HCI is about people, interactions and system interfaces. First, people do what people are good at, such as observation, interpreting, determining what is important, and making the final decisions. There are situations where human decisions need to be assisted by data visualizations. Secondly, the computer does what it is good at, which is repetitive tasks and routine. Finally, collectively, people will make better decisions or influence each other on their decisions. But neither people (individual or communities) nor computers are forced to do what the other does better. HCI strives to integrate the two so they can compliment each other to achieve more productivity.

There are quite a few challenges in applying universal design in the context of HCI in order to provide the formative insight needed to design interactive products that can be experienced by the mass in different contexts. The distinctive characteristics of these products may be identified by briefly considering the changes in the socio-technical paradigm; from the early days of computing to the 21st century human interfaces intended to provide a gateway into the world of distributed information paradigm; the scope and context of use of the computer (hard to define what a computer is these days, what is the computing power needed in order to be called a computer),;as it becomes a mediating tool for increasing different types of human (both business and personal) activities.

In another short 5-10 years, mini or micro computing devices will be everywhere as medical and consumer devices becoming mass. While HCI is still in its infancy, some HCI practitioners are trying to break away from common conception of an “average” user interacting with a laptop in the office to get work done, and to engage in a conscious effort to develop new understanding, methodologies and tools, in order to understand the following:

How emerging new distributed computational paradigms will create new challenges for HCI designs? How do we research behavior that does not exist today?
How new interaction /interface design can be effectively used to serve an increasing range of system-mediated human activities?
When does interactions / interface design cross the line and becoming service design? Interactive artifacts are now being introduced into service settings in a larger degree.
How new visceral interactions that are driven by interactive paradigms rather than user needs emerge, beyond the imagination of the novice users?
What are the emerging threats to privacy that force us to rethink some fundamental concepts in HCI when attackers, ranging from the curious to the highly malicious, might abuse or subvert the system?

The concept continues along the path of a One Dimensional orientation of windows, but does an admirable job of trying to make it work easily for the user.  The multitouch pad has raised edges (a clever affordance) that allows the user to press these areas to access global operations (similar to that of the Start Button on a Windows OS) and an area that allows the user to access applications specific settings (such as opening a webpage or choosing a bookmark from within a browser).

The concept video goes on to detail how the OS would change for the multitouch to allow it to reach its full potential.  Unfortunately, this is where the input method falls flat for me.  Multitouch, for the mainstream, originated on the mobile cell platform, and became successful because it was used smartly rigiht off the bat courtesy of the iPhone.  The reasoning behind this, is that there really is no alternative on the mobile platform besides clicking or using a scroll wheel (ala blackberry, although thats now optical wheel if we are going to get technical).  Multitouch makes perfect sense on the mobile platform because there is no other input method that allows the user to navigate a UI as quickly or as easily as your own hands.  Since none of the other potential input methods used in cell phones have any advantage in terms of accuracy, multitouch’s lack of accuracy is no longer an issue.  However, when one moves to a less mobile situation, such as a desktop computer, the disadvantages of the multitouch become much more apparent, and the oft championed advantages tend to be somewhat gimmicky.

While movies and Apple may have convinced us that the way of the future is through touch technology, I’m not sold on it yet.  The ability to have all 10 fingers performing multiple tasks at one time, as 10/GUI claims for an advantage of multitouch,  is akin to forcing each user to learn to play the piano if they are to get the most out of their technology.  While there are certainly many people who would be able to adapt quite easily to multiple tasks being performed at once with both hands, there are most definetly a large number which would be stuck doing things one handed (think of how many people you know who couldn’t play a tune to save their life on piano).  The mouse, while relegated to one hand, leaves the other free to use the keyboard, something which looks like it would be uncomfortable in the 10/GUI system.  Regardless of that, the mouse offers up one undeniable advantage over the multitouch approach, and that is accuracy and versatility.

If you think of some of the applications you use on a daily basis, whether it be for fun or for work, or whatever the case may be, you will likely encounter scenarios where you would not want to part ways with your mouse.  Using Solidworks (or any 3d modelling application really) would be an exercise in frustration, not to mention the fact that I would be inclined to never use Photoshop again (not all of us are this good).

The problem with new technology is that everyone is in a rush to exclaim it as the next big thing and the solution to all the current problems, but technology rarely works like that.  Computers were supposed to make our lives less taxing, and help us accomplish work quicker so we would have more leisure time.  Instead, they allowed us to accomplish work quicker, and now we are expected to move at the speed of light, be connected 24/7, and accomplish more than ever.  I’m not trying to say that multitouch isn’t without it’s merits, and that concepts such as 10/GUI are useless, but rather that more thought needs to be taken to determining the legitmate problems in the first place.  If we are trying to fix problems that don’t exist, we are simply spinning our wheels.  If we are trying to crowbar in a technology into every product we manufacture, it is not going to work everytime.  However, if we do sit down, and think through what technology would best solve the well researched problems that have been found, then maybe we can begin to advance efficiently and quickly, instead of this trial and error system manufacturers seem so attatched to currently.

Click the Image to Open the Video in a New Window

However, 10/GUI attempts to distance itself from the standard multitouch input methods that are on the market (such as the HP Touchsmart’s) by reinventing the way in which the interaction takes place.  Instead of one screen, 10/GUI employs a multitouch screen on the desk where a mouse would normally sit, which has a 1:1 interaction with the screen display which is in the normal position. 

What this does is increase the precision of multitouch by allowing for the user to avoid dealing with being unable to see through their own fingers, as well as eleviating ergonomic issues that arise with traditional touch input (fatigure from poking a monitor on a desk, or neck pain from staring down at a touch display on a table).  Miller goes on to further describe how he feels an OS could function given this new method of user input, but makes one critical false assumption.  When organizing what he feels is the currently overcluttered and arbitrarily placed windows of an OS, he forces them to a linear, page by page notion in his concept.  While he makes great strides towards making it work, it begs the question, is this really a problem in the first place?

Many users who are prone to having a significant number of windows open at once tend to fall under the banner of ‘expert user’, or at the very least, ‘intermediate user’.  These types of users tend to enjoy restrictions about as much as a bear enjoys having their space invaded, and the linear system is going to cause significant problem for these ‘power’ users, as windows are often arranged consciously, not arbitrarily as Miller suggests.  The amount of times I will have multiple windows open at the same time, with only certain bits and pieces showing is countless, and for someone to take that away for the sake of ‘organization’ seems backwards.  Function should override the ‘cleanliness’ of the aesthetic every time, and especially in such a significant area of the User Interface…

]]> http://www.ideacouture.com/blog/2009/11/25/is-the-mouse-obsolete/feed/ 1