Summer School 2006
After Ivrea, Roma, Split and Timisoara the 5th Convivio Summer School came to Edinburgh, August 14th-25th.
The theme this year was: "Technology, Enjoying or Enduring it? Visions, Boundaries and Transformations in Extending or Replacing Human Capacities."
Read more...
- Categories
-
archive
Archive for the 'User Interface Design' Category
11-12-2006 by
The complexity of simplicity.
In “The Complexity of Simplicity” Luke Wroblewski looks at how simplicity, often hailed as the holy grail of interface design, is quite hard to get right (if at all):
“Many of us carry a few preconceived notions about simplicity. We assume things that are easy to use don’t have a lot of options and, as a result, shouldn’t appear cluttered when we first encounter them.
Conversely, a perception of complexity can turn customers, clients, or business stakeholders off before they ever actually use a product.
Cultural context can also sway people’s perceptions of simplicity.
Regardless of the specific biases of individuals, notions of perceived complexity can prevent potential users from discovering the simplicity of a product’s actual use.
While there are many reasons why keeping things simple is difficult, I’ve encountered the following three causes quite frequently:
1.
Perceived simplicity can often conflict with actual simplicity of usage.
2.
Actions that provide real value, and drive revenue, often have formidable learning curves.
3.
Gradual engagement, the most frequently cited solution for managing complexity, is actually quite difficult to design and build.”
Posted in Interaction Design, User Experience, Human Centered Design, User Interface Design | No Comments »
09-11-2006 by
User Experience Research.
Andreas Pfeiffer’s “User Experience Research” introduces the concept of User Interface Friction, another measure to gauge the quality of the User Experience:
“How do we compare technology?
In our innovation-driven society, we tend to compare technology almost exclusively by looking at features and performance.
This functionality-centric approach is utterly natural … (but) as technology matures, features are not that important any more.
So if we don’t look at features any more, what DO we look when we try to decide on the comparative merits of two products?
Design? Style? Both are difficult to measure, and don’t do much on their own.
Of course there is always “user experience”, an increasingly important aspect in the success of technology-related products, but an equally elusive one.
These considerations led us to come up with a new concept, that has proven extremely useful in conducting technology analysis.
Since in nature it is somewhat similar to the physical notion of friction, we called it User Interface Friction (UIF).
UIF is the resistance imposed upon a user-guided process through the operating system and the way the user interface reacts.
In most cases, it has nothing to do with functionality: we use the term User Interface Friction to define the difference in fluidity and productivity that can be observed when running the same program or procedure on different computer systems, or when trying to achieve the goal on two similar digital devices.”
(via InfoDesign)
Posted in Interaction Design, User Experience, User Interface Design | No Comments »
28-09-2006 by
Ambient Signifiers.
Inspired by the Tokyo Rail system, in “Ambient Signifiers (How I Learned to Stop Getting Lost and Love Tokyo Rail)” Ross Howard talks about the use of subtle signals to help people navigate complex information spaces:
“While traveling the Tokyo rail lines, I quickly realized that apart from the obvious use of real-time electronic signage, colored trains, and audio announcements, there were also other techniques being used to assist travelers in knowing where they were, and where they were going.
These techniques were subtler, and bordered on subliminal.
Simple chime melodies sounded on each platform as the train was waiting for passengers to get on and off … these melodies were different for each station.
After long-term use of the same route, commuters build up a unique chain of melodies that accompany them on their way home.
Without necessarily realizing why, they begin to establish a familiarity with these sounds, and can quickly discover when they have overshot their destination by hearing an unfamiliar melody that indicates a strange place.
I call these cues ‘ambient signifiers’: design elements that communicate subtly as part of the environment’s ambiance.
Current web designs tend to communicate using overt signifiers such as icons and text (and) these small, high-frequency elements require active seeking on the user’s part.
Ambient signifiers, on the other hand, are more constant and low-frequency in nature, working on a more passive and subconscious level without any effort from the user.
Because of their low frequency, they can communicate effectively irrespective of the competing high frequency ’sensory noise’ present in today’s rich and complex web interfaces.
Users don’t have to look anywhere: ambient signifiers are felt everywhere.“
Posted in Interaction Design, Ubiquitous Computing, User Interface Design | No Comments »
26-09-2006 by
Tangible user interfaces: misconceptions and insights.
Nicolas Nova has just posted “Tangible user interfaces: misconceptions and insights.” (PDF, 6.2 MB), an interesting introduction to problems currently being faced by interaction designers in this area.
“Misconception 1: inert objects do not lead to tangible interactions.
Misconception 2:
Direct mapping is simple and intuitive.
Misconception 3:
Physical interfaces offer a larger variety of control than standard controllers, and are more realistic and intuitive.
Misconception 4:
People want ambient information and ambient is just ambient.
Misconception 5:
The starting point of designing TUI is to look at real-life counterparts.
Misconception 6:
Tangible interfaces are ubiquitous and allow mobile/seamless interactions.
Misconception 7:
Tangible interactions = gestural interactions with small devices.
Misconception 8:
Tangible interactions rely on a ‘one shot’ model and objects are stable.
Misconception 9:
Tangible interaction is about interaction and not cognition; interaction is direct.
Misconception 10:
Tangible interaction are a matter of human beings and the environment.“
Posted in Interaction Design, Ubiquitous Computing, User Interface Design | No Comments »