User Interface Design, or Making Stuff Easy to Use
By Earl Hunsinger
Have you ever tried to enter a convenience store, only to discover that for some odd reason, only one of the double doors is unlocked and the one you're pulling isn't it? Or perhaps you got the right door, but you pushed instead of pulled. How did you feel? Were you embarrassed? Did you look around, hoping no one saw your mistake? If so, I'm here to make you feel better. It's not your fault! How were you supposed to know? (Unless there was a giant sign telling you what to do, in which case I may not be able to help you).
The door dilemma is an example of how we often blame ourselves for the mistakes of others, usually the engineer or designer of the product (or maybe at the convenience store, the employee that was too lazy to unlock both doors). In our modern word, manufacturers all too often assume that we will somehow inherently know how to use their products and that it's our fault if we don't. Don't believe them. Would Sir Isaac Newton be at home in today's modern bathroom? Would he somehow instinctively know which way to turn the faucet? As intelligent as he was, of course he would figure it out. But would it be fair to laugh at him if he got it wrong the first time?
Doors and faucets are simple devices compared to the so-called modern conveniences we have today. A favorite joke on television involves someone not being able to program a VCR. Can you program yours? Better yet, can you program every feature of your cell phone? Do you know how to change the time on your car's radio? Without a manual, it may be easier to decipher the Rosetta stone. You can start pushing buttons, but this may be little better than guesswork and a frustrating test of your problem solving ability. Even with a manual it may be confusing.
As technology advances, this problem becomes more and more significant. When televisions first became available, they were (relatively) easy to use. You turned it on and tried to find a station. Now you may have a remote control that allows you to do a hundred things. The engineer that designed the system is so proud of himself. But what do you do? You turn it on and try to find a station. It's not necessarily that you don't want to do those other things. It just may not be obvious how to do them, or even what they are. Oh, there may be tiny abstract symbols on the buttons. The manual, if there is one, may outline the correct combination of buttons needed to perform a specific function. But it's not readily apparent; it's not obvious. We haven't had years to get used to it, like we have other modern devices. Technology that has been around for a few years we take for granted. Things like faucets and light switches don't have to work the way that they do. Someone decided years ago on a standard method of operation. If we grew up with them, we use these devices without thinking about why we have to turn or push a certain way. This principle may be part of the problem facing engineers. After spending many hours working on the design of a device, or working with similar devices, the engineer may take its use for granted. The truth is, for many of us, newer devices and functions just haven't been around long enough. We haven't used them on a daily basis the way the engineer might have. Of course, as technological devices become more complicated, automatically knowing how to use them becomes more difficult even for engineers.
The design of user interfaces (like TV remotes) has to catch up with technology. Just adding more features that nobody knows how to use is pointless. A thick manual is not the answer. Modern conveniences should be convenient. If a light required a complicated series of operations to turn it on, it would be simpler to just leave it off. This has nothing to do with whether we are capable of learning the sequence. It just wouldn't be worth the trouble, unless we were desperate. Of course some people may not be technically inclined; no matter how many times they read the manual, they may not be able to figure out how to program their VCR or cell phone. Should they be punished because they pursued some other field of study, or excel in other areas of life? It's reasonable for consumers to expect usability when purchasing goods. It's good business practice for manufacturers to incorporate functionality that the average consumer can actually use.
Some researchers, and engineers, recognize this. For example, researchers at Japan's Science and Technical Research Laboratories have been working on an interface that interacts with a user through spoken dialog using natural language. For television operation, the interface would be able to make suggestions based on the user's past viewing habits, and the user would be able to direct the interface through verbal commands.
Software engineers have been trying to make their products user-friendly for years, with various degrees of success. As the modern world becomes more complicated and technical, engineers in other fields need to follow suit. The fact that a specific combination of buttons provides a desired functionality doesn't mean that the engineer's job is done. Is it obvious to his (non-engineer) grandmother how to access that function? This involves more than just science, at least hard science. Perhaps it's a task that involves psychology or sociology. Maybe it's just common sense. In any case, someone needs to use a little more creativity when designing user interfaces, so that in the future stuff is easier to use.
