Why Siri is like skeuomorphic UIs: the magic is just skin deep

I've been following this debate on skeuomorphic UI design and I see merit on both sides. I don't think the rationale being making iCal look Ike a calendar is that it is supposed to mimic the physical sensations of a calendar. I think it is simply about the app being more approachable from the perspective of the general user.

I was at an Apple store in Modesto yesterday and I was observing a Going Further workshop. Each of the participants was at least 50 years old and had an iPad 2. They were delving into iCal. The very first response that came from one of the ladies at the session was, "Oh, how beautiful." Then she talked about how it looked just like the desk calendar she bought every single year for nearly 20 years.

The first part of her statement is subject to opinion. People are either going to appreciate the aesthetic value of the design or not. The second part is unmistakable, that iCal's look and feel immediately resonated with her in a way that made her feel more at home on the device.

All UI design is arbitrary to the extent that it is design. You can choose for your app to look however you want it to. What matters, then, is first a functional sense which should tie in closely with both human behavior (unless you're designing interfaces for dolphins to poke at) and aesthetic value. My argument in favor of well-executed skeuomorphic design (the kind that allows you to swipe pages whenever there's a stack, for example) is why not have an element that most users can immediately relate to?

You, as a developer, may not immediately relate to iCal the way this woman did—but then I highly doubt you would ever find yourself part of a basic iPad workshop either (unless you were teaching it). I think Apple's design does favor these users, but then it also takes the stance of having chosen a design that is perfectly reasonable for all users nonetheless. But here's the real kicker: I would bet that for the first time in 20 years that lady decides to skip the desk calendar.

I'm amazed that there is so much over-thinking about Siri's abilities or lack thereof. The software is good at present, but not as good as it can be and will be in the future when more software refinements are made and more entries are available in its database. It's also primarily US and UK centric right now and doesn't work well in other parts of the world (see previous sentence). All this is to be expected and this should really be the end of the story. However, technology has become so amazingly amazing on a daily basis that our expectations are very high. We're like kids at Christmas who are in a delicious frenzy to open our presents.

Should Apple call it a beta release? Technically, no because beta has always meant the testing phase where a limited number of people put it through its paces and submit feedback of their results, prior to the broad scale public release. However, Google has blurred the line on this, and beta is starting to take on a more marketing type of meaning of "it's pretty good now but just you wait--it'll be even more terrific soon."

Siri is groundbreaking in its current form. It blows away any other voice interface I've experienced in real life, and shows promise of eventually morphing into something like the computer interface shown on Star Trek and HAL on "2001, A Space Odyssey" (but without the evil bits). It's not there yet, so have a little patience. As Apple's programmers continue to develop the technology, it will be a game changer.

You are being far too complex in your presumptions. Nothing is actually ever finished it is always being upgrade and developed to the day it is put onto the rubbish heap and indeed that is true of nature itself even if our experience of it is too short to actually witness it. And then the comment that siri is skin deep but then in many ways so is human intelligence itself it appears a lot more unique and unfathomable than it actually is even if it is millenium beyond siri it self at this stage. And that's the point as Turing himself new well, it will take continuous development to achieve true mimicking of human interactivity but it has come along way from what we were used to before and be assured that once its usefulness is fully appreciated the capabilities will develop at a pace. what is required now that the actual interface has been cracked is a whole series of back up technologies to enhance its memory and IQ. like apps on the iphone that will happen and I suspect its growth will be rather quicker than a childs to adulthood and eventually it and similar incarnations will serve to show us (other than the religous zealots) just how relatively ordinary human intelligence actually is even if it isnt all crammed into a brain the size of our skulls. And remember Turing expected that to happen rather earlier than it presently has but then only with the potential of the cloud could it actually do so. Like a plane simply imitating a bird doesnt work for us and so expecting siri to simply imitate a human's version of intelligence is simply naive. Many animals out there are considerably more intelligent than us in very specific areas so try to think different.

I find these sorts of arguments vastly amusing. It comes down to the difference in aesthetic between hardcore geeks or design purists... and real people. Geeks and purists can theorise all they like about why "skeuomorphic" (what a ridiculously silly geek word... why not call it "real-like" or something, that normal people will understand?) are ideologically sub-optimal (or you don't ilke them, in real-speak).

The fact is that ordinary people prefer them. They feel familiar. They help intuitive understanding, not in an abstract user-interaction-paradigm way, but in the way that normal people think..

And as usual, Apple is on the side of the ordinary person, rather than the up-their-own-fundament geek purist. I've as much sympathy with this argument as with the tech-bores who think that having lots of mega-cycles and whizz-functions is "better" than a device that most people can pick up and use.

As usual, Apple 2, Geeks 0.

what a poor analogy. the skeuomorphic design gets in the way because the analogy breaks down and it ads visual clutter where it's not needed.

that doesn't mean physical analogies have no place in interface design. the springs, momentum, and damping that show up in iOS enable a better intuition of how to interact with, and what the current state is of the interface is. natural language enhances the interface with siri and is one reason it's more popular than the previous version of iOS voice interaction.

In fact, my favorite programs, like omnifocus allow natural *fuzzy* input which enhances the usability. Is it somehow a thin superficial veneer allowing someone to interact naturally with technology?

I've found Siri very useful and I think I'm not in the minority on this one.

There is yet another problem with skeuomorphic interfaces. They impose a metaphor that limits our imagination as to what we can do with it. If it looks like paper, too many people will treat it as if it really were paper. Since there are many things that one can do with a digital object that cannot be done with a non-digital object, these digital extras are less evident to us. Thought precedes action. If we don't think (imagine) of it, we won't make use of it.

Is Siri really skeuomorphic? In the attempt to say "yes" we also have to consider Siri being an androgynous and nearly omniscient servant who exists only to provide the information we need. That doesn't square very well with my concept of "human being" so, no, I don't think that Siri is aurally skeuomorphic. Siri is a digital being who speaks my language and knows a lot about my world but is otherwise unlike any person I know.

I believe that you are off base with the skeuomorphic argument and that most GUI designers would agree that it is an essential part of any interface. The way we comprehend new interfaces is through comparison to similar past experiences. In the case of calender, making the interface look like a calender informs us to the app's function and helps guide us in how to use it. Now, I agree that I'm also not a huge fan of the torn edges and would probably prefer not having the leather so dominant at the top, but to a new user, the look is inviting simply because it looks like something they know. And no, I don't believe that means that it has to behave exactly like the real world counterpart and I honestly don't think anyone's really too confused because you can't tear off the scrappy edges.

The same applies to Siri. It is a usable technology because it mimics our natural interaction with another person. If it sounded like a robot, it would be off-putting because we like to talk to people; it's what's natural to us. I don't think that anyone is fully forgetting that we're interacting with a set of databases and algorithms, but if you can easily put that aside while interacting with the technology, it's easier to use.

That's the same reason we have folders, files and beveled edges in our computer UIs; it makes a complex machine understandable, natural and usable. Without metaphors we would still be using punch cards or assembly code to interact with these machines. And if you take the metaphor too far, Siri would get moody at times, we'd have to spend time tearing paper out of calender, and the bookmark would fall out of iBook if you tilted it too much. Despite these interfaces having strong metaphoric links, none of us expect any of those three things to happen and because of that, the interfaces work.

I seldom comment on any of the topics here on TUAW, although I admit I'm a regular and an avid reader. I just have to give props to whom it is due. "Maccles" and "Claustin", I have to commend you both for your very well thought out and, more so, very well written comments. You both should consider a career in writing, if you aren't already in one. Thank you both for your assessment and insight. I totally agree with you both. "Maccles", your writing is impeccable. No disrespect to the author of this article.

I disagree with much of what you say.
Servers go. Batteries die. And some days it rains when you wanted sun. So what?
Siri is whatever Apple says it is. THey say it is in beta. Are you the arbiter of Apple's product classification policies?
Forget your angst over the beta thing, for a first iteration of a potentially paradigm-changing UI/UX idea, Siri (via Apple) is an exemplar of how to launch something that is more than good enough for now, while at the same time openly acknowledging (with the beta classification (a first for Apple I think))m that you ain't seen nothing yet. Any Dynamic UI/UX phenomenon like Siri, can evolve by further development sure, but it can only achieve robustness and completeness as it is used and thereby stretched, by millions of people in thousands of places around the world.
Methinks therefore, that you protest far too much.
Have a little patience whydontcha?
After many years of trying, which other company has done better?
Hmmm?

I enjoyed reading this article, I think you do a very good job of putting that whole situation in perspective.

Also, I absolutely agree with you about the fake leather look. It's childish, chintzy, and useless.