PDA

View Full Version : User interface feedback



David Jameson
2004-12-10, 13:59
I'm not sure where this belongs - it's vaguely amusing but it may also be an
inhibitor to sales so I think it's worth a discussion.

My wife has been struggling to use our squeezeboxes. Although she's
extremely smart, her field is psychology, not technology, so she should be
viewed as a "typical" consumer when it comes to computing.

She could not build a user conceptual model for when she should use the
UP/DOWN buttons vs. RIGHT/LEFT buttons.

So (silly me :-) I tried to explain parent/child relationships, i.e. you can
have a set of genres, underneath of which you have a set of artists,
underneath of which you have albums for each artist, and underneath of which
you have the songs for each album


She thought about this for a while and then said that if that's the way it's
supposed to work, then the RIGHT/LEFT buttons should be used to scroll the
genres, or the artists, or the albums, etc and then the DOWN arrow should
be used to go down to the next level.....her point being that children are
BELOW parents on a tree.


She has a point. A good user conceptual model is critical to acceptance in
the marketplace - the more easily people "get it", the better the chance of
selling to them.


Thoughts?

David Jameson

--
_______

dean
2004-12-10, 14:51
The Squeezebox user interface is a bit like the iPod user interface
(although we did it first!) where the items at your current level are a
list of items. To scroll through that list, you use the UP and DOWN
buttons.

When you find one that you like, you can press the RIGHT button to go
into it. (The animation gives some feedback visually as it moves you
to the right...) To go back out, press the left button.

The iPod differs in that they have a select button in the middle of the
scroll wheel. Personally, I don't like this aspect of the iPod
interface, because pressing the middle button moves you right, but only
sometimes. Sometimes it also plays the thing you selected.

We Squeezebox has the luxury of also having a PLAY button, so the user
interface makes a distinction between navigating (i.e. using the
UP/DOWN/LEFT/RIGHT) around the space and actions (the PLAY and ADD
buttons) that choose what to listen to. It's more consistent and more
flexible (i.e. you can navigate into a track and find out more about
that track) but perhaps a little bit harder to learn.

I'm not trying to say that it's perfect, but this is the thinking
behind how it works. Thanks for the feedback, keep it coming.

-dean

p.s. Some time ago, somebody (the name escapes me this moment) created
an alternate interface that used LEFT/RIGHT to navigate at the same
level and UP/DOWN to go in and out. It was interesting to play with,
but one of the issues I do remember was that it felt slower since the
animation moving left/right took time when you were scrolling through
potentially large lists.



On Dec 10, 2004, at 12:59 PM, David Jameson wrote:

> I'm not sure where this belongs - it's vaguely amusing but it may also
> be an
> inhibitor to sales so I think it's worth a discussion.
>
> My wife has been struggling to use our squeezeboxes. Although she's
> extremely smart, her field is psychology, not technology, so she
> should be
> viewed as a "typical" consumer when it comes to computing.
>
> She could not build a user conceptual model for when she should use the
> UP/DOWN buttons vs. RIGHT/LEFT buttons.
>
> So (silly me :-) I tried to explain parent/child relationships, i.e.
> you can
> have a set of genres, underneath of which you have a set of artists,
> underneath of which you have albums for each artist, and underneath of
> which
> you have the songs for each album
>
>
> She thought about this for a while and then said that if that's the
> way it's
> supposed to work, then the RIGHT/LEFT buttons should be used to scroll
> the
> genres, or the artists, or the albums, etc and then the DOWN arrow
> should
> be used to go down to the next level.....her point being that children
> are
> BELOW parents on a tree.
>
>
> She has a point. A good user conceptual model is critical to
> acceptance in
> the marketplace - the more easily people "get it", the better the
> chance of
> selling to them.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> David Jameson
>
> --
> _______
>
>
>
>

David Jameson
2004-12-10, 16:56
Dean, no need to justify it to me - I understand it completely - I simply
want to make the point that there are people who have trouble with it.

It is possible (if not probable) that my wife would have a problem with the
IPod too - but that doesn't change the fact that if someone is confused,
they are less likely to buy!

I wonder how many people who purchase SqueezeBoxes are NOT technical.

D


"dean blackketter" <dean (AT) slimdevices (DOT) com> wrote in
message news:A37F0438-4AF5-11D9-BD26-000393DB3CFA (AT) slimdevices (DOT) com...
> The Squeezebox user interface is a bit like the iPod user interface
> (although we did it first!) where the items at your current level are a
> list of items. To scroll through that list, you use the UP and DOWN
> buttons.
>
> When you find one that you like, you can press the RIGHT button to go into
> it. (The animation gives some feedback visually as it moves you to the
> right...) To go back out, press the left button.
>
> The iPod differs in that they have a select button in the middle of the
> scroll wheel. Personally, I don't like this aspect of the iPod interface,
> because pressing the middle button moves you right, but only sometimes.
> Sometimes it also plays the thing you selected.
>
> We Squeezebox has the luxury of also having a PLAY button, so the user
> interface makes a distinction between navigating (i.e. using the
> UP/DOWN/LEFT/RIGHT) around the space and actions (the PLAY and ADD
> buttons) that choose what to listen to. It's more consistent and more
> flexible (i.e. you can navigate into a track and find out more about that
> track) but perhaps a little bit harder to learn.
>
> I'm not trying to say that it's perfect, but this is the thinking behind
> how it works. Thanks for the feedback, keep it coming.
>
> -dean
>
> p.s. Some time ago, somebody (the name escapes me this moment) created an
> alternate interface that used LEFT/RIGHT to navigate at the same level and
> UP/DOWN to go in and out. It was interesting to play with, but one of the
> issues I do remember was that it felt slower since the animation moving
> left/right took time when you were scrolling through potentially large
> lists.
>
>
>
> On Dec 10, 2004, at 12:59 PM, David Jameson wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure where this belongs - it's vaguely amusing but it may also be
>> an
>> inhibitor to sales so I think it's worth a discussion.
>>
>> My wife has been struggling to use our squeezeboxes. Although she's
>> extremely smart, her field is psychology, not technology, so she should
>> be
>> viewed as a "typical" consumer when it comes to computing.
>>
>> She could not build a user conceptual model for when she should use the
>> UP/DOWN buttons vs. RIGHT/LEFT buttons.
>>
>> So (silly me :-) I tried to explain parent/child relationships, i.e. you
>> can
>> have a set of genres, underneath of which you have a set of artists,
>> underneath of which you have albums for each artist, and underneath of
>> which
>> you have the songs for each album
>>
>>
>> She thought about this for a while and then said that if that's the way
>> it's
>> supposed to work, then the RIGHT/LEFT buttons should be used to scroll
>> the
>> genres, or the artists, or the albums, etc and then the DOWN arrow
>> should
>> be used to go down to the next level.....her point being that children
>> are
>> BELOW parents on a tree.
>>
>>
>> She has a point. A good user conceptual model is critical to acceptance
>> in
>> the marketplace - the more easily people "get it", the better the chance
>> of
>> selling to them.
>>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> David Jameson
>>
>> --
>> _______
>>
>>
>>
>>

JJ
2004-12-10, 18:02
A wheel with a click-detent, like on a wheel mouse would be awesome for
navigating lists on a Slim player. Just as long as the display doesn't
insist on showing every interim item along the way. That is, if the wheel
were spun quickly through a large list it shouldn't have to display every
item between point A and B.

So maybe there's a market for an upgraded remote.

You mention the sluggish feel of swapping up/down and right/left. I'd
have to agree. I generally dislike most of the interface animations in
WindowsXP and find that turning them off makes the interface feel a lot
snappier (even if it isn't in reality). It might be nice if the Slim
interface display animations could be disabled or if the speed could be
controlled. This would make swapping up/down and left/right more feasible
for those who want to go that route.


----- Original Message -----
From: "dean blackketter" <dean (AT) slimdevices (DOT) com>
To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 2:51 PM
Subject: [slim] User interface feedback


> The Squeezebox user interface is a bit like the iPod user interface
> (although we did it first!) where the items at your current level are a
> list of items. To scroll through that list, you use the UP and DOWN
> buttons.
>
> When you find one that you like, you can press the RIGHT button to go
> into it. (The animation gives some feedback visually as it moves you to
> the right...) To go back out, press the left button.
>
> The iPod differs in that they have a select button in the middle of the
> scroll wheel. Personally, I don't like this aspect of the iPod
> interface, because pressing the middle button moves you right, but only
> sometimes. Sometimes it also plays the thing you selected.
>
> We Squeezebox has the luxury of also having a PLAY button, so the user
> interface makes a distinction between navigating (i.e. using the
> UP/DOWN/LEFT/RIGHT) around the space and actions (the PLAY and ADD
> buttons) that choose what to listen to. It's more consistent and more
> flexible (i.e. you can navigate into a track and find out more about
> that track) but perhaps a little bit harder to learn.
>
> I'm not trying to say that it's perfect, but this is the thinking behind
> how it works. Thanks for the feedback, keep it coming.
>
> -dean
>
> p.s. Some time ago, somebody (the name escapes me this moment) created
> an alternate interface that used LEFT/RIGHT to navigate at the same
> level and UP/DOWN to go in and out. It was interesting to play with,
> but one of the issues I do remember was that it felt slower since the
> animation moving left/right took time when you were scrolling through
> potentially large lists.
>
>
>
> On Dec 10, 2004, at 12:59 PM, David Jameson wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure where this belongs - it's vaguely amusing but it may also
>> be an
>> inhibitor to sales so I think it's worth a discussion.
>>
>> My wife has been struggling to use our squeezeboxes. Although she's
>> extremely smart, her field is psychology, not technology, so she should
>> be
>> viewed as a "typical" consumer when it comes to computing.
>>
>> She could not build a user conceptual model for when she should use the
>> UP/DOWN buttons vs. RIGHT/LEFT buttons.
>>
>> So (silly me :-) I tried to explain parent/child relationships, i.e.
>> you can
>> have a set of genres, underneath of which you have a set of artists,
>> underneath of which you have albums for each artist, and underneath of
>> which
>> you have the songs for each album
>>
>>
>> She thought about this for a while and then said that if that's the way
>> it's
>> supposed to work, then the RIGHT/LEFT buttons should be used to scroll
>> the
>> genres, or the artists, or the albums, etc and then the DOWN arrow
>> should
>> be used to go down to the next level.....her point being that children
>> are
>> BELOW parents on a tree.
>>
>>
>> She has a point. A good user conceptual model is critical to
>> acceptance in
>> the marketplace - the more easily people "get it", the better the
>> chance of
>> selling to them.
>>
>>
>> Thoughts?

Jack Coates
2004-12-10, 21:15
> Dean, no need to justify it to me - I understand it completely - I simply
> want to make the point that there are people who have trouble with it.
>
> It is possible (if not probable) that my wife would have a problem with
> the
> IPod too - but that doesn't change the fact that if someone is confused,
> they are less likely to buy!
>
> I wonder how many people who purchase SqueezeBoxes are NOT technical.
>

dunno, but I would like to point out that both my non-technical wife and I
(geek) were completely confused by the mini-iPod's clickwheel. She
eventually resorted to the manual and came to peace with the damn thing, I
still hate it. Neither of us can stand iTunes, which is kept around purely
for the purpose of putting Audible books and occasionally some music into
the iPod.

Since both tools are apparently considered the epitome of industrial
design by a lot of people out there, this just goes to show you that
everyone's needs are different. As the saying goes, you can please some of
the people some of the time.

FWIW, my wife has no problem using the Squeezebox or the SliMP3. While she
doesn't muck with anything advanced in it like Internet radio, she also
didn't have any issues figuring out how it worked or what to do with it.
People, whether technical or not, just have different expectations of
interface behavior based on what they've seen before.

--
Jack At Monkeynoodle.Org: It's A Scientific Venture...
"Believe what you're told; there'd be chaos if everyone thought for
themselves." -- Top Dog hotdog stand, Berkeley, CA

David Jameson
2004-12-13, 11:29
Ha, ha, ha :-)

"John M." <mail (AT) machtinger (DOT) com> wrote in message

After a week, assuming other devices in your house are not the opposite, I
think it will be second nature.

David Jameson
2004-12-13, 11:30
Agreed completely - it was just a data point.

D

"Jack Coates" <jack (AT) monkeynoodle (DOT) org> wrote in
message
> People, whether technical or not, just have different expectations of
> interface behavior based on what they've seen before.
>
> --