5 ms·

I always have a kind of negative reaction to these sorts of interfaces. What I tend to see in this demo is how to make a doorknob unintuitive, how to make musi

by rrmm 14y ago

I always have a kind of negative reaction to these sorts of interfaces. What I tend to see in this demo is how to make a doorknob unintuitive, how to make music player functionality undiscoverable, how to accidentally lock yourself out, how to frustrate a user whose mental model of the sensor is incorrect. I realize you have to approach new technology and interaction paradigms optimistically, but all I can think of is my own frustration when an ill-considered neato-feature is foisted on me when I least want it. Like blue LEDs and touch sensitive buttons that lack a physical button (eg atmel q-touch).

redguava 14y ago
It's up to the developer to make it usable, that doesn't take away from the fact that it's pretty amazing technology and people will find really cool stuff to do with it. I just wouldn't blame the tech for bad implementations.
- rrmm 14y ago
  I don't blame the tech. I'm just anticipating all the ways this is probably going to be used and am annoyed at those developers in advance. :D
  - redguava 14y ago
    Agreed if I have to start pinching my door handle to lock it then I won't be impressed. Consider me an optimist though, I have faith in our fellow developers... even if there are a few blemishes on their record.
    - rrmm 14y ago
      I won't fault you for your optimism: technological advancement thrives on it.
wladimir 14y ago
A tech demo is a tech demo, it shows what is possible, not what is necessarily feasible to market to the big public as a new UI metaphor. Often it takes a long time to perfect something. So no need to be negative. Don't confuse it with a commercial of something that is actually brought to market.
- rrmm 14y ago
  I agree concerning it just being a tech demo. On the other hand, with the tech I've watched, and that I've been involved with, the market application is fairly close to the academic conception. Figuring out a feasible use case often comes a long time after the commercial introduction, if ever. I get the feeling in certain cases, it's technology in search of a problem. That's ok (and even necessary) as long as I don't have to put up with it shoehorned in places it doesn't really fit.
  - wladimir 14y ago
    it's technology in search of a problem in academic research that's the rule rather than the exception. The nature of research makes it very hard, even impossible, to predict what is going to have applications in the future and what those will be. To name an example, touch screens were also written off as an (awkward) curiosity for decades. I agree with the "I hope it isn't forced on me", but that's a wholly different discussion. That's a common theme with technology: in the beginning you can choose and it all seems great, later on you're considered odd if you opt out because "everyone is using it". But that's not the fault of the researchers or of the technology, but of the way society handles it.
    - ucee054 14y ago
      > it's technology in search of a problem >> in academic research that's the rule rather than the exception That tells you something about academic research
xyzzy123 14y ago
Argh, "blue LEDs" is a trigger phrase for me. BLINK... BLINK... BLINK... The only thing more satisfying than a duct-taping or LED-ectomy is the idea of finding the designer and "re-educating" them... in a deep, dark pit, lit only by blinking, ultra bright LEDS.
- coffeejunk 14y ago
  The only thing worse than LEDs on monitors is the cheap power supply attached to it. I had to sit in a room with ~30 monitors all blinking at their own intervals and every time one LED get's turned on, the power supply does a high pitch whistle. A cacophony of high pitch whistles. I was so close to burning the whole thing down.
TeMPOraL 14y ago
> What I tend to see in this demo is how to make a doorknob unintuitive, how to make music player functionality undiscoverable, how to accidentally lock yourself out, how to frustrate a user whose mental model of the sensor is incorrect. The same could be said about touch technology. And usually is, for the first week someone uses it the first time. My friend, a good sysadmin, was often asking me how am I able to figure out how those Android interfaces work, then the other day he got an iPhone, and he was complaining and complaining... until he stopped, after a week or so. I think discoverability is a bit overrated. Lots of things around us are bad at it, and people learn by showing to each other how to use the stuff. And as long as stuff behaves predictable, we can quickly grasp the patterns, no matter how nonintuitive or counterintuitive they are. Or maybe I'm wrong, given how often I have to show people how to do things like setting the timer on the microwave or reconfiguring a VCR or whatever, given that they own it for like half a year and for me it's a first time I see a particular model (or sometimes even entire class of devices) and I don't have (nor have a need for) a manual. I don't know, maybe some people have troubles building mental models based on reasonable expectations about what a machine can do (I observed it strongly in one case). Anyway, I'm surprised by this phenomena, given that I once had to show to a good sysadmin how to set a clock on his microwave, 'cause he couldn't figure it out (and long he tried).
mseebach 14y ago
I once got a recommendation for "The design of everyday things" (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Design-Everyday-Things-Donald-Norman/dp/0262640376 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Design-Everyday-Things-Donald-Norman...) with a warning: It will break the world for you, because you'll go around noticing how things are designed counter-intuitively, requiring large signs to explain what should be obvious. A good example: "Push"/"pull" signs on doors. Multiple branches of humanity independently developed the ability to design doors that any other human that understands the concept of a door can figure out how to open. Then, suddenly, around 50 years ago, that knowledge apparently vanished, and we started to have to put big "how to use" instruction stickers on one of the simplest and most intuitive objects ever invented.
- rrmm 14y ago
  I read Norman's book for an HCI grad class. I would definitely second the recommendation.
- sethg 14y ago
  It could be worse. I used to work at a hospital with an automatic elliptical revolving door (I assume it was designed that way so you could push a gurney through it). On the one hand: automatic revolving door, shiny! On the other hand: they had to post a sign telling people how to walk through it.
- taeric 14y ago
  It may be that many things are counter intuitive, but it seems calling out doors as something that has ever been intuitive is fallacious. Perhaps they used to be more consistent, but it doesn't take a lot of effort to find horrific accidents that happened years ago because doors weren't designed well. Not to mention, watching my kids learn different doors has been amusing. I would think intuitive is the wrong word, so much as simple determination will get you through most any door. It seems more likely that around 50 years ago the technology and literacy rates had finally advanced enough that push/pull signs could be easily attached to commonly used doors.
  - mseebach 14y ago

by rrmm 14y ago

redguava 14y ago

It's up to the developer to make it usable, that doesn't take away from the fact that it's pretty amazing technology and people will find really cool stuff to do with it. I just wouldn't blame the tech for bad implementations.

rrmm 14y ago
I don't blame the tech. I'm just anticipating all the ways this is probably going to be used and am annoyed at those developers in advance. :D
- redguava 14y ago
  Agreed if I have to start pinching my door handle to lock it then I won't be impressed. Consider me an optimist though, I have faith in our fellow developers... even if there are a few blemishes on their record.
  - rrmm 14y ago
    I won't fault you for your optimism: technological advancement thrives on it.

wladimir 14y ago

A tech demo is a tech demo, it shows what is possible, not what is necessarily feasible to market to the big public as a new UI metaphor. Often it takes a long time to perfect something. So no need to be negative. Don't confuse it with a commercial of something that is actually brought to market.

rrmm 14y ago
I agree concerning it just being a tech demo. On the other hand, with the tech I've watched, and that I've been involved with, the market application is fairly close to the academic conception. Figuring out a feasible use case often comes a long time after the commercial introduction, if ever. I get the feeling in certain cases, it's technology in search of a problem. That's ok (and even necessary) as long as I don't have to put up with it shoehorned in places it doesn't really fit.
- wladimir 14y ago
  it's technology in search of a problem in academic research that's the rule rather than the exception. The nature of research makes it very hard, even impossible, to predict what is going to have applications in the future and what those will be. To name an example, touch screens were also written off as an (awkward) curiosity for decades. I agree with the "I hope it isn't forced on me", but that's a wholly different discussion. That's a common theme with technology: in the beginning you can choose and it all seems great, later on you're considered odd if you opt out because "everyone is using it". But that's not the fault of the researchers or of the technology, but of the way society handles it.
  - ucee054 14y ago
    > it's technology in search of a problem >> in academic research that's the rule rather than the exception That tells you something about academic research

xyzzy123 14y ago

Argh, "blue LEDs" is a trigger phrase for me. BLINK... BLINK... BLINK... The only thing more satisfying than a duct-taping or LED-ectomy is the idea of finding the designer and "re-educating" them... in a deep, dark pit, lit only by blinking, ultra bright LEDS.

coffeejunk 14y ago
The only thing worse than LEDs on monitors is the cheap power supply attached to it. I had to sit in a room with ~30 monitors all blinking at their own intervals and every time one LED get's turned on, the power supply does a high pitch whistle. A cacophony of high pitch whistles. I was so close to burning the whole thing down.

TeMPOraL 14y ago

> What I tend to see in this demo is how to make a doorknob unintuitive, how to make music player functionality undiscoverable, how to accidentally lock yourself out, how to frustrate a user whose mental model of the sensor is incorrect. The same could be said about touch technology. And usually is, for the first week someone uses it the first time. My friend, a good sysadmin, was often asking me how am I able to figure out how those Android interfaces work, then the other day he got an iPhone, and he was complaining and complaining... until he stopped, after a week or so. I think discoverability is a bit overrated. Lots of things around us are bad at it, and people learn by showing to each other how to use the stuff. And as long as stuff behaves predictable, we can quickly grasp the patterns, no matter how nonintuitive or counterintuitive they are. Or maybe I'm wrong, given how often I have to show people how to do things like setting the timer on the microwave or reconfiguring a VCR or whatever, given that they own it for like half a year and for me it's a first time I see a particular model (or sometimes even entire class of devices) and I don't have (nor have a need for) a manual. I don't know, maybe some people have troubles building mental models based on reasonable expectations about what a machine can do (I observed it strongly in one case). Anyway, I'm surprised by this phenomena, given that I once had to show to a good sysadmin how to set a clock on his microwave, 'cause he couldn't figure it out (and long he tried).

mseebach 14y ago

I once got a recommendation for "The design of everyday things" (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Design-Everyday-Things-Donald-Norman/dp/0262640376 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Design-Everyday-Things-Donald-Norman...) with a warning: It will break the world for you, because you'll go around noticing how things are designed counter-intuitively, requiring large signs to explain what should be obvious. A good example: "Push"/"pull" signs on doors. Multiple branches of humanity independently developed the ability to design doors that any other human that understands the concept of a door can figure out how to open. Then, suddenly, around 50 years ago, that knowledge apparently vanished, and we started to have to put big "how to use" instruction stickers on one of the simplest and most intuitive objects ever invented.

rrmm 14y ago
I read Norman's book for an HCI grad class. I would definitely second the recommendation.
sethg 14y ago
It could be worse. I used to work at a hospital with an automatic elliptical revolving door (I assume it was designed that way so you could push a gurney through it). On the one hand: automatic revolving door, shiny! On the other hand: they had to post a sign telling people how to walk through it.
taeric 14y ago
It may be that many things are counter intuitive, but it seems calling out doors as something that has ever been intuitive is fallacious. Perhaps they used to be more consistent, but it doesn't take a lot of effort to find horrific accidents that happened years ago because doors weren't designed well. Not to mention, watching my kids learn different doors has been amusing. I would think intuitive is the wrong word, so much as simple determination will get you through most any door. It seems more likely that around 50 years ago the technology and literacy rates had finally advanced enough that push/pull signs could be easily attached to commonly used doors.
- mseebach 14y ago