An advertisement for private jets in Economist magazine (I think):

The headline reads: “Simply the World’s Most Advanced Technology”. Honestly, there doesn’t appear to be anything simple about it.

In the world of private and corporate jets, complex = sophisticated. I suppose the interface complexity suggests the knowledge and training required to fly the machine, leading to security in the pilot’s ability to do so.

How does this differ from the trend (better late than never) towards simplicity in user interface design for consumer electronics? In CE, we’ve finally come to realize that a simple interface empowers the user, and creates a great feeling about the product. Since the user is typically the purchaser, making the user feel powerful is a good thing.

In aviation, the purchaser is typically not the user (the user is the pilot). There is no marketing benefit in making the interface simple; in fact, if the interface looks too simple, the purchaser (CEO) is liable to think either that the airplane isn’t “good enough”, or that the pilot shouldn’t be paid so much for doing such an “easy” job. On the other hand, if the plane looks complicated the purchaser can believe that it is “better” for having so many “advanced” features, and will be more secure in their pilot for knowing how to fly the thing. A perpetuation of the mystique of the valiant aviator, perhaps?

(This is not a commentary on Honeywell’s airplanes (I know nothing about them); it’s a commentary on the marketing decisions.) You’ve got to wonder: WWAD (What Would Apple Do?)