4 ms·

I love "Design of Everyday Things" but this floor plan light switch design always irratated me. Essentially you are sacrificing a high efficiency, low cognitiv

I love "Design of Everyday Things" but this floor plan light switch design always irratated me. Essentially you are sacrificing a high efficiency, low cognitive load task (that happens to have a poor first time experience) for a complex glossy UI that is intuitive but high cognitive load. (Suddenly you have to engage your visual system and import your full object recognition library where previously it was a finger twitch task.) We've struggled with this a lot at Lockitron. My personal belief is repetive actions (locking/unlocking) should be mechanically efficient while complex actions (inviting guests) should be more visually intuitive. For another light switch concept see the Goldee.

ekux44 13y ago
Has Goldee ever shown details on user input yet? I can only find concept photos with it lit us showing status, and vague mentions of gesture detection.
arrrg 13y ago
It depends on the application. Just think about how big shared spaces that would need such a light switch are typically used. Any one person will use the light switches only rarely (and frequently forget what the switches do between using them, so it’s not only about first time use). In such a situation an easily understandable light switch is preferable to a row of switches (especially since disturbing other people in that space by randomly switching on and off lights is not a pleasant experience for anyone). Whenever a space is used by many different people such a design seems preferable to me. Also, these big shared spaces happen to be the ones that would require such a light switch in the first place. Replacing every light switch with a floor plan switch? That would be a bad idea, sure, but there are applications that make a lot of sense.
mattlutze 13y ago
The better argument, I think, is "Do we need that much optimization?" Does the trial and error performed by a casual switch user cost us so much that spending the money on custom layout light panels makes sense? I think only in a very small set of applications. To counterpoint your second paragraph: The existing wall switches are much more than a poor first time experience and require more cognition. When using the "efficient" vertical wall switch panel, you already have to import your full object recognition library without errors. You then have to call up your list of mappings between rooms and switch position on the panel so you can flip the correct one. With the map, you only need to load your scheme of the office into active memory to select the appropriate switch. Further, the map provides error checking for your cognitive model, confirming / reinforcing the true layout (in a complex map, a user is bound to forget a room or take longer to recall it's location without the external map). Anecdotally, I lived in my family's third house for a year and a half, and never completely memorized the functions of the 6 switch panel in our front hall. Imagine an office, where different panels control different light banks depending on where they are in that large office space. The common user (average person in the office seldom turns on or off various things) will need to hunt for the right switch.
- lnanek2 13y ago
  Yeah, but in a couple years new construction will probably just be putting LCD panels and voice control in instead of light switches anyway. So crude targeting lights on will just be done by voice and you can have a fancy map on the panel if you want since it is just an LCD anyway.
  - avn2109 13y ago
    I loathe the day when this becomes true. It's an isomorphic situation to the decline in user experience that happened when automobile dashboard interfaces went from hard controls (tactile feedback, easy to grab, simple) to special-purpose touchscreens (unreliable, complex, ugly).
  - mattlutze 13y ago
    Cost will continue to be a factor for many years. A panel of switches may cost $25, While an integrated LCD touchscreen networked back to a control unit may cost factors more. Construction being the low-margin business it often is, I would be surprised if too many LCD panels and voice activation is common in the near future. What I think is more likely are smarter motion/heat sensors combined with a scheduling system. During different times, certain banks of lights will turn on and off depending on the detection of people there. For conference rooms that may still need manual control lights for presentations, switches are fine because there's only one or two of them. No brainer.
jwr 13y ago
I don't like it either, but for a different reason. This is an example of narrow thinking: let's solve an immediate issue, rather than rethink the whole problem from the ground up. How often do you need to control a single light that is in a different place than where you stand? The problem is not with the light switch UI, it's with the whole concept of manually controlling every single light in the house. Why can't we have lighting that senses where we are and adapts accordingly? Why can't our lights go off when we lock the door? Rather than get excited about a conceptually complex light switch, I'd like to see a home lighting system that doesn't require one in the first place.
- whyme 13y ago
  To me this is one of those examples where you might re-think the whole problem from the ground up, then take a step back when realizing the absolute solution is not the perfect solution. Take for example, the clap-it lights; while yes it requires less effort than walking over and flicking the switch, it's also extremely annoying to do. Likewise, I would get really annoyed when lights go on and off according to where I walk. Of course I don't have a Nest either and yet it does fill a need for some people.
- blktiger 13y ago
  I can just picture it now... I'm sitting in the living room reading a book when my wife leaves and locks the door... :)
aroch 13y ago
In fairness, I still haven't figured out what switches do what in the panel in my lab, but that's because there are multiple sets of switches in different areas of the lab that change thbe behavoir of the bank of switches I would use
forgottenpass 13y ago
I agree with you, especially because I rarely LOOK at the light-switch I'm flipping. Even at a friend's apartment, which of the switches I need to flip when entering the bathroom is a muscle memory task now. More importantly, the floorplan lightswitch (at least from my reading of this short piece on it) doesn't have a nice way to handle multiple sets of lights interlaced with each-other on the same physical area. Experimentation with which switch on a boundary of two rooms that you need to flip is cheap. Where experimentation takes longer is where the floorplan switch fails too. I immediately think to a gymnasium that had a huge bank of light-switches, for things like overhead fans, exhaust fans, lights that would take 15 minutes to warm up (don't want to accidentally shut those off!), secondary low lighting for when the main lighting is warming up and each of those would have up to 4 switches for different sections of the gym. The answer was text labels. Super easy, super simple. That's a pathological case, but business space has this problem, and multiple switches for single rooms is common enough in homes too. It seems like the floorplan idea could be incorporated as a set of graphical map-based labeling on physical switches themselves. Anybody who knows the room relies on muscle memory, everyone else can use labels. And because the labels themselves aren't the active surface, they can be more specific that a touch sized button allows. Touching a kitchen on the map might be a lot of light at night, a switch underneath a picture of the kitchen that has the recessed lighting higligted wouldn't.

ekux44 13y ago

Has Goldee ever shown details on user input yet? I can only find concept photos with it lit us showing status, and vague mentions of gesture detection.

arrrg 13y ago

It depends on the application. Just think about how big shared spaces that would need such a light switch are typically used. Any one person will use the light switches only rarely (and frequently forget what the switches do between using them, so it’s not only about first time use). In such a situation an easily understandable light switch is preferable to a row of switches (especially since disturbing other people in that space by randomly switching on and off lights is not a pleasant experience for anyone). Whenever a space is used by many different people such a design seems preferable to me. Also, these big shared spaces happen to be the ones that would require such a light switch in the first place. Replacing every light switch with a floor plan switch? That would be a bad idea, sure, but there are applications that make a lot of sense.

mattlutze 13y ago

The better argument, I think, is "Do we need that much optimization?" Does the trial and error performed by a casual switch user cost us so much that spending the money on custom layout light panels makes sense? I think only in a very small set of applications. To counterpoint your second paragraph: The existing wall switches are much more than a poor first time experience and require more cognition. When using the "efficient" vertical wall switch panel, you already have to import your full object recognition library without errors. You then have to call up your list of mappings between rooms and switch position on the panel so you can flip the correct one. With the map, you only need to load your scheme of the office into active memory to select the appropriate switch. Further, the map provides error checking for your cognitive model, confirming / reinforcing the true layout (in a complex map, a user is bound to forget a room or take longer to recall it's location without the external map). Anecdotally, I lived in my family's third house for a year and a half, and never completely memorized the functions of the 6 switch panel in our front hall. Imagine an office, where different panels control different light banks depending on where they are in that large office space. The common user (average person in the office seldom turns on or off various things) will need to hunt for the right switch.

lnanek2 13y ago
Yeah, but in a couple years new construction will probably just be putting LCD panels and voice control in instead of light switches anyway. So crude targeting lights on will just be done by voice and you can have a fancy map on the panel if you want since it is just an LCD anyway.
- avn2109 13y ago
  I loathe the day when this becomes true. It's an isomorphic situation to the decline in user experience that happened when automobile dashboard interfaces went from hard controls (tactile feedback, easy to grab, simple) to special-purpose touchscreens (unreliable, complex, ugly).
- mattlutze 13y ago
  Cost will continue to be a factor for many years. A panel of switches may cost $25, While an integrated LCD touchscreen networked back to a control unit may cost factors more. Construction being the low-margin business it often is, I would be surprised if too many LCD panels and voice activation is common in the near future. What I think is more likely are smarter motion/heat sensors combined with a scheduling system. During different times, certain banks of lights will turn on and off depending on the detection of people there. For conference rooms that may still need manual control lights for presentations, switches are fine because there's only one or two of them. No brainer.

jwr 13y ago

I don't like it either, but for a different reason. This is an example of narrow thinking: let's solve an immediate issue, rather than rethink the whole problem from the ground up. How often do you need to control a single light that is in a different place than where you stand? The problem is not with the light switch UI, it's with the whole concept of manually controlling every single light in the house. Why can't we have lighting that senses where we are and adapts accordingly? Why can't our lights go off when we lock the door? Rather than get excited about a conceptually complex light switch, I'd like to see a home lighting system that doesn't require one in the first place.

whyme 13y ago
To me this is one of those examples where you might re-think the whole problem from the ground up, then take a step back when realizing the absolute solution is not the perfect solution. Take for example, the clap-it lights; while yes it requires less effort than walking over and flicking the switch, it's also extremely annoying to do. Likewise, I would get really annoyed when lights go on and off according to where I walk. Of course I don't have a Nest either and yet it does fill a need for some people.
blktiger 13y ago
I can just picture it now... I'm sitting in the living room reading a book when my wife leaves and locks the door... :)

aroch 13y ago

In fairness, I still haven't figured out what switches do what in the panel in my lab, but that's because there are multiple sets of switches in different areas of the lab that change thbe behavoir of the bank of switches I would use

forgottenpass 13y ago

I agree with you, especially because I rarely LOOK at the light-switch I'm flipping. Even at a friend's apartment, which of the switches I need to flip when entering the bathroom is a muscle memory task now. More importantly, the floorplan lightswitch (at least from my reading of this short piece on it) doesn't have a nice way to handle multiple sets of lights interlaced with each-other on the same physical area. Experimentation with which switch on a boundary of two rooms that you need to flip is cheap. Where experimentation takes longer is where the floorplan switch fails too. I immediately think to a gymnasium that had a huge bank of light-switches, for things like overhead fans, exhaust fans, lights that would take 15 minutes to warm up (don't want to accidentally shut those off!), secondary low lighting for when the main lighting is warming up and each of those would have up to 4 switches for different sections of the gym. The answer was text labels. Super easy, super simple. That's a pathological case, but business space has this problem, and multiple switches for single rooms is common enough in homes too. It seems like the floorplan idea could be incorporated as a set of graphical map-based labeling on physical switches themselves. Anybody who knows the room relies on muscle memory, everyone else can use labels. And because the labels themselves aren't the active surface, they can be more specific that a touch sized button allows. Touching a kitchen on the map might be a lot of light at night, a switch underneath a picture of the kitchen that has the recessed lighting higligted wouldn't.