11–20 of 28 posts
Between our senses and external reality, there will always be an interface. The beauty of computers is we are much less dependent on the physical properties of actual objects in designing those interfaces. Maybe that's what the author is getting at, but I think they are saying it wrong.
You effectively just described what "good design" is -- so effortless, it's invisible. This isn't a new concept, but with the recent focus on design in startups, I guess it's finally coming to light outside the design community.
Thus -- a connecting thought from communication theory: "I didn't have time to write a short letter, so I've written a long one instead." - attributed to Blaise Pascal, Mark Twain.
Good communication is clear and simple: in conveying the message, it connects both the hearts and the brains of the author and the reader. This idea of simplicity isn't unique to hardware design, or software code, or written communication, or math ... but I don't believe that's the key takeaway. The point is that it's so difficult to understand and appreciate how much time and effort it takes, spent by talented and focused people, before the solution becomes simple and clean.
This is exactly why Siri is important. It is context aware and stays out of your way until you need it. I am very bullish on voice-driven apps of all kinds.
You wouldn't use Siri on a date, or in public would you? There are just some important issues that are raised by Siri that a lot of people sort of neglect. I don't think voice apps will be successful in a broad, paradigm shifting way. But, they will have their niche and there will be some fundamental princples that are learned.
I think the author is confused. He isn't talking about interfaces, he's talking about functionality. In his examples of mobile applications, interface is actually everything: the app is a point of overlap between the user's singular need and the tool that provides a targeted solution. (We can argue over the distinction of user interface vs. interface, but I posit the former follows the latter.)
In other words, the mobile app interface is not non-existent, but perfect: a single point of overlap between need and function.
From the article: That’s precisely what a tool is: something which requires very little explanation for how to use it, because it is designed so precisely for its purpose, that how to use it is obvious. If you’re trying to dig a hole with your hands, you don’t need much explanation for how to use a shovel. “This is the handle” is about the extent of it.
That's an example of a perfect interface, not no interface!
Physical objects have/are interfaces too. What do you think handles, levers, door knobs, gear shifters, file cabinets and flat surfaces are? Between our senses and external reality, there will always be an interface. The beauty of computers is we are much less dependent on the physical properties of actual objects in designing those interfaces. Maybe that's what the author is getting at, but I think they are saying i…
EDIT: it was probably more accurately the late 90s
This is exactly why Siri is important. It is context aware and stays out of your way until you need it. I am very bullish on voice-driven apps of all kinds.
I think Siri is important in a variety of ways, but voice driven apps in the traditional model (a la Siri) aren't how I perceive the future of interfaces to be. You wouldn't use Siri on a date, or in public would you? There are just some important issues that are raised by Siri that a lot of people sort of neglect. I don't think voice apps will be successful in a broad, paradigm shifting way. But, they will have thei…
Your interface has to be a metaphore for a real-world process. If it isn't then you are a) doing it wrong or b) there is no direct mapping to a real-world process.
Why?