ken fishkin, nov. 20001 invisible interfaces ken fishkin, anuj gujar, beverly harrison, roy want
Post on 21-Dec-2015
217 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 2
Trend
Exponential growth in computer speed; Moore’s Law, but
Limited growth of bandwidth and naturalness of our physical interaction with the computer
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 3
Emerging UI Paradigm
Time50’s 60’s 70’s 80’s 90’s 98
InteractionBandwidth
switches& knobs
commandline
GUI
AR, VRPhicons
“InvisibleInterfaces”
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 4
Towards “Invisible Interfaces”
Goal: to seamlessly blend the affordances and strengths of physically manipulatable objects with virtual environments, devices and artifacts
Physical Virtual
Invisible Interfaces
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 5
Our Invisible Interface Efforts
Manipulative UI PDAs pressure sensors, tilt sensors
Proximal UI mobile computing RF sensors wireless networking
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 6
Manipulative UI Approach
interaction through transparently mimicking familiar physical manipulations
via augmenting handheld devices
invisible interfaces
+
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 7
Video...
3 tasks navigation through an ordered list navigation within a document annotation optimization (handedness
detection)
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 8
Key Design Considerations
Match properties e.g., book - unit pages, sequential
ordering preserved but thickness or extent is lost
Match manipulations e.g., book - flicking corners consistent but
moving by “chunks” is notMatch feedback
visual, auditory, kinesthetic (tactile)
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 9
Navigation - Rolodex
Physical Rolodexmanipulation
Virtual Rolodexmanipulation
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 10
Navigation - Rolodex
Side view - Palm PilotPressure sensors
Custom circuitry on back
Behind the scenes...
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 12
Navigation Within a Book
Moving relative to beginning/ending of document
Moving by “chunks” relativeto beginning/ending of book
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 13
Navigation Within a Book
Behind the scenes... degree of spatial pressure location
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 15
Annotation Optimization
Physical annotationVirtual annotation (handedness)
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 18
Lessons Learned
No prior model that physical interaction has an effect (unexpected, learning needed)
Fidelty of matching is crucial (“interface fusion”), based on real world expectations
Inadvertent action is problematicCareful kinesthetics design needed (range
of motion, precision, JNDs)
Ken Fishkin, Nov. 2000 19
Lessons Learned
User comments: “intuitive”, “cool”, “pretty obvious in terms of what’s going on”
Users explored the range and space of manipulations (as in novel GUIs)
Passive interactions perceived as “magical”
Enhanced interaction experience “beyond the laptop”
top related