I can't quite tell if you are saying the tables and frames are a better UX than Apple and Google. Personally I find frames and tables far more user friendly than the constantly shifting and indecipherable UX that Apple forces on us with updates.

Well, it doesn't matter what you or I think of it. It does matter, however, what a doctor thinks of it.

As the other comment pointed out, it's a balance. Simple is not the same as user-friendly, but they live on the same street.

Doctors routinely deal with concepts that would confound me, but they are often quite technophobic, when it comes to computers. I have a friend that's a really skilled anesthesiologist, and is constantly asking me the most basic questions about his iPhone.

Complex interfaces can be trained, but the magic is to have an interface that can be explored. If you train someone on rote, then they go to pieces, when anything changes.

However, if you give them an interface that doesn't penalize them for exploring, and has clear, unambiguous affordances, they can easily adapt to things like updates, and they won't force you to have to maintain an ancient UX.

But designing that kind of UX is quite difficult, which is why so few people do it.