System Modules Should be Differentiated From Apps

The difference between system modules and apps is inherent in their respective definitions. In a strict sense, system modules and apps are both application software. There is however a subtle difference. System modules are a core, native and integral part of a system while apps in the loose sense are third party apps. Another less subtle way of distinguishing between the two is thus: system modules cannot be uninstalled by the user while apps can be uninstalled. I say less subtle because some OEMs and carriers install bloatware that cannot ordinarily be removed.

From the foregoing, native parts of a system like Contacts, Windows Media Player, Phone dialler, SMS and windows explorer are all examples of system modules (core apps). Software like Angry Birds, Microsoft Office and Photoshop are all third party apps and are thus removable.

There are instances where software that would qualify as a third party app on one platform or device would be a system module/core app on another device/platform. An example is the Amazon Kindle app. It can be installed as a third party app in iOS, Android and Windows for PC but it is a system module on devices like the Kindle Fire.

Applying the Distinction to UI Design

I find it a bit incongruous when system modules (core apps) and third party apps are listed side by side. On Android and iOS, the icons for modules like Phone, SMS, App Store and Play Store are all listed in the app grid/app drawer. The icons for these system modules should have a dedicated location. In other words, the core apps of any platform should be given pride of place, front and centre.

The objective here is not to foster protectionism, relegation or marginalization of third party apps. Rather, the rationale is to promote a sense of organized presentation that would minimize the risk of confusion. This is because the core apps/system modules of any platform usually represent its primary functions and as such, a quick and definite mode of access should be provided.

On iOS for example, allowing the icons for messaging or phone dialler to be moved into a folder or into another page/screen would reduce the efficiency of the system as such relocations would make primary functions longer to access. Some people opine that a phone or even a PC is their personal device and so they should be able to personalize it as they see fit. What the people in this camp need to realize is that there is a fine line between personalization and chaos. On countless occasions, I have observed users spending too much time looking for a core app because it is listed alongside third party apps. Sure, you could use the search feature of your device to find the elusive icon (app) but I think using search to locate a core/primary function is a result of flawed and inefficient design.

Certain Setting

One other victim of the lack of distinction between core apps and third party apps is the Settings icon. Though the settings module is not really an app, it is still a system module and as such should be front and centre or at least, have a definite mode of access.

iOS and Android allow the arbitrary movement of the settings icon to any folder or page. Windows Phone includes the icon in the Apps List (App Screen if you prefer). And since the list is ordered alphabetically, the icon is inevitably pushed further down the list. So the more apps you install, the longer it will take to get to the settings icon as you would have to do more vertical scrolling. And while the icon can be pinned to the Start screen, it is not a definite mode of access.

I should mention that Android devices have capacitive (or virtual) buttons that allow quick access to settings. And also Jelly Bean now offers another way to access settings by pulling down on the right side of the status/notification bar. It is an inelegant method but it at least gets the job done.  However, the old Settings icon in the app drawer still remains; awaiting capricious or inadvertent relocation. What Google needs to do is decide on one definite mode of access.

Conclusion

I think the onus is on UI and UX designers to prevent the unnecessary movement/relocation of the icons for system modules. They are too integral to the system to be toyed with. After all, you wouldn’t remove your car’s rearview mirror just because you don’t use it. At least you shouldn’t. Now, where’s that email icon?