I don’t like it because it’s often a lesser experience. A lot of the screenshots have truncated text or links to external things you need to see before replying or liking or whatever.
I find this also worrying because Facebook and Twitter are addictive enough, and this will just be a giant sea of more.
I think it could an interesting experience, maybe more natural for a phone or whatever watch device, but I think it is more of a 'junk food' approach to information. Sometimes, the slower, less flexible way is better.
What if you could expand a card?
This seems similar to the CardStack movement
The blog post brought up a good question "Will this happen at the app, notification, or OS level?" It seems like consolidation of different apps/services is more likely at the Device level instead of the App level over time.
As an industry, we might need to change our perception of website responsive design. Instead of viewing it as great evolutionary response to a multi-device world, we might better view it as simply life support for a dying medium.
This article highlights the problem I've always had with apps vs. web: immersive experiences work for things like games, but are a real hinderance for content which serves a similar purpose. Why should I have to check 4 or 5 different platforms when my objective is the same: to check up on new content from sources I want to hear from?
The framing of apps as publishing platforms is huge.
Super excellent work. Kudos.
What I see as a problem for this to catch on is: why would content providers want to lose the ability to do ads in their own way (maybe we'll see a lot more editorial advertising) and also to lose "app discoverability" ie. how people discover new features in an app (maybe this also could be promoted in a card itself).
Interesting indeed. I would not mind a future like this.
Interesting to think about the data behind the cards themselves and how content providers (apps) will need to organize their content into a standard that potentially works across multiple devices and OSes. You can already somewhat see this with Twitter Cards, Facebook Open Graph Tags, etc. which are a pain in the but to implement.
Assuming it this is handled on the OS or Device level, those new standards would need to be adopted by the content providers themselves (which seems like pulling teeth), and raises tons of questions about the syntax of the standard. Is it a markup similar to html? Can you associate styles and aesthetics to your content? Or is it purely structural, giving content providers no real ability to enhance user experience?
Wow lots to think on here...
[update] a few grammar changes
its an interesting perspective- but does the author really think that companies like Facebook, Twitter, et al. will just cede control of the user experience to a card-based operating system? if everything is simply treated as a timeline, then what is really an operating system other than just updates...?
this is kind of what Google Inbox is attempting to do, so it will be interesting how much it catches on.
Perhaps in the future there will be a way to toggle the OS view between timeline and app-view.
Not entirely sure if I agree products can be boiled down into a cross-section of modular blocks of content, but it is interesting to hear.
What if Facebook/Twitter don't have a choice? If sharing a photo with all my contacts and/or followers is easier straight from the OS, why would I need Facebook – I'd just need your name or phone number.
You are on to something my good sir.
Really interesting – would love to hear what people here on DN thinks of this.
Other then the bad grammar, flowery over complicated language, and horrible reading experience (I can't read that body font for more then a paragraph!). I find a lot of these types of themes and views come from the Android side of things.
I'm not sure what is so different on the Android platform that makes native apps so unappealing compared to iOS. I think the idea of using a card as a fully functional experience for whatever you are doing is an awkward and cumbersome experience. Sure the super powerusers of android may do that, however most android users i've met (joe blow etc) are not doing that. They get frustrated when they try to get to the facebook app to look at the post or reply.
The iOS approach to using quick responces in the notification makes sense, because it approaches a different problem and a different way. Why should I need to innterupt what I am doing to go reply to an iMessage when I can do it from the top. Android is more of a "I'm interupting what you are doing, and you can get lost and sucked into doing everything i want to push at you in this card before you try and go back to what you had been doing".
Working in a card seems incredibly fragile, what if i accidentally navigate away, what does the system do to notify me there is a new card when i'm already IN the notification system working away? What happens to whatever i've been doing when I accidentally go out of the notification centre back to what ever app i was in before?
This post also is entirely focused on people who only use their devices for low depth interaction, and completely skips the fact that most people i know on iOS actually use their phone for much deeper things such as documents, photo editing, etc.
App designers are sometimes going this direction of 'never ending content', but most people I know want an end, either that they leave the app, or that they have read everything for the day. They want to achieve a completion state of some sort. Having a never ending stream of apps and updates (ala a timeline for a phone interface) means I never finish, i never can hit a place of momentary victory.
It is so weird, we have one group of people trying to fix email, and another group trying to turn our phones into the same problem we are trying to fix in email!
so to answer your question directly. I don't think that this is a terrible concept at all. The atomization of data is very useful to make better apps. I do however thing that the actual use cases presented, and that the outcome of his concepts is incomplete. I do not think that this train of thought is completed enough to turn it into a product and it needs more time, more thought, more hands, and people who care about how the users feel. Not just power users, but my Father in Law, my wife before she got an iPhone, my cousins.
antidotal story; My wife was blown away a few days ago, she used to have an android phone, but barely used it. Now that she has an iPhone she's using it more and more and for more "deep" tasks (editing spreadsheets when she's not at the computer). We were walking through Dresden and wanted to eat, she was wondering outloud how we'd find somewhere to eat. I pulled out my phone and asked siri and she was blown away, not because she didn't know that it could be done, but because she hadn't thought about the fact that she could do it. She told me she was thinking about how she used to go home to her computer to look up a place to eat, find the directions and print them out etc. Her android could do these things, it wasn't impossible before. She never did use these things on her android because it wasn't easy. It wasn't obvious, and it was complicated when she tried. Whenever she tried something cool on her android it was the old windows problems of a million dialog boxes the first time, setting everything up. You die of hunger before you find the restaurant. Apples approach of no setup, no options just working isn't 100% right, but it wins at getting people to use the new features and that is more important.