according to the latest International Data Corporation (IDC) Worldwide Quarterly PC Tracker data. The... Read more
Imminent iPhone 6s Announcement Leads To 103%...
NextWorth Solutions, with its online and in-store electronics trade-in programs including http://NextWorth.com, reports that it has experienced a 103 percent surge in quoted trade-in values over the... Read more

Jobs Board

*Apple* Retail Online Store: Customer Insigh...
**Job Summary** Apple Retail (Online Store) is seeking an experienced e-commerce analytics professional to join the Customer Insights Team. The Web e-Commerce Analyst Read more
*Apple* Music, Business Operations - Apple I...
Changing the world is all in a day039s work at Apple . If you love innovation, here039s your chance to make a career of it. You039ll work hard. But the job comes with Read more
WW *Apple* Retail Online Store: Customer In...
**Job Summary** The Apple Retail - Online Store is seeking an experienced web merchandising analytics professional to join the Customer Insights Team. The Web Read more
Senior Payments Security Manager - *Apple*...
**Job Summary** Apple , Inc. is looking for a highly motivated, innovative and hands-on senior payments security manager to join the Apple Pay security team. You will Read more
Software QA Engineer, *Apple* Pay Security...
**Job Summary** Imagine what you could do here. At Apple , great ideas have a way of becoming great products, services, and customer experiences very quickly. Bring Read more
All contents are Copyright 1984-2011 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.