Studio 4 - Usability Tools

Usability Goals - A Short Description

We want users of a system to be able to have a lot of freedom, while keeping it simple, effective, memorable and also safe for the user. This means that when we design a system we need to keep Usability Goals in mind - these are:

• Effectiveness - We want the system to be able to do everything required of it, while having an array of features that we need. For example: If we were creating a word processer system, we would need features to allow us to change the font, colour, size, layout, background and much more. If these type of features weren't implemented into the system, then it wouldn't be effective enough to create a style or format we need and therefore; would be unusable.
• Efficiency - The system needs to complete tasks in a simple and fast manner.
• Safety - The system should not break, corrupt files or lose data etc. i.e. when inserting a DVD into the cd-tray, the system should not scratch, melt or deface the disc.
• Utility - The system allows the user to complete tasks without hassle or be required to do anything technical. Also the system needs to have a variety of functions and features that can allow the user to use shortcuts and freedom.
• Learnability - Simple display of features and functions that are self-explained i.e. they make it easy for the user to learn the system.
• Memorability - Visually allows the user to easily remember how to use the system.

Design Principles - A Short Description

These are the design priciples based on The Design of Everyday Things by Don Norman:

• Visibility - How we look at things, and how we understand something simply from the visual content i.e. you look at door with a small rectangle piece of metal engraved with the word 'push' - from this we understand straight away to move through the door we need to push instead of pull and aim for the small metal panel.
• Feedback - Showing the user a task has been completed, sending infomation back to the user about what actions have been done. Forms of feedback: Lights, sounds, animation, movement, text or a combination of any.
• Constraints - Physical, Cultural and Logical. Physical involves the movement of thing being restricted. Cultural contraints involves learned conventions which help users within technology. Logical involves the exploit of people's reasoning i.e. relationship between an object and an image can represent 'danger' or 'insert here'
• Mapping - how useful is the controls and their movements being displayed in the real world i.e. a switch to turn off a light or a number keypad to turn of the light. Which is the easier option?
• Consistency - Keeping interfaces similar as well as the elements within them.
• Affordance - How obvious is the attributes of an object to the user to allow them to know how to use it without reading instructions. i.e. A user will look at a chair and instantly know by visually looking that you sit on the chair to use it.

Scenario

A mobile phone is a common tool that is used by most of the general public, however in certain situations we need our technology to do something that enables us to use the device but not disturb our environment and surroundings. When we go to a public library we still want to be notified of a phone call or text message without being loud and disturbing people, so we may need to adjust the volume of the phone.

'John has come to his local public library to do some research. However he is expecting a text message from his girlfriend at some point during the day and a phone call from a friend. Upon entering the library John walks past a sign "No noise. Please keep mobile phones on silent or switched off." He realises he has left his phone on and needs to reduce the sound encase of a text or phone call. To do this he needs to touch the 'off' button and select Silent with Vibrate. This allows John to keep his phone quiet, but the vibration will let him know if he recieves a text/phone call on his mobile phone'

Function

Turning a phone on silent. Usually done by touching the off button once and selecting silent, or with a shorcut button on the keypad by holding it down. The best possible way would be to use the shortcut button on the bottom-right of the keypad, it has a musical symbol with a line through it to indicate to the user that it will silence sound. The shortcut button on the keypad is efficent, memorable, effective and allows the user to utilise the function within seconds. The picture that dipicts the silent feature is also usually embossed (similar to a remote control or elevator button) which allows the user to complete this task without actually looking at the mobile phone. Embossing buttons seems to have become cutural in todays society, as it is already learned there isn't the need for learnability with this function.

Design

Feedback: The feedback given to the user is usually a small, short vibration of the phone and some sort of text/picture combination i.e. with a sony mobile phone it will vibrate while displaying a musical symbol crossed out and titled "Silent Mode".

Visibility: It doesn't actually need to be viewed to perfom this function, however the keypad is embossed and a symbol is used to depict the function of the button.

Mapping: It is a very clear and concise button displayed to the user to allow them to perform the silent mode function using the shortcut keypad button.

Constraints: This function comes with the physical restraint of movement (technically) and visual movement, because if the user isn't confident/comfortable with the mobile phone, they will need to look at keypad to perform the function.

Studio 3 - IDEO and Reading Week 3

Creative Design Approaches

Interpretive understanding of taking notice of what people do in their everyday lives, what they use and how they do it. Also, how this might inform design and create an influence within a design process.

Page 54, Parked Car
I think from this image, most people would assume that the driver of the car was in a hurry to get parked because they were late for some form of transport. However, if you notice in the car window screen the user has set up a sun block to keep the car cool; from this I feel that the driver wasn't in a rush.

The layout of the car park isn't making full use of the space available, because there is some left over room (see right-hand side of image). You can see that the car has been parked over the edge of parking line in order to give the car and user move room to get out of the car (possibly to remove luggage from the back seats). Also the bigger automobile (bottom-left of image) seems to have parked over the line as well because there is extra 'wasted' space next to the pre-designed parking space.

I think the main issue within this layout is the actual design of the car park itself. For example: the spaces have all be arranged in straight lines where as the end of the parking space is going diagonal ( \ ).

I think this image is very useful for informing design, because a solution is possible by simply changing the straight lines of the parking spaces to match the angle of the edges. Eg:

New Design: \ \ \ \ \ \ \

This would allow more cars to be parked within the area, make better use of the space given and would also generate more money for the owners of the car park (providing they charge per hour or day). Another Solution could be to provide wider parking spaces (possibly at an extra charge) for users with lots of luggage, large automobiles, families etc.

Page 86, Toilet Cubicle
The toilet in the image appears to be a disabled person's toilet, I say this because it has a bar along the wall, which is common to disabled toilet cubicles.

The main issue within this cubicle is space and distance. If this toilet cubicle is designed for disabled user, then I feel the layout is completely wrong. For example: the distance between the toilet rolls and the toilet itself has quite a bit of space between the two. This would prove to become a difficulty for the user (depending on their disability).

An example of this becoming a difficulty would be: If the disability was to do with the users legs, the wouldn't be able to reach over towards the toilet rolls by themselves without the risk of falling off.

Although I have picked out a potential problem within the image on page 86, there is something in the image that could influence design. You can notice that a user of this toilet cubicle has used a bar that is designed to help disabled people move onto/off the toilet for hanging up their newspaper.

This can lead to new designs within toilet cubicles, by including a small bar or a slot in the wall which will allow users to put magazines or newspapers in the toilet for future reading (if the toilet is within the work place). Although statistically more men read while on the toilet than women, so this design should 'possibly' be aimed towards men's toilets rather than womens.

The image also brings out some useful ideas for women cubicles, where a small bar could be put in place to allow women to hang their handbag upon whilst they are using the toilet. This would also stop robberies occurring through the bottom gaps on the toilet cubicle, which has occurred often, mainly in public toilets. Obviously one of the most common occurring things within a toilet cubicle will be a hook on the back of the door, where men and women can hang their coats, bags etc. However I believe this is still not a safe place for users to hang their bags/handbags because anybody can reach over the top and grab anything in reach, this is why I developed the idea of having some form of hanger next to the user, while they are sitting down.

Reading Week 3
Jane Fulton Suri and her team at IDEO use images to help understand ways that ordinary people use various objects in everyday use. It allows the team to develop new designs by studying how people interact normally within an environment. Jane uses images to learn “firsthand about the context, habits, rituals, priorities, processes and values of the people” , by using a collection of images Jane and her team can ask themselves various questions about, how the user is interacting with objects they are using, what they do whilst using and what they do within the environment.

An example of this would be on page 169 where they have used the concepts within a breakfast routine. The main focus of this study was to work on the concepts of 'toasting bread' before eating and 'juicing oranges' before drinking them. Whilst conducting the study of these rituals the design team developed breakfast concepts that they wished to study. Once the study was completed and after thinking about the activities rather than the juicer or toaster they understood various stages:
- Toasting bread & Stacking toasted bread – before eating it
- Juicing oranges & drinking juice

“By thinking about the activities rather than the 'juicer' or 'toaster' themselves, led to new ideas: a toast-rack life for the toaster and a straight-into-the-glass juicer”
(IDEO Reading, Page 169 by Jane Fulton Suri)

From the above example; you can see that the team at IDEO have thought of some concepts from daily tasks that people do in their everyday lives and studied them. They were asked to do this by a company named 'Matshushita' to see if they could improve the products. After studying the concepts, Jane and her team managed to improve the products to create a simple and more efficient product for the user. Jane and her team at IDEO tend to study people in comfortable surroundings, mainly in their own everyday life environment. By doing this, the team at IDEO can study how people interact with various things, how they differ and how improvements can be made.

Jane Fulton Suri goes on to say that, not everything in our surroundings has to be re-thought or re-designed with some unique idea to make it more exciting etc. She states “this is the type of product you see sold in an airplane catalog”. So as designers, we shouldn't attempt to re-design everything we see in our daily life – instead we should concentrate on how we could improve things to make them simple and more effcient, and try not to overdo our thinking when it comes our surroundings.

Studio 2 - iPod Usability Explorations and Reading Week 2

Ben Schneiderman’s 8 Golden Rules of Interface Design

To improve the usability of an application it is important to have a well designed interface. Schneiderman's "Eight Golden Rules of Interface Design" is a guide to good interaction design.

Strive for consistency

When a system is being used, each screen should look similar with the same type of language, such as an ipod – all the menus, prompts and other screens which are displayed use the same terminologies and display.

Enable frequent users to use shortcuts

After a while, a user will adapt to the system that their using and they will start to look for shorter methods, so they can perform tasks at a quicker pace of interaction. For example; When someone is using Microsoft Word and they need to copy and paste something to another document they can use function keys of Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V to do this method a lot quicker.

Offer informative feedback

For every action there should be some type of ‘feedback’ reaction, which lets the user know what is happening. Especially for actions that happen a lot less often, or a major event – they should let the user know what is happening and why. For example: A user has accidentally clicked on the ‘X’ to close a word document, the software prompts the user asking “Do you want to save changes to [document name].doc?” with the option of “Yes, No & Cancel”.

Design dialog to yield closure

When a user is performing tasks, their operations should have a clear start, middle and finish. Upon completion of a user’s task they should be provided with informative feedback – this allows the user to understand that a task has been completed, and they can start upon their next task.

Offer simple error handling

When designing a system, the developer should design it so the user can not accidentally click on something that will create a critical error. If this does occur, then the system should be able to detect the error and offer a very simple method for dealing with the problem, that the user can understand. For example; Microsoft Windows XP is designed so if a user created an error it has many various prompts informing the user, what has happened.

Permit easy reversal of actions

Allow the user the ability to go back a step encase of a mistake. This type of feature will make a user feel more relaxed about using the system, thus giving them the confidence to explore options that they wouldn’t normally use. For Example: In Microsoft Word, if the user accidentally deletes a few words or a whole page, the user can undo this by using Ctrl+Z.

Support internal locus of control

Make sure the user is in control of the system. That way the

user isn’t simply responding to what the system is doing and they are the ones who are telling the system what to do. This especially applies towards the experienced user, as they have a very strong desire for the sense of control over the system.

Reduce short-term memory load

The display for any system should be kept short, concise and straight-to-the point. As human’s we are limited in short-term memory processing, so we require that displays are kept simple and consolidated so that we; as users, can understand. For example; when using a word processor you can view multiple pages, however it will consolidate them so that it is easier for the user to view.

Usability Evaluation of an Apple iPod Nano

Task - To play a single track by an artist from a certain album.

Shortcuts

There are no possible shortcuts available to allow the user to shorten the time of selecting a specific song to play and listen to.

Dialog Closure

The iPod nano doesn't appear to have any closure of menus displayed. For the music player though, they menu has simple slide in transition effects when moving forwards/backwards throughout the music menus. In retrospect - transition effects whilst moving between menus could be seen as the opening and closing of different menu screens.

Consistency

The ipod nano has excellent consistency for a user, because the menu's, background, text style and visualisations never change. This is especially good for a first time user of an iPod Nano, because it allows them to become familiar with the ipod system. The following shows what makes the iPod very consistent:

• No Colour Change - whilst browsing through menu's there are no colour changes
• Simple Language - Plain English is used throughout (Albums, songs, artists etc)
• Locked Buttons - 'control panel' position is fixed
• Menu's - All the menu's are exactly the same (colour, text, layout, graphics etc)

Reduce Short-Term Memory Load
The entire system of the iPod is very basic, allowing the user to take in all of the information displayed to them at each menu level. Apple seem to have designed their iPod system to a very simplistic design, which allows almost any type of person to be their target audience.

Target Audience
I shall be choosing an age range of 12 - 22 year olds to be my target audience.

Instructions for Target Audience
The instructions to be used will be very simple allowing the users to concentrate more on the task and worry less about complicated instructions:

1. Press the middle button (circle) x2.
2. Artist folder should be displayed.
3. Run thumb or finger on outer circle in a clockwise direction to scroll down in menu (anti-clockwise to scroll up).
4. Once correct choice has been made press on middle button (circle) once.
5. Select 'All in Album' (this will display the entire list of songs from the album)
6. Repeat Step 3
7. Repeat Step 4

Analysis of Data
I will be concentrating on checking for user error's (how often they occur, timing etc). Once all data has been recorded I shall be comparing them with one another using age and interests, to see if there is any correlations between the two and easy of use of the iPod. I will also be looking into how to improve this experiment for future reference.

Schneirderman Satisfaction
The iPod Nano technology appears to satisfy the rules in my (non-byist) opinion. The only rule that it doesn't appear to satisfy is 'shortcuts' as the iPod nano doesn't have any short cuts due the simplistic nature of its system.

Reading Week 2
Usable-in-life - This refers to the ability to perform in real life situations and to find out if a device/product will work in a variety of everyday life scenario's.

Usability testing and evalutaion use this technique in order to test their products in a variety of circumstances which are not avaiable to a controlled area, i.e. laboratory. This technique will involve taking the device or product out into the natural enviroment in order to find out errors and difficulties that wouldn't get noticed within a lab-type environment. For example:

A user has been invited into a controlled environment within a research laboratory. Their task here is to test a product within a short-spaced time period and to perform actions requested by the researchers within this time period.

In that type of environment, most users would find them selves under a great deal of stress and would tend not to act naturally with the device given to them. This is mainly because they are not in their natural environment and often feel they are being watched , similar to an exam type situation. Where as; if the researchers have left the controlled area and entered into the tester's natural environment, the testing would more often than not prove to be a lot more worthwhile.

Usability-in-life vs Usability-in-itself

These concepts differ from each other vastly. They differ because one focus' on the internal usability of a device or product, where as 'in-life' will aim to focus on the post-testing of the device within the environment. 'In-itself' will focus on how usable the software is depending on a number of factors; consistency, reliability, shortcuts, longertivity, response etc.

IPod under the mircoscope

The iPod seems to meet all the requirments of both of the usability types of testing and in all circumstances. This is due the simplicity of the product; the menus, interface and general design of the device is easy to use in all situations in both controlled and natural environments.

In the natural enviroment the iPod is small but very effective as it interacts extremely well with a range of users where neither age, gender or user knowledge of the product effects its usability. The usability-in-itself is extremely good as well. The software and technology of the product is tested to its full extent in a controlled lab enviroment where the researchers can find out if anything need adjusting or improving. Using the latest and most up to date technology in these controlled environments Apple - the company who made the iPod; have assured that their product provides intelligent feedback, fail-safe interaction with the interface and a decent system recovery within its software.

Studio 1 – Definitions and images of pervasive computing and Reading Week 1

203CR – Designing for Usability 2

Studio 1 – Definitions and images of pervasive computing

List of Definitions
Below is a list of definitions found from various sources across the Internet via the Google (http://www.google.co.uk/) search engine, along with the links to where the definitions were taken from.

Pervasive Computing – Refers to the use of computers in everyday life, including PDAs, smartphones and other mobile devices. It also refers to computers contained in commonplace objects such as cars and appliances and implies that people are unaware of their presence. One of the Holy Grails of this environment is that all these devices communicate with each other over wireless networks without any interaction required by the user. (http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=pervasive+computing&i=49146,00.asp)
The idea that technology is moving beyond the personal computer to everyday devices with embedded technology and connectivity as computing devices become progressively smaller and more powerful. Also called ubiquitous computing, pervasive computing is the result of computer technology advancing at exponential speeds -- a trend toward all man-made and some natural products having hardware and software. Pervasive computing goes beyond the realm of personal computers: it is the idea that almost any device, from clothing to tools to appliances to cars to homes to the human body to your coffee mug, can be imbedded with chips to connect the device to an infinite network of other devices. The goal of pervasive computing, which combines current network technologies with wireless computing, voice recognition, Internet capability and artificial intelligence, is to create an environment where the connectivity of devices is embedded in such a way that the connectivity is unobtrusive and always available. (http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/P/pervasive_computing.html)

Pervasive computing is the trend towards increasingly ubiquitous (another name for the movement is ubiquitous computing), connected computing devices in the environment, a trend being brought about by a convergence of advanced electronic - and particularly, wireless - technologies and the Internet. Pervasive computing devices are not personal computers as we tend to think of them, but very tiny - even invisible - devices, either mobile or embedded in almost any type of object imaginable, including cars, tools, appliances, clothing and various consumer goods - all communicating through increasingly interconnected networks.
(http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid7_gci759337,00.html)

Analysis
All 3 of the definitions are very similar in the fact that they all state that Pervasive Computing is used in small devices. Also that Pervasive Computing can be embedded in almost anything that is man-made and whilst embedded it can be connected to a network or wireless device/network. All 3 definitions agree that this type of technology doesn’t require human interaction and that all pervasive computing devices can communicate with each other independently.

The definitions only differ from each other by interpreting the term Pervasive Computing in different ways. Pervasive Computing is generally agreed to be heavily in connection with ubiquitous computing, as all of the terms seem to trend toward one another. The above image explains a bit about pervasive computing by showing that a Human can keep track of personal things and information while ‘out and about’. The reason this is possible is because all the information tends to be embedded into many devices which interact with each other.

Ubiquitous computing – Making many computers available throughout the physical environment, while making them effectively invisible to the user. Ubiquitous computing is held by some to be the Third Wave of computing. The First Wave was many people per computer; the Second Wave was one person per computer. The Third Wave will be many computers per person. Three key technical issues are: power consumption, user interface, and wireless connectivity. (http://vdict.com/ubiquitous%20computing,6,0,0.html)

Ubiquitous computing (ubicomp) is a post-desktop model of human-computer interaction in which information processing has been thoroughly integrated into everyday objects and activities. As opposed to the desktop paradigm, in which a single user consciously engages a single device for a specialized purpose, someone "using" ubiquitous computing engages many computational devices and systems simultaneously, in the course of ordinary activities, and may not necessarily even be aware that they are doing so. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubiquitous_computing)

Ubiquitous computing, or calm technology, is a paradigm shift where technology becomes virtually invisible in our lives. Instead of having a desk-top or lap-top machine, the technology we use will be embedded in our environment. From the ubiquitous computing page at Xerox PARC [UBPARC] we have the following description: imagine a world with hundreds of wireless computing devices of different sizes in the same room. In order to bring this type of computing out into the environment, among the things we need to rethink are user interfaces, displays, operating systems, networks, and wireless communications. (http://www.cc.gatech.edu/classes/cs6751_97_fall/projects/say-cheese/marcia/mfinal.html)

Analysis
All 3 of the definitions for ubiquitous computing are very similar in the way they define how technology has become invisible to the Human everyday life. They all explain that ‘ubicomp’ a.k.a. ‘calm technology’ is making computer interaction available everywhere in physical environment but at the same time this technology is hardly noticeable.

The definitions don’t really tend to differ from each other, because all 3 have come to the same conclusion that ubiquitous computing is availability of many computers to a single user with the use of wireless communications. The only different approach to explaining the term ubiquitous computing is that we, as people need to rethink everything we use in computing to date in order to allow the full flow of ubiquitous computing within the environment. This image clearly shows a ubiquitous computing environment, while displaying how people would use a device in their everyday use without realising where the information is actually coming from, and how much they interact with each other.

Ambient Computing – Ambient computing is about moving computing capabilities beyond the desktop and about constantly and seamlessly adapting configurations of technology to changing situations and needs. Key issues in ambient computing include: Invisibility, e.g. that computing is embedded in other everyday objects:

• Construction, e.g. that new possibilities can be obtained by putting existing components together.
• Heterogeneity, e.g. that components should function in many fundamentally different contexts and configurations.
• Change, e.g. reflecting that the needs and the technologies are changing continuously.
• Scalability, e.g. that solutions that work with few users and in a limited context, should also work in almost unlimited contexts.

(http://www.daimi.au.dk/~olavb/AQLWS/)

Analysis
This definition shows that Ambient Computing heavily interacts with ubiquitous computing by agreeing that the computing technology needs to be embedded in everyday objects whilst being invisible. The term Ambient Computing is very similar to all of the other terminologies, because they all agree about the future of computing is multi-tasking, multi-user and can function in any type of environment whilst being barrier-free.

This image is used to display how everything within our daily lives can be embedded with technology and linked to a network. All embedded devices would be ‘wirelessly’ connected to a network, with the ability of all devices communicating with each other – without the need to human-computer interaction.

Disappearing Computing – In the context of disappearing computing, the user is engaged in mobile interaction sessions, with wearable machinery, while the software should be able to dynamically utilize distributed remote I/O resources, for the purpose of interaction, that are engaged (I.e. come and go) "on-the-fly". The technical purpose of this work is to provide the development infrastructure for crafting interfaces that support such disappearing computing behaviour. More specifically, the results of this work concern: (a) an interaction style that is particularly suited to the mobile, distributed and wearable nature of interactive applications; (b) a systematic design method, enabling designers to formulate easily dialogues with concrete interface elements, assuming dynamic engagement through discovery, and optimal utilisation of I/O resources "on-the-fly"; c) an implementation library in the form of an interface toolkit, through which programmers can implement fully working interfaces, that hide all dynamic remote I/O resource management details; and d) a set of run-time utility components, such as an application manager, being the necessary accompanying run-time instrumentation for dynamic distributed I/O control supporting multiple concurrent applications. (http://www.ics.forth.gr/publications/technical-reports.jsp?raey=2002, Anthony Savidis, Constantine Stephanidis, ICS-FORTH Technical Report)

Analysis
Once again, we can see that all of the terminologies are heavily involved with each other, looking for the same outcome.

A final outcome that involves a computerised civilisation. Where that the average person can use technology without the need of always being in physical contact with a computerised device. For example: A user may enter their home and the house is embedded with devices that will know what lights to turn on in the house. The house may even know the location of the user’s pet cat.

This is the outcome that all of the terms are looking for, that we as users can interact with everything, while everything we come into contact with is interacting between themselves – without the need of a human touch.

This image shows an office environment where if you look closely, you can see no computers but in the background the wall is also a desktop. Also if you look at the desk on the right of the image you will see that the user is drawing onto desktop, embedded within the table.

Reading Week 1

• - Everyware
• - Not simply just computing everywhere but also computers, computing and components everywhere and in everything
• - computing without the computers
• - An augmented reality, body-area networking
• - Invisible computing but computing everywhere - "does not live on a personal device of any sort, but is in the woodwork"
• - desktop model to become obsolete leading to the reconfiguration of everyday life of people around them
• - The abililty to wear computers, "wearable computing" allowing a t-shirt, pair of jeans, shoes etc to be able to interact with various objects linking the user to their surroundings