Re:The best interface is no interface
by TeMPOraL on Tuesday March 17, 2015 @05:28PM
(#9221638)
> 1. The system has to be told exactly how to perform a task. 2. The system has reasonable defaults on how to do it. You push execute. 3. The system knows what you want and just does it.
This. Interface is by the very definition a barrier between your brain and the system you want to change (by "system" I mean a system in general sense, a hammer, nail and a piece of wood also form a system). What matters is your goal and the change of system's state - everything else is cruft and we should aim to remove it.
Your brain actually tries to do that by its own. You can see it when e.g. driving a car. At first you're aware of everything - the steering wheel, the pedals, the gear shift knob, etc. You consciously manipulate them to move the car around. But at some point, with enough accumulated experience, you don't really think about the interface anymore. You just think "I want to be there" and do all the required movements to steer the car to the right place.
What is important for your brain to learn to ignore the interface is the interface being predictable and consistent. This is where, I think, smartphones are a step backwards compared to old featured phones. As we moved from firmware to full OSes, you can't rely anymore on timing. For example, on my old SE K800i I could do most frequent actions without even taking my phone from my pocket, because my brain learned the position and timing of various options. "Press Right Function, move down twice, press Right Function, wait 0.7 seconds, press Right Function...", etc. It's something that you can't do on a smartphone, because the new tech is laggy and full of unpredictable interface delays.
> The next step forward is probably to geofence your car and when you're near, a push notification asks you if you'd like to open your car door.
Or we could, you know, use NFC for opening and/or BLE for determining if the phone is near/inside the car.
Geofencing is totally a wrong tool for the job (and so far every time I heard it being suggested for something, ot was wrong for that as well).
> Finally, we get to the two step walk to door, open door.
We could do that decades ago. The way smartphones are getting introduced into the equation seems to be a huge leap backwards.
Re:The best interface is no interface
by to3m on Tuesday March 17, 2015 @06:15PM
(#9221974)
I used to text while driving when I was a young man. My Nokia 2110 had no T9 and nice big buttons, so I could do this without the phone ever having to leave my coat pocket. I would even properly punctuate, too!
This. Interface is by the very definition a barrier between your brain and the system you want to change (by "system" I mean a system in general sense, a hammer, nail and a piece of wood also form a system). What matters is your goal and the change of system's state - everything else is cruft and we should aim to remove it.
Your brain actually tries to do that by its own. You can see it when e.g. driving a car. At first you're aware of everything - the steering wheel, the pedals, the gear shift knob, etc. You consciously manipulate them to move the car around. But at some point, with enough accumulated experience, you don't really think about the interface anymore. You just think "I want to be there" and do all the required movements to steer the car to the right place.
What is important for your brain to learn to ignore the interface is the interface being predictable and consistent. This is where, I think, smartphones are a step backwards compared to old featured phones. As we moved from firmware to full OSes, you can't rely anymore on timing. For example, on my old SE K800i I could do most frequent actions without even taking my phone from my pocket, because my brain learned the position and timing of various options. "Press Right Function, move down twice, press Right Function, wait 0.7 seconds, press Right Function...", etc. It's something that you can't do on a smartphone, because the new tech is laggy and full of unpredictable interface delays.
> The next step forward is probably to geofence your car and when you're near, a push notification asks you if you'd like to open your car door.
Or we could, you know, use NFC for opening and/or BLE for determining if the phone is near/inside the car.
Geofencing is totally a wrong tool for the job (and so far every time I heard it being suggested for something, ot was wrong for that as well).
> Finally, we get to the two step walk to door, open door.
We could do that decades ago. The way smartphones are getting introduced into the equation seems to be a huge leap backwards.