Case in point this article on MacWorld, which highlights the frustrations a recent Windows switcher to Mac faced when presented with installing the new Firefox 3 application off of the disc image. Once mounted, the well-designed DMG without text explanations was designed so well that the user thought it was just a depiction, not actual icons which required interaction. In this case both the common setup.exe methods on Windows combined with the lack of explanation on the Mac proved to confuse this person.

This highlights a very important fact: Simple does not automatically mean intuitive, and likewise intuitive does not have to be simple. When designing an interactive environment of any kind, taking the user’s knowledge for granted is a big mistake. Intuitive in computer terms means that a user can anticipate how the feature or device functions, without having and previous knowledge regarding it.

This kind of consideration cannot be overlooked. Simple can masquerade as intuitive, as an easy to understand design feature can come across as intuitive easily. But once things get more complicated, intuitive user understand needs to take over, and it’s here where (for the most part) Apple does an excellent job.

Mac OS X (in all its flavors) has set itself apart on the UI front by providing novice and advanced users with a powerful environment to work in, while not over complicating the experience of using it. People not familiar with Macs often take the interface for ‘face value’ and claim it the Fisher Price of computing, and presume it simple because it’s a streamlined, ‘fun’ looking, and doesn’t require ponderous tasks to get through while you accomplish tasks.

Apple looked at what people want to do with personal computers, and also looked at what others were doing in response to that want. They extracted the best and worst among them, and delivered a way to do things with a UI which all interfaces should model: knowledge obtained in one aspect of the interface (application) is transferrable and applicable to others.

For example Apple’s ‘i’ suite of applications. What you learn in iTunes you can apply in iPhoto, and vice versa. Manipulating content with similar or identical interactions trains the user quickly and gives them confidence to explore an application, giving them more opportunity to do improve what they can accomplish.

Contrast this with some applications on Windows which operate completely different from each other, even when they don’t have to. It appears that some developers come up with an interface that looks cool, and then try to figure out how to cram in all the elements of the application needed within it.

That’s neither a simple approach, or an intuitive one. With WPtouch, we spent considerable time considering what elements needed to be formatted for the touch-based interface, and intuitively guide someone using it. We settled on some key usage styles which were already in use on the iPhone, such as the ‘load more’ feature in the YouTube app which we used to load paged entries.

As with Apple’s work, simple is not easy, and creating great user experiences requires time, thought, and a focus on what’s intuitive rather than what seems simple, appears to looks good, or just fits into a given space.