User Centered

I'm sure most people don't consider the button they press to cross the street a "UI" persay, but well, it certainly is, and it does a poor job of conveying the "state" of the system to the users. I read some comments from Ken Becker illustrating the lack of feedback in crosswalks and how they could easily be improved.

I see this EVERYDAY on my walk to work without fail. I'm not sure what it is -if you approach a crosswalk and you see someone waiting to cross and standing near the button, it's a pretty good bet that the button has been pressed already....but the vast majority of people go ahead and push it anyway. In fact, they press it three for four times, just to be certain. (ok- I've been known to do this from time to time myself).

Clearly, we have little faith in the system. In some cases you actually do get an audible beep when the button is pressed... but that hasn't stopped us from hammering away at it a few times. What's lacking is feedback that that the machine knows we're waiting to cross the street. Further, anyone walking up to the crosswalk after has no idea what the state of the system is. They walk up and see me standing there looking at the lights and watching the traffic.. but who am I? I could be a nefarious jay-walker for all they know, and they'll have no part of my shenanigans -better press that button lest the authorities charge them with conspiracy to commit illegal street crossing.

Ken rightly points out the elevator button as a nice contrast. The feedback problem was solved by simply illuminating the button after it's been pressed. That way, the systems says "don't worry, I got you covered..." and anyone walking up also knows immediately the state of the system. Of course, that doesn't stop people from occasionally pressing it multiple times. There's some kind of myth or impatience that we have embedded within us that pressing it multiple times will fool the elevator or traffic light into thinking, "Wow! Lots of users today! I better hurry on up and get them where they need to be! Let me just abandon everything I'm doing..."


Image via: http://blog.cleverly.com/

My first Harmony experience was not all that great. Mainly because there is no technology that exists yet that will communicate the state of the devices back to the remote. So while the number one praise of the remote (from techies/home theater gurus) is that the significant other/babysitter can just pick it up and press a button- no more explanation is needed, it's easy to find out pretty quickly that that just isn't true.

There needs to be other explanations that end up being little more confusing than before, because they have to do with our (physical) habits. Now the user has to stay within the confines of the state that the remote expects the system to be in. In other words- we still have to be aware of the state of the system, because the system doesn't understand our quirks and habits. For example- when watching a DVD, I configured my remote to turn on the DVD player, switch the TV to video, and the receiver to DVD. Pretty simple, except that most of the time I've already turned the DVD player on to put the movie in. So, I tailor that activity to leave the DVD player alone only to find a case where I'd like it to power on. Of course, you can tweak the remote and control individual components, but when you take yourself out of the one button mindset, it's very noticible and more cumbersome.

The point here is that even if the owner understands what's going and can manage, what happens when the novice (ie, anyone not familiar with my home theater rig) comes along and the owner bills this as "just press the button" and it doesn't work? There's a tremendous amount of distrust in the system from then on. Especially since there's not likely to be a set of "fall back" instructions. More importantly, trading a verbal instructions like "just press this button than this button...." for "DON'T turn the DVD player on before you press anything, the system will take care of that for you..." will probably go against some habit the user already has for "settling down" to watch/listen to something.

Regardless, I bring this up because there is a new model out (the 550) which is around 150 dollars (review,official page). I think I'm going to throw my hat in the ring again with this model. Despite those problem I have, I think the idea is the way to go, and the value of it will far outweigh any negative disparity. The price point is slightly more than the lowest-end model (which is *still* incredibly high)- I figure this is going to replace the aging 600 series. So- a "do-able" price that mixes with a fresh design along with my need for a good universal remote. Conclusion? I'm willing to give Logitech a second chance with my consumer dollars.

Background/Old News: Harmony (Logitech) remotes are "activity centered" remotes that have the right idea when it comes to using your home theater devices. For those uninitiated, you can press a "watch tv" button and all your devices will switch and adjust themselves appropriately- sparing you the trouble of hitting video twice on one remote, change to channel three, select the "TV" setting on the receiver and so on and so forth. Read Donald Norman on "Activity Centered Design" for more information on the Harmony and this approach.