the free software movement

I haven't really jumped on the free software bandwagon as of yet. I think it's a great thing to have, but my limited knowledge of computers makes it all a little intimidating for me. I would rather spend the extra money to have software that is easy to install and that will work as soon as I put in the start-up disk. I also like the help feature that comes along with purchased software. In the free software movement, no one is responsible for any problems that might arise and there is no help centre to phone for assistance. Installing the free software can also be a challenge. For example, I have no idea what exe, etc. means, or at least I didn't until yesterday's lecture. This language means nothing to me and I would become frustrated trying to download things that I'm not sure will work properly. This can be time consuming and can also lead to messying up your hard drive. I know I've downloaded things before and then have no idea where they've gone within my computer. Yes, I am extremely deficient when it comes to computer use and knowledge! I like the philosophy behind the movement, but I'm not sure it will be totally revolutionary since a lot of computer users depend on the simplicity of purchased software. The fear of catching viruses from this software is also a deterant for me. Computer repairs are expensive and I am a poor student who would rather spend the little extra money I have on clothes, concerts, or a night on the town, than repairing my infected computer.

Some proposed solutions to make this movement accessible and appealing to a larger audeince would include easier-to-use downloading processes. I'm not suggesting tutorials because those can be lengthy and boring to read, and who has time for that these days, but something that can make this software more accessible to acquire. We're not all part of the camoflauge army, with a coke in hand and a sophisticated understanding of coding. (Thank God). And until the masses gain some greater knowledge of how to use and install this software, then this free-software social movement will not reach its potential.

accessibility

Designers should consider people with disabilities because these considerations will make the product better for all users, not just those who are disabled. Non-disabled users interact with the same devices that disabled people use and often the designs that were meant to cater to the disabled users actually end up benefitting everyone. This is a great way to go about designing interactive devices because it allows for more widespread use, a larger audience, and increased profit for the company. If disabled users' needs are not considered in a design, they will be excluded from accessing the device. The audience will therefore be limited, along with compnay revenue. Designers should also consider the needs of disabled because (a) even non-disabled users might be temporarily disabled (for example, if an injury occurs and their usual performance is affected) and (b) one day we will all encounter disabilities in terms of loss of hearing or eyesight, arthritis, and reduced mobility. Designers must be sensitive to the needs of the disabled because it is ethical, progressive, and overall beneficial to everyone involved, including the company, disabled and non-disabled users.

I think that remote controls for televisions and dvd players could be inaccessible for a lot of disabled users. The printing that indicates the commands is very tiny which makes it hard for people with impaired vision. The buttons also require lots of interactivity which might be difficult for users who can only do one movement, for example, if a user can only nod his/her head or pound a fist, this device would be very difficult to use. Access to entertainment should be just as easy for disabled users as it is for non-disabled users but the design of so many of these remotes is complicated enough for non-disabled users that it could be too overwhelming to use.

single-handedly taking over the world

today in class we are having fun with glasses that simulate eye disorders and using only one hand to type this entry. we are learning that not everyone can access things we daily take for granted as easily as we can. things take longer. headaches are common. a lot more effort is required to type and this makes revisions and lenghty entries seem overwhelming. my papers and these blog entries would be much poorer quality because the physical is so strenuous that my brilliant ideas get clouded and forgotten. I hear it's getting harder from here on in.

fun with kiosks

Kiosks offer a world of services and information, but this could become problematic because laws concerning kiosk censorship have yet to be established. There is no governing body that previews the content available in interactive kiosks and because of this, it is up to the individual companies to decide what material is and isn't acceptable to include in their kiosk. For the most part, kiosks seem tasteful and to provide only helpful or necessary information, but, as is true with most new technologies, there are always people who will find a way to abuse the medium by publishing corrupt or offensive material. Television programs, movies, and even websites, warn us if the content is violent, offensive, or inappropriate for children so that we can make an informed decision as to whether we want to proceed, despite the cautionary message. This is a very regulated process and we trust the censors' ratings, but if kiosks are out in the open, we could happen to stumble upon some disturbing graphics or information without being warned ahead of time. This is even more troubling if a child is exposed to indecent material in a kiosk. Maybe a censorship committee for kiosks will be formed as the technology becomes more prolific. At this point, it seems like something that will only be created once it is necessary. For example, once a kiosk content manager posts inappropriate material and the public is outraged and subsequently demand that kiosk censorship become a serious concern for the provincial or federal government. Until that reactionary demand, however, it doesn't seem like there is a need to invest (both time and money) into censoring material that has, to date, been appropriate for audiences/users of all ages, etc.

A failed attempt at a segue from kiosks to software tools...

Flash was extremely complicated and difficult to use. The instructions were lengthy and unclear. It is overwhelming for new users to find pages upon pages of instructions when they want to try new software tools. We live in an age of immediacy, in which we want to acquire things (including knowledge) instantaneously because we have become so dependent on rapid results (i.e. fast Internet connections, game shows that provide "wealth without work" since players can become instant millionaires without really earning that money. The tutorial for flash is old-fashioned, if you will, since it takes so long to complete. Perhaps as more people become more accustomed to this type of software (maybe lots of people already are and I'm somewhat of an anomaly) instructions will be shorter and more condensed because the behaviour is practically automatic. Confusing functions, wordy instructions, and lengthy manuals are not conducive to our fast-paced, technological society. Technology is only useful and productive if it is accessible to many people. As we have learned in this class, users should not be excluded from certain forms of technology for any reason, including a less-than-savvy understanding of computers.

video conferencing and email management

Although video conferencing has its flaws, I can understand why it remains a popular mode of communication. A sense of immediacy is created when you can actually see the person you're talking to. It makes them seem closer and somehow more real, even if the image of him/her is distorted or there are delays in the transmission of dialogue. In the context of traveling, or living far away from your family and friends, video conferencing offers a more personal way to keep in touch. It is always wonderful to hear someone's voice over the telephone, but I know that for me, seeing someone's face evokes a powerful emotional response, especially if you haven't spoken in a long time. Video conferencing is beneficial is for couples who have to suffer the many drawbacks of a long distance relationship. Communicating in this way forces the two people to give their full attention to the conversation since everything their doing is visible to their partner. It heightens the sense of connection to see someone's face and to hear their voice while communicating.

Text-based chat is the most banal form of communication. It has its uses and can be fun and convenient, but the depth of the conversation has its limits since so many visual and audio cues are missing. Users are often multi-tasking and using short forms over msn-style chat conversations. There's an understanding that very little committment is expected in this form of communication and, while some users might have great online chemistry with their friends, etc. through this medium, I try to restrict my use to very brief, almost utilitarian purposes - quick questions, last minute plan details, etc. A user who is traveling or living abroad, probably wouldn't leave an msn conversation with the same sense of fulfillment or connection that video conferencing might provide.

Managing an overload of email messages is a tricky task. Maybe some sort of email management software exists? Maybe someone should create some if it's not already available? Something like a de-cluttering, or cleaning lady, function for your inbox would be useful for many people. Professors, people in management, and students on LISTSERVs all face the problem of email overload; time is precious and no one wants to waste it on deleting unwanted messages from their inbox or replying to hundreds of emails. It would be good if you could have multiple inboxes: a separate one for each class that you teach, one for messages from colleagues, and then one for friends and family. This would not diminish the number of received emails, but, psychologically, it might be beneficial for the user because the messages don't all appear in one giant list. It would be like the folders feature, except that the messages would be sorted before arriving in one of the various inboxes, rather than having the user sort them after they've all arrived, and messied up, the same inbox.

This is definitely a very real problem for many users and I'm surprised there isn't some software available to help manage it. Maybe people with overloaded inboxes could hire graduate students as their own personal assistants who can reply to and manage the messages.

For my project, I will use sequence navigation. It is the best technique because the feature itself is not very complex. The "Elevator Attendant" feature will be accessible from the main menu of the user's mobile phone. When the feature is selected, the next page will provide another menu, including options to "Call Elevator," "Customize Settings," "Cancel," as well as a "Help Button." The user can select his or her preferred option and a new screen will appear. This is a very linear process and if the user needs to return to the previous menu at any point, they can do so by choosing the "Back" button located in the upper right corner.

I don't anticipate too many navigational problems arising since it is a simple structure and design, but things might get confusing if the user tries to do multiple things at once. For example, if the user has called the elevator, then checked out the "Help" option and then wishes to cancel the elevator call, there might be lots of back and forth between the main menu and sub-menus. It doesn't seem like much of a problem, though, and the sequence navigation can still be applied.

Because the specific application of technology in something like a "Smart House" is so foreign to most users, there are lots of potential problems that could arise. It would be lengthy to have lots of FAQ's, step-by-step demonstrations or overviews for the various ubiquitous computing devices in a "Smart House." The amount of time and money required to establish this sort of help would be extensive. Manuals for each device would be a nuissance for the users and would also take up lots of space in their home. It seems that the technology behind a "Smart House" should be such that it is user-friendly and doesn't require much help.

Some possible suggestions for this challenge include: (a) providing one manual for all the devices available in a "Smart House." With an index as a navigational tool, users could easily find what they need within the master manual and solve their difficulties accordingly, or (b) having online access to help menus so that paper manuals don't create clutter in the home, or (c) to create a voice-operated interface within the home that would directly connect the user to a customer serivce/tech support for the manufacturer. Rather than having to deal with menus on the telephone, the user would speak to a representative immediately and all of their information (i.e. the problems they encountered) would be recorded in the company's system so that if they call again, the agent will know what their previous problems have been. This information will also be valuable to the manufacturer because they could refine some of the problems that were not anticipated prior to the product launch.

some thoughts on i/o devices

Simply put, form factor is an important consideration when designing i/o devices because consumers won't care about cool tricks if the product doesn't look good. Marketing has proven to be a powerfu tool and we have come to depend on sleek trendy designs for the i/o devices we use in our daily lives. If designers try to market an aesthetically unpleasing product, another company will manufacture the same device in cooler packaging. The iPod is a perfect example of this phenomenon. Mp3 players were on the market long before Mac launched its iPod and solidified its place as king of the portable mp3 players. Other company's have attempted to make sleek designs, but none have come close to Mac's success. iPod become synonymous with "mp3 player" and the ubiquituous white earphones (another example of a perfectly designed form factor) became part of the urban landscape. Through excellent marketing, iPods became associated with a certain lifestyle and this technology wrapped in its trendy wrapping became an essential accessory for people of all ages.

We have already seen the effects of pervasive computing. There are very few people who do not own cell phones or PDAs. There are still people who refuse to purchase mobile phones (every movement has its resistance), but for the most part, pervasive computing is, well, pervasive in our society. To me, it seems this type of technology detaches people from what is happening around them in the moment. If we are all speaking or writing to someone who is not where we are, as we walk to work, school, etc., then we become disconnected from our immediate surroudings. We are constantly elsewhere. While these types of devices keep us "connected" with people because we are all so easily accessible, in ways, I think these sorts of things actually create as much distance as they do connection.

As far as interacting with our computers, I guess pervasive computing has created a portable version of the desktop paradigm portable so that we can now type emails, check the weather, schedule appointments, and make personal phone calls while on the move.

The technology behind ubiquitous computing and something like the "Smart House" is impressive and fascinating, but the idea of having microphones embedded in walls and cameras lurking behind picture frames all seems a tad Orwellian for my taste. With ubiquitous computing, it seems that interaction with our computers will be more two-way, rather than the user simply commanding the computer. Interfaces that require audio, scents, or gestures will replace the predominantly touch-based interfaces of the desktop paradigm. This "third wave" of computing will make our interactions with computers more spontaneous and automatic since we can interact with them from various locations, not just by sitting down in front of a computer. It seems that with ubiquitous computing, we will see less of the form factor or device itself since so much of the technology is embedded in other objects.