Live data from Hacker News

A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

worrydream.com

51–60 of 156 posts

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#51
I can't help but think that the success of the iPhone and iPad has caused a big step back in usability among devices that try to copy them.

Two similar examples:

Garmin's newer aircraft GPS units have touch screens instead of knobs and buttons. The iPad has proven very popular among pilots. I can see why Garmin would decide that "touch is the future." But, while I'm flying an airplane, for my money I'd rather have knobs to grab and twist, and buttons to push and feel.

Tesla's new Model S uses one huge touch screen for its in-dash interface. Surely, if you want to change your music's volume or turn on air conditioning while driving, it's harder to hit touch targets that are Pictures Under Glass than to grab and twist a knob.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#52
post #3

Excellent Post. More of that please. I think some sort of HUD in glasses will be the future. Doesnt take up much space (presumably) and allows for rich gesture interaction (like whats already possible with Kinect)

Bret Victor has a longer essay from 2006 on user interface design, called "Magic Ink." It's similarly insightful and interesting. http://worrydream.com/#!/MagicInk I've submitted a HN story for it: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3213535

I http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1059496

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#53
post #51

I can't help but think that the success of the iPhone and iPad has caused a big step back in usability among devices that try to copy them. Two similar examples: Garmin's newer aircraft GPS units have touch screens instead of knobs and buttons. The iPad has proven very popular among pilots. I can see why Garmin would decide that "touch is the future." But, while I'm flying an airplane, for my money I'd rather have kn…

I would counter those sentiments with the ZuneHD experience. Most people haven't used one, but touch isn't vision focused. With the Zune in my pocket, I can unlock, skip a track, stop, play, change the volume (on the screen, not a rocker on the side). I can also try to shuffle/unshuffle, but that isn't as easy.

I was actually amazed that Apple completely missed the ability to use touch when you weren't looking at the device.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#54
I would submit that part of the problem is that nobody really has a clue how to use your hands. Are we going to have a thingy for every subtask that we want to do? Are our computer workstations going to resemble carpenter workbenches? Probably not, if for no other reason that lack of cost effectiveness. We've got something like the Wiimote as pretty much the epitome of hand-based interaction, but it's not very precise for anything that isn't a game.

I don't mean this as a criticism of the post, I mean it as a stab at an explanation. It is a good point and I've been complaining about the primitive point and grunt interfaces[1] we've had for a while, but it's not even remotely clear where to go from here without (touchscreens are only an incremental point & grunt improvement over mice, you get a couple more gestures at the c another huge leap in processing power and hardware, at the minimum encompassing some sort of 3D glasses overlay for augmented reality or something.

[1]: The mouse is point & grunt. You get one point of focus and 1 - 5 buttons (including the mousewheel as up, down, and click). For as excited as some people have been about touchscreens, they're only a marginal improvement if they're even that; you still have only a couple kinds of "clicks", and you lose a lot on the precision of your pointing. Interfaces have papered that over by being designed for your even-more-amorphous-than-usual grunting, but when you look for it you realize that touchscreens are a huge step back on precision. They'll probably have a place in our lives for a long time but they are hardly the final answer to all problems, and trying to remove the touchscreen and read vague gestures directly has even bigger precision problems.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#55
post #51

I can't help but think that the success of the iPhone and iPad has caused a big step back in usability among devices that try to copy them. Two similar examples: Garmin's newer aircraft GPS units have touch screens instead of knobs and buttons. The iPad has proven very popular among pilots. I can see why Garmin would decide that "touch is the future." But, while I'm flying an airplane, for my money I'd rather have kn…

Two counterpoints:

1) "targets" are a part of tactile interfaces, in touch interfaces we may shed the need for accurate targets (i.e. gestures can be made anywhere on a screen)

2) Confidence that comes from the physical response from tactile systems may just be an anachronism after a decade or two of built up trust in touchscreen systems

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#56
post #51

I can't help but think that the success of the iPhone and iPad has caused a big step back in usability among devices that try to copy them. Two similar examples: Garmin's newer aircraft GPS units have touch screens instead of knobs and buttons. The iPad has proven very popular among pilots. I can see why Garmin would decide that "touch is the future." But, while I'm flying an airplane, for my money I'd rather have kn…

I would counter those sentiments with the ZuneHD experience. Most people haven't used one, but touch isn't vision focused. With the Zune in my pocket, I can unlock, skip a track, stop, play, change the volume (on the screen, not a rocker on the side). I can also try to shuffle/unshuffle, but that isn't as easy. I was actually amazed that Apple completely missed the ability to use touch when you weren't looking at the…

They didn't completely miss it - go to settings, general, accessibility, and you can enable voiceover which reads anything you touch out loud and makes you double click to activate, so you can navigate without sight.

It's terrible if you want a hardware button to skip a track, but it's usable for basically any iOS app with standard UI controls - including web browsing - which a hardware button isn't.

I've never seen a Zune in person - do you just mean it has lots of buttons for all those tasks, or how does the touch interaction work on it without individual hardware buttons?

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#57
post #13

The article focuses on "everyday object" manipulation, but he's right about technology too: there are a wealth of common HCI tools that glass cannot accommodate. - The textual keyboard remains one of the fastest methods of text entry. It can be used without looking, offers high bandwidth, affords both serial and chorded inputs, and works well for precise navigation in discrete spaces, like text, spreadsheets, sets of…

The Kinect is a great example of using the most expressive form of interaction we have - our entire body. It's the right idea. The latest updates even do facial recognition (identify muscle movement). Too bad it doesn't scale to smaller devices/cramped objects. I wonder how small kinect-like tech has to get before it makes its way into smart phones, etc. However, I think voice might be a more expressive medium there,…

I think Kinects/distance detectors are still very young technology. Imagine how far it could be pushed with just engineering. A very high resolution detector could identify facial expressions, smiles, grimaces, smirks, a whole gamut of emotional inputs. Push the resolution even higher and you could use iris movements to zoom in and out based on what the user is trying to look at.

Voice control was omitted from the video, I don't really understand that. I still think natural language is potentially the best mode of interaction and other modes would be secondary after that.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#58
post #51

I can't help but think that the success of the iPhone and iPad has caused a big step back in usability among devices that try to copy them. Two similar examples: Garmin's newer aircraft GPS units have touch screens instead of knobs and buttons. The iPad has proven very popular among pilots. I can see why Garmin would decide that "touch is the future." But, while I'm flying an airplane, for my money I'd rather have kn…

Two counterpoints: 1) "targets" are a part of tactile interfaces, in touch interfaces we may shed the need for accurate targets (i.e. gestures can be made anywhere on a screen) 2) Confidence that comes from the physical response from tactile systems may just be an anachronism after a decade or two of built up trust in touchscreen systems

So, Ipads for navigation displays in a cockpit - great idea. But, would you really like your pilot to trust that an airplane is descending because Siri said it was? Don't think so.

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#59

Great post. Has there been any interaction research done on using something like a stress ball as an interaction device for digital environment? In my imagination a ball would have standard accelerometers and gyroscopes, but in addition fine-grained sensing capabilities to sense different kind of grips. It could also provide tactile feedback.

Music tech has been wrestling with novel controllers including several like the kind you speak of for a while now: http://www.nime.org. Take a look through some of those conference notes for ideas. This is from 2003: http://nime.org/2003/nime03_program.html

Re: A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design

#60
post #17

I just watched the video, and typed my reactions, as I had them; no idea if this will be of interest. * * * People still travel for meetings? By plane? Wait, someone is driving the car? Thats not very productive. There are bellhops? Why are there still bellhops in the future? What do they do? Why is the screen so small? Why have a screen, if you have those perfect augmented reality glasses? 'Creating reply interface'…

love it!
Post reply on HN