15 ms·

God I hope not. Voice input is a terrible UX, because as a user, you have no idea what the system can and can't do. Every single Voice UX I've used for input (

• athenot 10y ago
  The same criticism can be levied against keyboard-driven tools aimed at power users. That doesn't make the tool less useful, it just shifts its target audience.
  • vthallam 10y ago
    Exactly. The use cases and target audience are different. I use my echo dot for playing songs, switch off lights and add random alarm/timer etc. The future not might be voice only, but it will definitely voice intensive.
    • Retric 10y ago
      "Big" only works if someone can make big money. It can't have advertising without becoming useless. So, Voice activated lights are "The Clapper 2.0" which was not a big deal last time around. Sure, there is a niche for reordering products easily, but commodity voice tech is going to rapidly hit zero margins. Like those 10$ TV dongles that used to take a full PC.
      • Spooky23 10y ago
        The clapper was a huge product. Millions of units shipped, mostly for $30 1980s dollars at a high margin.
        • Retric 10y ago
          "Millions" is not such a big deal. 10 Million of units shipped * 30$ ~= 300 million retail. Google makes 330 million in profit every week.
          • Spooky23 10y ago
            Sure... but how much does Google Home make?
          • untog 10y ago
            Why does every business have to reach Google profit levels, though? A business that turns a healthy profit with low margins is a successful business.
  • untog 10y ago
    Sure, but it does contradict any assertion calling it the "next big platform".
• rileymat2 10y ago
  I agree that the UX is pretty bad now. But Potentially, a system could monitor your on screen behavior and educate you unobtrusively when you do something that might have been easier by voice. Theoretically, the device could monitor your location and background noise to understand if voice commands are reasonable at that time.
  • wcarron 10y ago
    I want to see voice assistants become actually useful and usable in the coming years, and agree that massive data-vacuuming like "monitoring background noise" is probably the fastest way to pump enough data through ML and AI techniques to push them forward, but that feels unnervingly intrusive. I avoid these devices for the privacy concerns and also the generally poor security of IoT devices. I hate to sound like a luddite, but i really abhor these devices and how hard the tech companies are trying to foist them upon us as "the next big thing".
    • rileymat2 10y ago
      I am not proposing sucking in all the data, I mean an awareness of its environment so it knows when voice is appropriate. For instance if it can detect me driving in my car (due to speed) with no passengers (noise it has heard) maybe it can understand it should use voice.
      • r00fus 10y ago
        You do realize that in order for the assistant to know you're in a car, and that you're "at speed" it would likely need access to your location information, right? Aggregated over time (even if only when the assistant is "on" - ie, the iOS "while using" setting), that's a pattern of your movements. Either Apple/Google/etc and granulize the permissions such that things like "boolean: user is in vehicle at speed" are addressable separately (possible but unlikely) or such knowledge comes with a cost - the app knows where you are and have been. Same applies doubly for "noise it has heard". Consequently my decision is: no assistant, thankyouverymuch.
      • 10y ago
• cptskippy 10y ago
  There are certain times when a voice interface is dramatically faster, simpler and more intuitive than a visual UI. One example is setting a timer or alarm. Another is asking for conversions (how many teaspoons in a tablespoon). The Amazon Dot is my favorite kitchen tool, we use it more than we do spoons at this point. The ability to set multiple timers, convert units and measures, and remind you to do things all while playing your favorite tunes is amazing.
  • supercoder 10y ago
    Billion dollar kitchen timers
    • ChuckMcM 10y ago
      You laugh but it is a seriously good thing. I mentioned the 'side project' I had submitted that Google legal had rejected, it was combining Siri with timers and cooking facts as the ultimate kitchen timer. As the GP points out, there are a bazillion factoids you might consult while cooking and a huge win for cooking is having everything come out at the same time (co-ordinating timers) so as an app on your phone following you around in your pocket it can be pretty killer.
      • ethbro 10y ago
        "I see you're baking chicken, Dave. 98% of recipes agree your requested baking time and temperature will result in an overly dry bird. I'm afraid I can't allow you to set your own smart oven parameters anymore..."
        • DiabloD3 10y ago
          Given how badly people screw chicken up on a regular basis, I'm not even seeing the problem here, and I'm usually the one to shout Skynet during an otherwise reasonable discussion on AI. Fucking up food is a sin.
        • verbify 10y ago
• IshKebab 10y ago
  Google Home is an exception to that I think. Partly because you have a good idea which Google searches result in a knowledge graph result. Those are read out by Google Home. Also you're being very "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."
• LeoPanthera 10y ago
  I have this exact criticism with modern GUIs. Hide the scroll bars. Move all the icons into a hamburger menu. Strip chrome from everything. It's maddening. There's absolutely no way to discover how to use apps like this unless you already know how.
  • itake 10y ago
    The side swiping menus (like in Snapchat) are so confusing to me as an old guy. How the heck are we expected to know you can swipe left and right on a screen to reveal a completely new screen?!?
    • LeoPanthera 10y ago
      There's no good way, and I really dislike this modern trend of un-discoverable UIs.
    • niftich 10y ago
      It's discovery/referral gating. Teens who get Snapchat upon hearing it from a friend can ask their friends on how to use it, and it stimulates conversation and feature discovery. If you don't have at least one existing friend who is experienced at using Snapchat, you're probably not in their target market (by design).
      • JumpCrisscross 10y ago
        You see this social gatekeeping in how they distributed their spectacles, too.
    • blawson 10y ago
      Because you try it once or twice when exploring a new touch interface? It takes all of < 1 second. I get it is obfuscated but we aren't talking about a crazy level of interface hiding. People expect to be able to swipe on most interfaces these days.
      • 10y ago
• ThomPete 10y ago
  Voice input is what we humans use when we speak to each other. Things said in our home all the time: "Do you know what the weather is going to be like?" "Is it going to rain today?" "We need to buy some milk." "The roast need one and a half hour." We speak all the time with each other and there is nothing weird about that. I bought a Google Home and it's literally transformed our lives in the little details for the better. Before asking for the weather was something which required one of us to find the phone, open it find the weather app. It sounds banal but if you have to do it every day because you take your kids to school believe me it's a godsend. My wife was very sceptic about this and is certainly no tech fanatic, she now loves it because as she said she can now turn listen to radio just like in the old days when all you had to do was turn on the radio. My kids love talking with it. And it's basically just a very practical assistant which is revolutionary in the little details not some sci-fi scenario. It's not disrupting anything it's improving the quality of tech by allowing us to interface with technology in one of the ways which removes yet another layer of abstraction. You don't need to know what the system can do as long as it can do enough Google Home certainly can and it's just getting started.
  • ghaff 10y ago
    The general issue I have today is that, for a lot of things, voice can feel like an exercise in coming up with the right wizard's incantation--especially as you add Skills, etc. But that's not really an inherent issue with voice. It's just that today's systems are mostly stuck with requiring relatively strict adherence to specific syntax. This will certainly improve over time. I don't find Alexa as transformational as some people I know do but I find it useful enough.
    • Ajedi32 10y ago
      Google Assistant is slowly getting better with stuff like this. While usually I stick with the commands and syntax I _know_ works, occasionally I'll try getting fancy and throw it a curveball by just speaking 100% naturally and Assistant will surprise me by actually doing what I intended. For example, a while back I was using Assistant to look up showtimes for a movie at a specific theater, and just to see what would happen I said "show me a map" without giving any explicit context. I was expecting Assistant to come back with a search query or maybe pictures of generic maps in response, but to my surprise it actually understood that I was talking about a map of the theater and gave me that. Of course, that specific response in that exact situation isn't in and of itself all that impressive, and for every time Assistant succeeds in figuring out what I meant in a situation like that there's maybe one or two other times when it has no clue, but the idea of being able to speak 100% naturally to a virtual assistant and having it "just work" is unbelievably cool.
• mafuyu 10y ago
  It's great for certain interactions. I use it to turn off the lights and set alarms before I go to bed, get the weather every morning, make grocery lists, etc. Nothing huge, but the reduced friction is great. Also, for the $100 price it frequently goes on sale at, it's a great wireless speaker with Spotify integration built in.
• qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  This is the Infocom problem: You're trying to present the user with two fundamental illusions. 1) the computer can understand what you're saying, totally and completely, and 2) that you (or it) can do anything. However, it can't, it can't, and you can't. And when the illusion fails, it's frustrating: Neil Stephenson would call it Metaphor Shear, I (being less fancy) would call it why-didn't-they-give-me-a-better-ui-or-at-least-a-manual-dang-it. This is ultimately why I prefer unambiguous interfaces over "friendly" ones.
• balls187 10y ago
  > It can work 99% of the time, but if that 1% it breaks down and I have to revert to a device with a screen, it kind of ruins the point. I don't think your statistics makes any sense. 99% of the time, you save time by speaking your intent, vs interfacing with your phone. That time saved is meaningful and outweighs the 1% of the time you have to fall back to your screen device. 99% of the time, you can use your hands/fingers for other tasks while speaking your intent. That allows you to multitask more efficiently.
• gwbas1c 10y ago
  I want voice-activated lights... That's about it. The problem is: The electronic light control modules are expensive, break down after 1-2 years, and then go obsolete. I'll spend more time rewiring my house than stumbling around in the dark!
  • pdkl95 10y ago
    > I want voice-activated lights... That's about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clapper https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clapper
  • smw 10y ago
    The led wifi light bulbs seem like a good option when you have actual lamps. When they become obsolete in a few years you buy another one?
• alasdair_ 10y ago
  >Voice input is a terrible UX, because as a user, you have no idea what the system can and can't do. This is the same as the command line. Just like the command line, voice may not be completely intuitive initially but for regular use, it's probably much faster than a colorful GUI.
  • demonshalo 10y ago
    much powerful maybe, but not much faster.
    • freehunter 10y ago
      Even using Siri, which everyone can agree is terrible, having her set a timer using voice is much, much faster than picking up your phone, unlocking it, navigating to the Clock app, switching to the right tab of the app, then setting a timer. "Hey Siri, set a timer for fifteen minutes". Done.
      • r00fus 10y ago
        That's a bit disingenuous. iOS command center swipe up, timer button and it'll remember your last setting. Works faster than voice for the most common use case.
        • freehunter 10y ago
          >That's a bit disingenuous People love to misuse that word. I just tried it with best case scenarios, and it's still a second or so faster using voice (1.5 seconds) vs control center (3 seconds). I mean, voice is literally just yell out "hey siri set a timer for 15 minutes" and that ends the interaction. Done, just like that. If you're changing the time that is set, it's significantly longer.
        • pswilson14 10y ago
          You aren't including the time it takes to find your phone, pull it out, maybe unlock it, and THEN do the steps you describe. That's friction, and that's where these frictionless interfaces step in.
• mahyarm 10y ago
  Voice is a command line style UX and is a tool that is useful in those cases. You have to memorize commands although.
• throwaway729 10y ago
  > because as a user, you have no idea what the system can and can't do This is how I thought about search without search operators. Then Google got it right and owned the market. So I agree with you -- but I also think someone will eventually get it right, and that company will take off.
• ArlenBales 10y ago
  I only have two problems with voice, one of which is UX related: 1. It's slow. Apple AirPods are a good example. Siri controls the volume. Talking is slow. The input and response until the volume is changed is slow. Faster would be to use the long side of the AirPod as a touch control and sliding up and down it changes the volume. One finger slide = volume change. Two finger slide = track change. In any case, touch controls are way faster than voice. 2. It's weird in public, and faulty in loud environments. Talking aloud to yourself is going to get strange looks at you. I tend to do things that don't bring me attention, so I don't use Siri. Also, good luck using Siri at a concert or loud train commute.
• mattnewton 10y ago
  It's like a CLI- intimidating and not discoverable at first, but hopefully powerful later on. Except I am not sold on how it will be powerful yet: it lacks th "replay" that cli's have with scripts, and it lacks composability right now.
  • freehunter 10y ago
    Tab completion, the "history" command, and using the up-arrow weren't in the first shells either. Eventually someone will find a way to create custom macros with voice commands.
    • mattnewton 10y ago
      I have no idea what that would look like for the end consumer but I remain hopeful!
• ksec 10y ago
  Thx. I thought i was the only one WHO HATE Voice input. Especially when i have a long day i dont want to speak to a bloody machine just to get things done. I think Voice Input should be an Additional, not as the ONLY input method.
• deboboy 10y ago
  "you have no idea what the system can and can't do" - shouldn't matter.
• Johnny555 10y ago
  Voice input is a terrible UX, because as a user, you have no idea what the system can and can't do Very true -- our Echo can control the lights, but I can never remember what each light is called, while with a GUI, I can see the list and it's obvious that "Livingroom - TV" is the light near the TV that I want to dim, while "Livingroom - TV table" is the one on the table to the right of the TV and I want to turn that one off.
• pasta 10y ago
  Maybe this could work like Tesla is trying to get auto driving working: When you say 'Hey Google / Siri / Alexa / whatever' a connection is set up to a real human who can control your house automation. Then the system could be self learning because the operator is translating your command into an action. But it would not be for me. I absolutely never felt the need for home automation (don't think it is going to make my life better). And I care for my privacy.
• piyush_soni 10y ago
  I didn't see Google Now in the list of "every single voice UX you've tried", so recommend trying that. It's pretty great actually, and only getting better. I've tried most of these systems, and Siri is actually a joke in comparison.
• jagermo 10y ago
  In addition, Voice works well if you are alone in a silent enviroment. It does not work well if kids are playing loudly in the same room and the wife is yelling at you from the next room. I also don't like the feeling of having a dedicated microphone set up that records everything, waiting for a command and is completly intransparent about what it sends back to Amazon/Google/Apple.
• ehnto 10y ago
  The point about talking out loud is the key one for me. It doesn't matter how good the interface is, I don't want to talk out loud to myself in public. The same way I don't use magic wand like gestures to control phone. Talking, while potentially more natural, is also simply slower than most other input types.