How does the fact that the app sells well disprove the fact that the app is badly designed? I have both Motion-X apps, and I love their features, but I find myself using simpler apps because of the Motion-X UI clutter. Motion-X offers an impressive feature set for the price, but why on this earth do I have to deal with un-familiar graphical switches to change a setting? Where in the real, tangible world does having more switches and buttons make something better? I'd actually use the apps more than once if I didn't have to study the UI in order to make a task-related decision.
I never can figure out how to use the Motion-X apps. Tease me all you want, but the UI is a chore to me. I prefer the dumbed-down Tomtom app for navigation and the Nike GPS app for my runs. While they may lose, feature-wise, they win on functionality. Why should a user have to deal with artificial UI abstractions that add flair at the cost of increased cognitive load?
For example, take a look at a screenshot from Motion-X's Drive app (http://i.imgur.com/uWXdk.jpg). Compare that to the less-flashy Tomtom app UI (http://i.imgur.com/6mPKe.jpg)
Which UI is more functional?
And for run tracking, which UI would you find yourself more inclined to use, Nike GPS' (http://i.imgur.com/80pLl.jpg) or Motion-X GPS' (http://i.imgur.com/tTdMN.jpg)?
I never can figure out how to use the Motion-X apps. Tease me all you want, but the UI is a chore to me. I prefer the dumbed-down Tomtom app for navigation and the Nike GPS app for my runs. While they may lose, feature-wise, they win on functionality. Why should a user have to deal with artificial UI abstractions that add flair at the cost of increased cognitive load?