AsSimpleAs UXDesign

UX Design as we understand is a science to make technology easy, better and to improve relationship with brands, by understanding users' psychology. Just like a trusted friend, UX Design undoubtedly is like a protagonist who is virtuous and is always user-centric. Like they say, every protagonist is incomplete without a antagonist, in this case its the the evil twin of UX- The evil UXD.   In this blog, let's have a look at the antagonist of UX, where UX design is drawn towards the darker side to use the very virtuous UX heuristics for evil intents and manipulation.

What is Evil UXD? The prime objective of Evil UXD is to make the users spend time, clicks or money in one way or other by manipulative tricks and guile; all to the brand’s advantage directly or indirectly. These patterns in interfaces are deliberately designed to trick users into doing an action or restrain from a certain action, for the advantage of the brand. It could be a simple logout button which is unnecessarily hidden in menus, or it could even be a simple expendable product sneaking in your shopping cart without your knowledge. As many deceiving ways it may come in, the Evil UXD is not user-centric, but brand's profit-centric.

The Craft of Evil UXD But being pure evil is easy, but it can be sensed by the users easily too; And for taking advantage of the users' weaknesses, it is the brand that is eventually hated and abandoned. In many deliberate efforts to be evil by brands for playing nasty tricks on users, (thanks to bodies like the European Union) the websites can get lawfully banned and penalized. The real craft of Evil UXD lies in making these traps look like genuine UX flaws, and not get penalised or hated.

The gray area in the picture above is what we will be discussing today. It needs technique to manipulate the users right under their noses, and elegantly able to get away with. When these tricks get unnoticed or seen as too small to complain; In either case, the brand reaps the advantage.

Seven sins of Evil UXD

To understand any evil it is important to understand the rationale or need behind it. All the tricks and deeds ultimately connect to these seven sins below, which eventually translates to brand's advantage in one way or the other...

1. To make user spend more time on a site/to click/to visit 2. To increase/save users against their choice to quit 3. Marketing through spams, subscriptions and user base 4. By selling the products to the users by guile 5. To get constant connection to user by their software/app installation, and even to spy on your personal information 6. To avoid/save on support 7. To increase dependency on their product and beat competition

Dark patterns- The Acts of Evil UXD

The acts are the tricks which lead to Evil UXD sins. These tricky elements in the interface are called the dark patterns.These patterns are what we encounter everyday, but do not realise that these are taking advantage of every second and thought we spend in them, in ways we can't even imagine. www.darkpatterns.com have organised and grouped these patterns thoughtfully which are listed below.. 

1. Bait and Switch

The user sets out to do one thing, but a different, undesirable thing happens instead. This is one of the oldest tricks in the book, and it is very broad in nature – many dark patterns involve some kind of bait & switch. Click here to know more.

2. Disguised Ads

Adverts that are disguised as other kinds of content or navigation, in order to get users to click on them. Click here to know more.

3. Faraway Bill Utility companies traditionally sent out monthly bills by snail mail, but today they tend to put them online – leading to bills that are rarely seen and easily forgotten. How you receive your bills is framed by companies as a choice between “offline” and “online”, but is in fact also a decision of “push” versus “pull”. With snail mail bills, you received a detailed breakdown each month. With online bills, few companies will email you the detailed breakdown, citing security concerns. Instead, you have to remember to log in, then go through the tedious process of navigating to your most recent bill. As a result, a certain proportion of people just don’t bother – and as a result they forget about the costs of the service, and aren’t able to react unexpected additions to the bill. Click here to know more.

4. Forced Continuity The user signs up for a free trial on a website, and in doing so they are required to enter their credit card details. When the trial comes to an end, they automatically start getting billed for the paid service. The user is not given an adequate reminder, nor are they given an easy and rapid way of cancelling the automatic renewal. Sometimes this is combined with the Sneak into Basket dark pattern (as alleged in the Vistaprint class action lawsuit.). This dark pattern was previously known as “Silent Credit Card Roll-over” but was renamed since the term “forced continuity” is already popularly used in Marketing. Click here to know more.

5. Forced Disclosure In return for a free or low-cost action, the site requires the user to disclose extensive personal information – unnecessary to the transaction in-hand. Click here to know more.

6. Friend Spam A site or game asks for your Twitter or email credentials (either via the password antipattern or via OAuth for an allegedly benign purpose e.g. finding friends who are already using that service), but then goes on to publish content or send out bulk messages using your account – i.e. from you. This technique is commonly used by viruses – but even well-known companies sometimes engage in “friend spam”. Click here to know more.

7.Hidden Costs A hidden cost occurs when a user gets to the last step of the checkout process, only to discover some unexpected charges have appeared, e.g. delivery charges, tax, etc. Click here to know more.

8. Misdirection The attention of the user is focused on one thing in order to distract its attention from another. Click here to know more.

9.Price Comparison Prevention The attention of the user is focused on one thing in order to distract its attention from another. Click here to know more.

10. Privacy Zuckering “The act of creating deliberately confusing jargon and user-interfaces which trick your users into sharing more info about themselves than they really want to.” (As defined by the EFF). The term “Zuckering” was suggested in an EFF article by Tim Jones on Facebook’s “Evil Interfaces”. It is, of course, named after Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Click here to know more.

11. Roach Motel The “Roach Motel” is a broad category of Dark Pattern that subsumes most types listed on this site. Put simply, a Roach Motel makes it very easy for a user to get into a certain situation, but then makes it hard for them to get out of it when they realize it is undesirable. Email newsletter unsubscription is a well known example – whereby it is typically easy to subscribe, but much more effort is needed to unsubscribe. The revised CAN-SPAM 2008 rules state that this practice is forbidden for emails that have a primary purpose “to advertise or promote a commercial product or service”. (Unfortunately, CAN-SPAM does not cover “transactional or relationship” messages.) Click here to know more.

12. Road Block When the user’s progress to task completion is restricted or stopped by something else on the screen.Click here to know more.

13. Sneak into Basket The user attempts to purchase a specific item. However, somewhere in the purchasing journey the site sneaks an additional item into their basket, often through the use of an opt-out radio button or checkbox on a prior page. Click here to know more.

14. Trick Questions The user is required to respond to a question (typically in the checkout process), which, when glanced upon quickly appears to ask one thing, but if read carefully, asks another thing entirely. This pattern works because it is normal for users to employ high-speed scan-reading on the web – see Steve Krug: ”We don’t read pages. We scan them.“) Click here to know more.

My attempt at being Evil

I have also tried out a dark pattern in a recent project at Decos. We designed an app to collect response whether the trash has been picked everyday, from citizens of Nagpur.  Its a simple one page interface designed such that the user need not have to open the app everyday. The app simply pop ups the question “Is your garbage picked today?” in the notifications every day before noon. As simple as that....

It was made clear that the stakeholders are expecting an app-response above 70% from the users everyday. I sensed that there is a high chance of the app notification getting ignored, because of more important things in the citizen’s life other than trash. So I tried tweaking the design with a dark pattern to have automated responses, in the cases where the users do not bother to respond to our notification. I tried to play in the grey area to let the user know the countdown for the automatic response, and presented to the marketing and management team.

The team shot the idea down, because it was too risky to jeopardise our company’s credibility and reputation that Decos have. I say, thats a good judicious call... But for me, I got the kicks out of being evil for a while.

With great (UXD) power comes great responsibility. If UXD is like a superpower, its up to the designer to choose what he uses them for. As a UX designer who is a Deadpool fan, I adore the smart craft of Evil UXD and find designing it challenging and exciting. I personally feel that it is ok to use the super-powers to my advantage once a while. But, things get different when you are designing for an organisation. Your risks become the organisation’s and vice-versa. But always remember, evil could never conquer anything concrete. Bob Marley once said "You can fool some people some time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time", so be judicious.

So the next time you do not get to figure out your way in an interface, get stuck or get irritated finding something... Watch out! you might be a target for Evil UXD.

Let me know what you think...

'Search' is an inevitable part of our digital lives. Not only in the search engines, but this little magnifying glass icon in almost everything we use in the digital world. From computer operating systems, mail, facebook, smart applications, contacts to almost every content/list we know on digital interfaces, the search tool is a consistent helper just a click away. Undoubtedly, It is one of the most useful tool in our interfaces and something we totally take granted for. I've looked down on search for years and never expected that this little guy on most of the pages we use today, has so much behind it.

It all started while I was assigned to improve the search feature for a 20-year-old product called JOIN in my current company. Unlike my usual assignments, JOIN is an established case and document management system with thousands of existing users working in government offices, very much used to the way JOIN is working now, not tech-minded and have difficulty adapting to new functionalities.. This compelled the team to design this feature like a diffusing a bomb with extreme care and precision to get it right in one go. We decided to take it slow and steady with designing low fidelity wireframes first with screens and mockups to test the UX before programming it in the software.   Just like a mischievous character masked as ghost in every Scooby-doo episode, every search is not as innocently as simple as we think it looks like. Our team had a lot to learn the hard way by meticulous scrutiny, research, user-reviews and tedious iterations; which took us 10 times more time than what I have initially estimated to just paste Search icons on the top of every list.

Just like designing UX for any other feature, designing search also needs the designer to have clear answers to many aspects in the cycle of search before the pencil nibs the drawing board. As simple as the pointers below may seem like, they can save a lot of time and efforts in designing a search cycle. 

1. Where is the search box placed? 2. What are we searching? 3. How does the search start? 4. How will the suggestions be? 5. How to exit search?

1. Where is the search box placed?

By Intuition, designers get this right most of the times; and it looks pretty obvious every time it is done right. But when it goes wrong, there is nothing else with which can confuse the user to bits. The position of the search should intuitively associate to the content it is searching in. On the web, this becomes especially tricky when there are multiple content buckets/lists on the same screen. Proximity can make a search -the most important thing or -something that lies in the corner of the page and none of us have an idea how to use because it’s outcome is somewhere else. 

Here is a screenshot my facebook page, good example of a search box placement and association....

Here we can see a circus of multiple lists, and there is a search box for each of these lists closer to them, clearly implicating their action and effect. And on the top, there is the 'global' search, which searches the whole website. This implies the access of the search box throughout the website by its placement at the top of the page. This is commonly seen in website designs... 

What would have been a bad example is using the search bar on the top to search the friends list. It gets too detached from the content it will be applied on, creating unnecessary confusion for the users.

(Sure it seems simple.. But trust me, I know bunch of products which disagree with this concept)

2. What are we searching?

Knowing and understanding the content that we are searching makes a world of difference in delivering the right experience. Based on the content to search, behaviour and results, the search is divided into two types a)Subtractive Search and b)Additive Search

a. Subtractive Search:  

Also termed as Faceting... The subtractive search takes an existing list and removes items based on the search query. Here the items are already populated and are filtered when searched, but not newly generated. These items are then displayed in the best-match-first order or even by keeping the order intact, based on how crowded the list gets. The more narrower the search query gets- by the characters types in the filter box, the more specific the list becomes by character matching. This is an example from Facebook friends chat list, a simple search applied on a single list of content and works as we type each character.

Here you can see that the list gets shorter and shorter as we type. Note that there is no suggestion drop down, but the list itself acts as the suggestion by showing only the matches.

Macbook's Spotlight search This is a MacBook OS feature to search all the things in a mac. In this case, the spotlight search starts with the empty state showing only the search bar, then shows everything that matches the first character and filters further.

b. Additive Search:

This search is operated in the case of multiple lists and content type (Like Google search). For this, the search takes us to a new blank page and freshly populates a result list with items of different kinds/lists. Most 'Global' searches use this pattern to search and display the results.

Best Example for additive search is google search, it searches from various lists like web, images, maps, News, videos, etc., to search from. It starts with an empty page and composes a new list as per the search query. Here you can see suggestions in a drop-down, unlike subtractive search.

This is a screenshot from Office365 webmail's search. Here you can notice, although there is a list of emails in my inbox, Office 365 chooses to start with a clean slate to match the search criteria, to accommodate the results not only from my inbox but also from other folders like sent, drafts, trash etc,.

In some cases additive search is also used in the place of a subtractive search, just to retain consistency and play safe (like in Android Marshmallow Contacts).

However, the answer to this simple question “what type of content are we searching?” is often missed by many of us. And I still wonder how can something that we use everyday has been not noticed enough and accounted before we design or estimate for search functionality.

3. How does the search start? 

"You can't know where you're going until you know where you've been." A search could start from an icon, search box or even in a hidden state; which is then followed by either transforming the current view of the content; or taking the user totally to a new page to show the results. This transition between a content/list page to search page should be very apparent to the user to be aware of where the view is migrating to. This transition can overburden the user with the concern of not knowing what's happening, and fear of losing track of where the user is. Many products deal with this in many ways, but the below two are widely practiced... 1. By smooth incremental animations can make the user feel that search is just another layer on top, but not another redirected link. This keeps the user informed what is happening on the screen and maintains autonomy(freedom from external control or influence; independence), the corner stone of any good interface design.

2. In the absence of animations, few elements from the content/list page are retained in the search results page, by giving the user the feeling that he is not redirected far from where he is. Below is an excellent example of how the website structure is retained in the title bar. 

4. How will the suggestions be?

Suggestions are brilliant ways to help the user in a search. These suggestion dropdowns and text prediction not only help the search be specific for the user but also go easy on the system. But suggestion can be a lot more than just text corrections...

These suggestions nowadays are not only limited to text but can also help the user to narrow their search, in the case of huge content and content types.

Facebook even offers multiple facet suggestions like shown below. This is a brilliant example which exercises the potential of the suggestion dropdown to the max.

And the other petite detail that needs to be designed in the suggestion drop down is typography, showing the matches and text predictions. The color, font, space, thickness and hyperlinks play a major role in creating the right tailor-fit experience to the users in helping with their queries.

5. How to exit search?

 A graceful exit is as important as the entry because there is always a content/view a user eventually wants to get back to, (Except in the case of dedicated search engines like Google or Bing). A search is a tool which is only called when needed while browsing content; and not every time a user succeeds in finding what he wants in a search cycle. In such cases the user should be able to go back to the folder/view he started the search from. For this, the searches usually rely on a close/back button in the search box itself.

Google Drive is a classic example which gets it wrong. 

In the case of (which is every time) the user is inside a folder and wants to search for something inside the folder. The user is forced to conduct a search at the app/top level. And incase the user does not succeed in finding what he is looking for in his multiple search attempts, the user is left without button to exit the search view and return to the view he was working on. The user is forced to use the back button of the browser multiple times to go to the folder he was in before when he started. This is just cruel... Which is also the case with Onedrive. 

Conclusion

So, if you have a product or designing for one with a search functionality, I advice you to check thru these 5 simple pointers to gauge the quality of the search experience you are providing.

Of all the things in designing experiences, something as small as search has the potential spoil the whole product’s experience. So, search as a topic is like an iceberg, where theres a lot more than what we estimate it to be. Voice entry, search results, faceting are many other little things that can pile on the perfect search experience making it even more complicated than what is discussed above. Search when not dealt with care have the potential to sink the whole Titanic experience.

Search on... & Let me know what you think.

I was one of those laggards who learned about the Internet of things <IoT> very late. And because of my delayed arrival in the IoT revolution, there is a ton of  blogs, articles and research already on the net. As I learned about this magical seamless network of things, I came across thousands of videos on youtube too foreseeing how IoT can change our lives. As excited as I got in the beginning, the interface designer in me got threatened by the interface-less/less-interface technology and very limited discussion of interface design IoT needs. Every video I have seen had lesser and lesser interfaces, which made me grow insecure by every buffered frame and left me with the big question: Is IoT revolution really going to bite a big chunk of work from the Interface designers??

As I continued to overcome my vulnerable thoughts and continued to watch another video, which is from Connected Devices Laboratory, Brigham Young University.

It struck me that IoT needs interface designers even more desperately than any other tech revolution. I'd like to put forth my observations in three practical scenarios why IoT needs interface designers badly.

1. Designing tortuous menus and visualizing monstrous data: 

Have a look at this Clip from the same video link below from 1:21 to 1:35... 

I imagined myself in the mom's situation in the clip "literally" in her house with thousands of sensors, hundreds of feedbacks and tens of systems bridged to my phone. I continued imagining myself waking my son up by drilling down a painful menu of all the systems in the house for the sound system, locate my son's room and then knock the volume. To be honest, I'd prefer walking up to the kid's room and kicking his arse myself, which I find much easier and extra satisfying. It's like finding a piece of control in a haystack of menus. This gets even more tough in the scenario where we are trying to make sense of such haystack of information from software and sensors. 

In IoT, the four prime reasons for an interface to communicate with a user are 1.information (Telemetry), 2.inquiries, 3.commands, and 4.notifications. And what is communicated to the users can be hundreds and thousands of little bits of data from various software and sensors; that needs to be read, understand and be aware of. The amount of data is exponentially high in IoT, to which design is a crucial medium to make the user engage in IoT. Fetching data from sensors and integration with applications is very much feasible and easy with today's tech, but it is visualizing data, designing long but intuitive menus, dashboards and many more new ways of helping the user digest more data in less time, is what IoT is waiting for now.

2. Designing Environments:

The most exciting thing about IoT is undoubtedly the automation or automatic control;  strategically controlling things and environment around for us based on our lifestyle patterns and behavior, with minimum or no human intervention at all. What's even more interesting is IoT promises to give mind to matter, which can take decisions,  positively behave just to please and comfort us materially, beyond interfaces, screens to the things in the world we live.

Although the technology has advanced enough to change the colors of a room to any color known to man, it is not smart enough to anticipate the exact visual we want to see. And there is none perfect than a designer to design the precise experience to the user through coloring these inanimate things around. And there's this thing also called ‘overriding’ because humans are too complex to be predicted. So even the points of interactions to override, security exceptions; will extend beyond handheld devices to displays in different sizes and shapes, spread in the environment around. That just simply mean one thing- More interfaces....!!

3. Designing a strategy:

The developers are mostly busy learning how to make light bulbs turn on  through their devices connected to a switch on the, these exercises lay very less emphasis on how to use this tech to its full potential to improve lifestyles. In spite of the hype in expectations, most of us really do not know what to do with such great tech like IoT. IoT can really use a lot of brainstorming and visualisation in this area to open new ways of thinking. 

There's a lot than just mood lighting, music and proximity door locks to IoT.

Every thing in IoT can be like designing a magic trick, where the system should pull information from the most least expected sources and be really helpful to the user, mostly without his involvement. And every IoT has the potential to pull a smart trick and sweep us off our feet, than merely using as a remote control. IoT is not watering your plants remotely from miles away, its more to do with moisture sensors deciding when the plants need water without your intervention.

As the development and business department is doing their part, Designers who are well versed in Cognitive psychology, Behavioral sciences, Anthropology and other sciences incorporating to user experience need to churn out more vivid ideas through many thinking processes. IoT does extend user experience beyond interfaces and screens to the physical world we live in everyday. The job of linking one physical output/activity to a physical trigger through IoT is expected from an experience designer (atleast for now). Wether we are equipped and game for the task? is the question we need to ask ourselves.

What now?

Now that we know that IoT needs designers more; let's gear up, read and get ourselves prepared for the anticipated. After all, it seems like interface designers are going to linger on for quite a long time. And we also need to think bigger and out of the boxes to improve lifestyles at a higher level with IoT. I'd like to leave you with this video which inspired me to write this blog and to look at IoT at a larger perspective. Awesome guy...

This topic is about the collaterals that come with the design jobs. Its more emotional than technical topic, which I’d like to express with these expressive memes to show how it exactly feels.

Clients and stakeholders are integral parts of our jobs as designers. We rarely get to work on the projects where we can actively make decisions, and play the boss. But most of the times, we are destined work with black suits and smarty pants, who always play the middle man between us and the users, trying to play advicers along with you.

One of the most difficult things for a designer are the stakeholders meetings. Some times making the them understand make our life harder than the designing itself. As an Architect, Product designer, Ux designer and Graphic designer, this is an inevitable step we all have to face, as long as it has anything to do with designing. But what makes this particular part so difficult? Is there a way we can avoid, or make things much easier? Are there smarter ways to tackle this? 

- This is what we will be discussing today.

The Problem

Any kind of it, Design has always been a soft target. Anyone, wakes up in the middle of the presentation and says something as ridiculous as they feel its a great contribution; if the room has more inconsiderate idiots, they back it up also. We all know that particular moment where we go....

But theres nothing we can do either, than keep calm. The fact that they are on the same team working with us do give them a right to ask stupid questions. This I see as the real test for designers, to show what they are made of. In many interviews I have taken, I purposefully ask over-smart questions to see the real performance of a designer that counts in corporate. Designers often get offended, take the feedback personally and get defensive in most of the situations.

I find it extremely difficult to explain as the reason is too complex for the poor souls to understand and we know that we are way ahead of those silly thoughts. Then the the face they make only forces us to be rude, or throw a punch in the throat. All the care we took, time and heart we have put to create the perfect solution, does make us protect the design to prove our sincerity and the time we have spent. As an outcome, The process of protecting the design, often renders the designer breed as arrogant and snobbish.

Lets talk how we can use such situations to our best and handle gracefully, or atleast handle with grace, all in the interest of making good designs by better collaboration with the clients/stakeholders.

Put them in your shoes.. Let them feel the pinch.

Design as I see is a constant process of taking decisions on the solutions we can think of, and reasoning with them to choose the best. And this can happen even at the most top level to the minute detail; very similar to ordering at McD, where you decide first to go for a burger or something else, and then narrow the choice on a particular type. No line/point we draw is out of coincidence or a habit. So try not to explain the conclusions directly like magic, take your audience through your design process, and try putting them in your shoes when you took a reasonable decision out of the choice you had. Let them know how much pain you have gone through to come to a conclusion.

But most important, try remembering every decision you take at every node in your design, compose yourself calmly when a stupid question is put forward.  

Now put yourself in their shoes. You feel their part of the pinch too

Respect their needs, no matter how stupid they are. It could be time, work or even something magical they want to happen. Try reasoning with them, and understanding their needs. Unless you understand their ridiculous needs, you will never be able to prove to them how ridiculous they sound. 

We do want to give a perfect solution, and love the products we design. But incase we get stuck in places where we have to deal with ridiculous needs, I suggest you either leave the job to find a suitable job that cares for design, or negotiate to meet their needs exactly, nothing more. It’s not quite impossible. Remember, a company always remembers an employee who understands in such situations. 

But do remember to express the impractical elements. Speak up, Just don't be a pussy!

Answer all questions before there are asked.

Just because you are talking in the same language doesn't mean they get you.

When you are presenting, every thing you do not acknowledge turns into a question. Putting the clients in your shoes, and making an impact is only possible with a sharp presentation. The presentation should be a sequence of how the research took place, and the important nodes and turns should be highlighted for client/stakeholder to understand how you reached to a conclusion. In a way, the client/stakeholder’s participation depends on how well you allow them to be a part of the process. And for this you need to get into their shoes as well to give a tailor fit presentation for their concerns and level of knowledge. A client/stakeholder presentation should be like a story, which is ready for all the anticipated questions their minds can think and ask for. Do not leave them with a lot of questions by the end of your presentation, this makes a designer job even more difficult.

Don't take designing too personal

Designers have this inherent attitude that they owe good designs to the world, which is good, but they often get so desperate in doing so.

I have seen and been the over-caring designer who wants to deliver gold for the  stake holders who only ask for silver or even iron. Yes, you spend a lot of time and heart to come with a world class design(Which can change the world), and its not fair to get trashed at this stage. I have witnessed many designers breaking down, taking offence and even trying to shove up the client/stakeholder’s throats by hook or crook, even after the idea has been rejected. This obviously makes things awkward and can make a designer looses respect and interest for the project. It might because the designer believes in the design, and all.. But often come out super-desperate to do something good to the world.

Designers, calm your tits! Its ok to deliver silver than being desperate, if the client/stakeholder do not know the importance of gold..Im not really asking you to care less, but asking you to stay calm and composed to get something good out of such tricky situations. let go, its not your wedding invite where people judge your taste... Play it cool. Do not blame the client/stakeholder, but DO blame yourself for not able to sell them gold. But please.. Let go psycho!

Collaborate with for good decisions & hold ’em responsible for the bad ones.

Let go if people do not agree with you after all you have tried, Avoid taking the responsibility of the success of the product just to pass your design. You have enough on you plate, let the clients/stakeholders take the responsibility of decisions they take, and make sure you hold them responsible. A designer’s job is to get ideas to reality, not to alter them. Advice is cool, but desperation to prove a point is unbecoming, no matter how right you are. 

Keep calm and reason back

Recently, one of my client didn't quite like the UXD of an app I have worked on, so the asshole (without my knowledge) went to another designer and got his UX/UI dESIGNED. And then he called me to show the new designs, and tell me how good the new designs urethane mine. I instantly felt bad and heart broken that bitch had to go to someone else to scratch the itch. So, without loosing my cool, I told that the new design is splendid and got my ass out of there. Thats not the worse part... The worse part started when I recalled and realised how much the new design sucked. I regretted not able to reason in the moment. This happened because my reason was clouded by my emotion. So... Yeah!

Keep these questions handy

Reasoning is often done by questioning, and making the client/stakeholder think of the short comings. The following are phrases can be used to knock senses in people in a very subtle and calm way.

Are you saying..........

Are you sure you want this to ......

How/when would you....

I would not recommend..... , Due to........ reasons

How/when do you think the user in ........... situation/s react to this

What is the objective of making this...........

Can you elaborate on .... part/ Can you rephrase?

Why is this needed? 

Can you give me another example/situation

What do you think would be the effect....

these 10 questions will do wonders, as long as your question does not imply anything but sense and collaborative approach.

Always start any thing you want to say by ‘I think’ 

Unless you are quoting someone or showing something thats already tried, anything that you say should start with ‘I think’. Passing statements just proves people to ask for credibility or challenge. Thank me later as these two words will save you a lot of arguments, especially with assholes.

Lastly, Don’t be afraid to ask questions

Yes, everybody is the room gets it (or fakes it), make sure you understand. Find innovative less-embarrassing ways to ask questions instead of asking to repeat. Make sure you understand your shit right before you start. At any stage of the project, the more questions you ask and let the clients/stakeholders in, the easier and safer your job gets.

Conclusion

And none of these can ever compare to what learns through experience.  So the more you work, make sure you learn and note how to handle the clients and the stakeholders, and how to make your way through. 

“What will happen to visual designers in the future?” was the first title I have given to this blog. But I thought of making the title sound more general.

A part of my job deals with interviewing UX-UI designers fro recruitment. And recently in our efforts to hire a Senior UI Designer with experience more than 7 years, I have realised how fast technology can make a competence obsolete. I would describe my experience similar to finding a cat in a box full of extinct dinosaurs. These guys who failed to update themselves had a hard time understanding my questions and few of them felt I was asking trick questions. Being a designer, this really made me sad and scared for our generation of designers and future. And my previous blogs also made me write how we may have to equip ourselves from becoming obsolete.

In this blog I'm going to leave my opinion on what the future holds for us designers, but writing about future is a risky thing to do. One can only anticipate and project, but cannot be 100% sure.

So im gonna try tarot reading for the designers out there. Because, this stuff can never get into controversies, and..... I always wanted to be a gypsy, because I find them cool !! So, following are my predictions in gypsy style.

(For best results read in the spooky gypsy accent)

Design Astro Sign: Technical

The need and speciality for Mechanical, Electric and Electronic designers is likely to a raise in robotics. As the demand for new products and number of products for each individual is likely to remain a mystery for now. But new technology and training for you is unescapbly on your cards.

Design Astro Sign: Product

With the market facilitating new products and technology, the average lifetime of a product became very short. This may have an effect on rapid designing and releasing various editions of a single product. Freelancers are likely to get a good opportunity to showcase their inherent ability and bag high paid projects. 

Although the future seems to be as it is today, product designers will be given a chance to get specialised in robotics as well. You may be able to prove your worth, by having knowledge in mechanics and materials. This kind of effort is likely to hasten your progress towards your goals. 

Design Astro Sign: User Experience

With stars favouring you, UXD is likely to get more attention and noteworthiness from the consumer product perspective. UX designers will be expected to take “The science of motivation” as one of their specialisation, and more importantly a responsibility. You are likely to grow closer to business and marketing terms, and play major roles in profits.

Robotics, 3D and artificial intelligence are atleast 5-10years away for you to lay your hands on and have proper rules chalked out. Till then your life may continue to be as tiring, lost and detached from the rest of the industry, as they will always wonder what is it that you actually do. Even in the case they understand, the world is likely to think they can do your job better. 

The future may relieve you from so many wireframes, but not from presentations and content of work produced. With Planets concerned with education and knowledge, you will be demanded to chase and learning new technologies till the time you retire.

As for UX as a competence, its one of those things never go out of need. But standardisation and more research in IA can pose a threat of automation of UX, at least to the extent you can feel the pinch.

Design Astro Sign: User Interface/Visual

The influence of stars and planets posited therein is likely to bifurcate your breed into more specialised fields, to match with the variety of interfaces the future has to offer. In present the most used interface is the Visual interface, but the future will be more favourable to verbal, gesture and even mental interfaces to interact with machines. This poses a definite bifurcation of interface design as shown in below tarot cards, and will demand high level knowledge in handling these interfaces.

Those of you who are looking for a more VD design like today are in for a disappointment, as the work demand may decrease by half. But the ones who are looking for more research based concentrated visual design will be should broaden your horizons by acquiring knowledge to keep up with the demand for exquisite tailor made visuals. As long as humans have the visual sense as their prime sense, designing visual interfaces will go never out of need, but they will just get more acute.

Design Astro Sign: Verbal Interface

The need for a verbal interface designer has recently emerged and is likely to stay for a long long time. As voice based personal assistants becoming more accurate and powerful with every update; a voracious need can be expected in the near future for specialists in sound, cognitive psychology and semantics. But sadly the boom may only persist till the technology becomes saturated to perfection which will take attest 10years. A gradually decrease in need may be experienced after that, and only required for special cases. But hey, there are thousands of languages in the world to do this with...

Design Astro Sign: Gesture Interface

Kinesics, the study of gestures andfacial expression, dipping it’s fingers in cognitive psychology, will become a household term in conversations. And kinesics designers and researchers are likely to be in great demand. Unlike voice based interfaces, the gesture based interfaces might not hit the personal devices, but its likely going to hit the home entertainment experience like a wave. Gesture based interfaces, at baby steps now may take over the specific targeted markets like a giant very soon. But this is likely to have a long lasting demand for designers in this field, and also a constant one. 

Conclusion

As chapter-7 was about whether a robot needs UXD or not, and it’s role in robotics. In this blog we are going to discuss how to go about designing UX for robots.

I had to write this, as many of the friends have requested me to write how to start designing UX for robots; inspite of my efforts to explain how it is similar to designing UX of any Mobile app. And what needs to change is the its the way we look at robots to a new perspective. Also its the uncertainty of understanding how any robot works, with a combination of the sic-fi trash we fed ourselves, is what scares us and makes us think that UX for robots is a whole new ground. Thats what we will be discussing in this piece of blog.  

9.1 Computer vs Personal Assistant vs Knowledge Navigator vs Artificial Intelligence vs Robots

One of the main reasons UX designers get scared of robots is because they get confused by the terms than between the terms. And the confusion leads in an effort that tries to cover everything. So, Robotics-101 for you guys...

Computer

A computer is a general-purpose device that can be programmed to carry out a set of arithmetic or logical operations automatically. Since a sequence of operations can be readily changed, the computer can solve more than one kind of problem. - Wikipedia

In a very UXD view, its functions can be roughly listed as

Organize & Navigate Information Create, edit & play Information Create a logic & Sequence Arithmetic & Calculations And through these we made the internet, games, online booking, what not...

Personal Assistant & Knowledge Navigator

Siri & Ok-Google are the perfect examples of this type. A natural language user interface to answer questions, make recommendations, and perform actions by delegating requests to a set of Web services. 

Majorly a voice based interface accompanied by a visual touch interface, that are tried and tested simple logics that work in multiple cases and environments. 

Or just a series of common commands, which can be performed without much of human assistance in every step. Like sending a message on Watsapp in just one command, rather than multiple commands like “open watsapp, got to john’s chat, message john...” , You know what I mean.

But these are not intelligent to improvise, learn and reason. These are mere logical programs, just controlled by voice.

Artificial intelligence

This is too sci-fi that the technology is taking baby steps in this field. And I'm sure this needs atleast another 10 years from now to get to consumer product cader. 

Anyways, 

Artificial intelligence (AI) is the intelligence exhibited by machines or software. It is also the name of the academic field of study which studies how to create computers and computer software that are capable of intelligent behavior. - Wikipedia

In simple words, a software that has ability to reason, plan, learn, process,perceive, adapt, improvise and even manipulate. A software which is more like a human baby in exhibiting intelligence. 

So, none of the above things count as a robot. Not even close... We often get confused that all the above things can be counted as robots because of their co-existence in all the sci-fi we have watched and read about.

Robot

A robot is a mechanical or virtual artificial agent, usually an electro-mechanical machine that is guided by a computer program or electronic circuitry.

 - Wikipedia

In other words, if you fit a mechanical arm to a computer, mobile or any of the things mentioned above, it becomes a robot. Even wheels count. But the only condition is that the prime out put should be mechanical (Vibrators do not count). But without a mechanical element, none of the above technology pass as a robot. 

The text book definition also states that a robot is not directly guided/controlled by a Human, there has to be a ‘computer program or electronic circuitry’ in between. 

So there is never a direct HRI (Human robot interaction).. There will always be a computer in between of a Human and a robot. So it has to be HC-CR-I (Human to computer - Computer to Robot - Interaction), where all we designers’ concern would be HCI (like always).

9.2 So what makes designing UX of a robot different?

Now its clear what makes a robot different is the movable component. So the question is what is the effect that a movable component can have on a normal user interaction and experience. What changes when one adds mechanics to an interface?

Based on my observation, mechanical parts can put a robot in 4 degrees of availability, effecting the UX at a fundamental level. Very similar to a boyfriend in any relationship 

Controlled remotely

Always reachable and available

Sometimes reachable & available

Uncertain reachability & availability

Let me explain how this in three different interfaces- touch, verbal & gesture...

If you study the sketch above carefully, typical UX possibilities are plotted between the degrees of availability of robots and different interfaces. With a little bit of patience and tolerance to my sketching, one can clearly see how the 4 degrees of availability’s make experience very distinct in each kind of interface. 

So simply understanding these four degrees with your robot’s availability and interface type, the UX of robot can be made to fit the exact need to reap the exact experience. 

I still remember the UXD module I opted in my college, especially the class on heuristics. I felt so disappointed and vaguely insulted after the UX Heuristics class because I felt the topic was such a waste of time to list down such obvious points and to remind them. So I never took them seriously nor taught the gospel of heuristics in the modules I taught after that. But recently, my view has changed big time...

Before we start,  following links are to the 10 famous heuristics for a graphic user interface by Jakob Nielson and explainations.

http://www.designprinciplesftw.com/collections/10-usability-heuristics-for-user-interface-design

http://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/

I didn't realise how helpful these are till I worked on Robotics recently. It was a dumb but a complex robot’s user experience I had to design. Not only the robot had a touch interface, but could also be operated by voice and gestures. The concept of designing UX for a robot turned my thinking upside down just by adding wheels and arms to an interface. This made me think at many levels and altered a lot of my usual UX process I use for a GUI. And that was the exact moment I felt a need for a list of the most obvious thing I could have missed in my design. So I ran back to my old college book stacks and dug up for the heuristics list I have written in foul mood. 

As obvious as they are, these 10 heuristics make a great check list to check any interface. Although these 10 heuristic rules were devised long back, I tried applying these to robotics also. It gave me such a satisfaction to have a check list for the most obvious and important things, which I could have missed easily in the new domain. But as I worked more on robotics I felt a need for more heuristics, for Robotics. Obviously, when the scope/Setup of the system widens, like Verbal interface, Gesture interface and Robotics, we will need more relevant heuristics too.

I was surprised to know that such UX Heuristics for Robotics have not been developed yet. So I thought of finding a way to know how these UX Heuristics for Robotics would look like if they were developed.

My research started by finding a pattern in the the common problems faced by the users using the current Robots & verbal interaction interfaces we have in the market now (like Siri, Google now, Amazon echo, Jibo, etc.,). Based on the overall pain points of the user, the heurists below then been derived after a lot of brainstorming, grouping, categorizing and rationally track a pattern, the research led to a list of pain points. These are simply the most obvious things that the user expects but the designers miss to regard in their designs.

The pain points were divided widely in categories like- feedback, verbal communication and recognition, verbal clarity, vocabulary, perception, minimising errors, handling errors, appropriate output and Misclaneous. The below heuristics developed can be applied to Robots with Interactive verbal interfaces, and also for ones with additional visual interfaces (screen).

A robot is more of a computer or like any mobile device, but with mechanical abilities, this could be in the movement of the whole system or in parts of it. And because of these reasons a GUI alone is not enough to control it, it is often controlled verbally, with gestures or a mixture of these with a GUI. And the position and availability of the interface can't be taken for granted either. These following heuristics have been listed taking these things in consideration in robotics, to enhance the interaction with a human on the other side.

The Principles

1. Clarity of the system’s status and intended action.

The obvious thing with robots is, we can't take the display or the robot’s availability for granted. The display won't be at the same place all the time, won't be visible or the robot won't even be there itself. Here showing status is not enough, but what comes next is equally important.  It should be clearly conveyed to the user and the bystanders when the system is working, on what it is working, or by when it will be available for a new task, in the most informatively and sequentially while it is in the process.

2. Confirmation on the command received, before acting on it. 

The robot should always confirm the task assigned before starting the task, either by repetition of the task or by asking for confirmation. In cases the robot might start walking away before the user realises that the robot got the wrong task.

3. Task duration and outcome communication

The robot should always communicate the time taken to accomplish any task assigned and permission should be taken from the user if the duration is long. 

4. An option to start over the task at any point.

Till the technology matures to a point where there is no need for human assistance, a startover/reset button should be provided to start the task again. Preferably a hard button for this.

5. The freedom for user to close, exit, pause any action or a part of the action without touching the robot.

Dealing with a technology which is not stationary/with dominating moving parts should have a remote stop button to avoid errors and ensure safety in most of the cases. This can be done either by a key word like “Hold on” or “shhhhh..” or by any other intuitive command in case of voice controlled robots.

6. Minimal Graphic Interface

Incase of a graphic interface (Screen with touch), make the interactions as minimal and the targets as large as possible (Fitts law). Buttons/interaction points which are larger in size, easy to access and should be placed distinctively for the user to quickly identify them as a point of interaction or information. Contrast in the button's properties, such as size or color can also be used to guide user to the most preferred and frequently chosen options. 

7. The most preferred and frequently used Options should be presented/cited first to the user.

In the case of Graphic interphase as well as verbal interface the most preferred and frequently used Options should be presented/cited first to the user.

8. Buttons which can start an actions should stand out from other menus.

Buttons which can start an actions on a Graphic user interface should be different and stand out differently. Deep menus and drill downs should be avoided on a screen whose place can't be taken for granted.

9. Versatile viewing angles and contrast 

The display should be seen in all lighting conditions. Or the system shall be intelligent enough to adjust itself. 

10. Error messages and information

Avoid using robotic responses like “Invalid Entry” or “Negative/wrong”, for missing/incorrect entries. Provide more information on how the user can improve his interactions.

11. Provide an alternative menu

There should always be an option to use GUI as an alternative to the Voice commands. In the case of noisy places and places with distractions, the user will need a secondary interface.

12. Let the User Finish talking

The System should let the user finish what is being assigned, especially with verbal interfaces. Any fillers that people use while thinking like “Aaaaa……” or “Lika…..”, the system shall wait for the user to finish. This is one of the most irritating point complained point.

Obvious, but these things would be nice if considered...

1.    Clarity & Pace of the voice interactions

2.    Ensure the most obvious and simplified information architecture

3.    Avoid options which sound similar to each other

4.    Use terms that are familiar to your users, and use the same terms consistently in all prompts and instructions.

5.    Avoid jargon and technical terms.

6.    There should be a name to trigger/Interrupt the system anytime

7.    Avoid Abbrevations

8.    When the user input is inconsistent, ambiguous or not understood., the system shall request more information politely

9.    Provide help

10. The user should  feel like he is the one controlling the system, not the other way around.

11. The User should feel as he is being concerned and listened to.

12. a small talk or a conversation to keep the user occupied, in the cases of mundane tasks performances.

14. Deep menus and drill downs should be avoided on a screen whose place is not stable

These heuristics along with the UX heuristics for GUI can be used as guidelines to start designing robot’s interaction. The list above definitely need more polishing, time, research and mental mastrubation. But for now, they helped me quite well with my current project. This blog did make me wonder whether a verbal interface and gesture interface would need separate heuristics list. Boy, we do have a long way to go..... Till then, the list ain’t that bad to start with.

I often find myself in discussions in which my very own fellow designers say that, we (the visual and user experience) designers have very less to offer in robotics. In this blog we are going to discuss how important designing interactions and experiences are in robotics. Aaaaand…. I should say, if you hate movie references and do not watch much of movies, you might regret reading the rest of this blog. Save yourself…!!! 

I have already eaten half of your brains in chapter5 explaining why fiction and movies make a great research base for design, and other things bout human aspirations and blah… and blah…. Just like gesture based intefaces (in chapter5), even Robotics fall in the same unknown-slash-futuristic-slash-I-have-no-f@#%ing-idea area. And I still retreat my open arms to fiction, to see what is the ultimate dream man has to the idea of Robots.

So I started my research by taking the 12 of my favourite robots from the movies I have watched. Also added couple of robots from the reality too to see where we really stand with respect to fiction.

1. C3PO (Starwars)

2. Chitti (Robot,Indian movie)

3. Robocop

4. Wall-E

5. Roomba

6. Asimo

7.R2D2 (Starwars)

8. Abide

9. Transformers

10. Tars (Inception)

11. Terminator

12. Baymax (Big Hero 6)

Then I tried to put them in some order hoping for a pattern that can make sense. First I have decided to arrange them in their mechanical ability and mechanical design.(Below)

‘Thats one way’ I told myself, because I felt vaguely disappointed by the fact that R2D2(my personal fav) is far behind than the rest - The real reason for the research to find another scale for robots.

By putting my movie watching to use I have plotted this sequence on another axis...... Ease of communication- The experience and ease in assigning a task to the robot. (Below)

That was cute! As I realized its not about the ease of communication alone. Its also about how often do I have to communicate to get a task done, and how much does a user have to baby sit to have a task done. So I have plotted the 12 on a scale of their independence and understanding too. (Below)

I noticed in the above GIF that the most independent robots like terminator and transformers at the top, are the ones who improvise, learn and adapt to accomplish a mission/task. And at the bottom we can see the robots from reality, which clearly state we a long way to make robots independent.

It is also clear that the most able robots are not necessarily are the ones I wish to have in my house. Because to me, something like R2D2 from Starwars sees to deliver a better experience to me than it’s counterpart C3PO, although C3PO has a far better mechanical abilities and design, i believe R2D2 can understand me better. This brings me to the thought that the intelligence for a system to understand, learn and adopt is more important than it’s mechanical ability, atleast to me when it comes to have a robot in my own house.

I was just trying to put forth that the ease of communication, understanding, improvising, adapting and independence of a robot is as important as it’s Mechanical ability, or may be more important.

So why are we discussing this? Oh yeah, I was trying to state the role of designing experiences in robotics. 

Heres a classic example... The Personal Computer

Around 1986, when I was still in my mother’s womb, computers grew stronger and able. But they remained only toys for geeks for a very long time, for people who could make them work and get things done. They were far away from common man to use or his ‘personal computing’. Until a small company thought of adding a little bit if experience designing to it, to make it easier to use. 

Heres another example... The Roomba

Roomba when launched captured all the attention and curiosity of users. It came with these buttons to choose the size of he room and ask the robot to clean the room to sparkle. But the engineers took years to make the experience better by making it simpler and more usable. And the engineers came up with an algorithm for the robot to calculate all by itself, In other words- to learn, adapt and take decisions. 

Watch this video...  https://vimeo.com/2145782 

If you are as lazy as I am, you can stat watching at 2:30 mark till the point you are interested. If you are lazier than that, the video talk about the same point I'm trying to make in a much less desperate manner with more examples. i.e, Technology is very important, but without a comfortable seat, handy steering wheel and a decent view, the titanic could very much have had sank itself.

Conclusion

In all the examples above, its evidently seen that the usability of a mere technology, made it an appliance - An appliance that is easy to assign a task, something that can understand what the user exactly means or make out, and do not need  constant baby sitting. And this is irrespective of the type of a robot, it could be with a graphic user interface, a verbal interface, textual interface or even if its just a calculator, everything technology that we interact with need it’s experience designed.

Well, first let me clear that I have not been to the future, nor any body has yet. Because we all know that’s impossible. But what is possible is to identify a pattern - study - and narrow down on possible outcomes in the future. What if I list down things that define future, but can be done in the present as well. That’s exactly what you will find yourself reading in this piece of blog today.

Lets first have a look at few of the examples envisioned through research by big brands like Microsoft, Corning, Apple Etc., to align and motivate their employees and the users to their Vision.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-tFdreZB94

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xuSRhzw_GA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6cNdhOKwi0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-GXO_urMow

So, I have decided to do an experiment with a bunch of my secretly chosen group of people (AKA beer buddies), who have agreed to participate in this experiment in exchange of chilled beer pint each. First I have tortured them by showing all these videos and references above, then I have asked them to point out all the things that made the think that these references render future, (heres the catch) except the technology. What came out was really interesting…

Following is the list of outstanding characteristics of future user interface (not technology) that came out in the session. All we have to do is to make sure our design posses few of these 15 characteristics to make it look futuristic already.

1.     Heavy but meaningful Animations - Menus slide and open in highly animated and choreographed sequences, which adds fluidity to the information.

2.     Establishing hierarchy and meaning, through animations and 3Dimentional metaphors.

3.     Information in large quantity in info-graphics, like stacks of files and windows, which can be dynamically altered to user needs.

4.     Information/elements appear and unfold only when needed or on demand (mostly by long presses)

5.     Monochromatic color scheme + Greys and slim text

6.     High contrast in Typography & Font sizes to create hierarchy that’s easily identifiable.

7.     Gesture driven and dominated (very less buttons/hints even on the UI, like expand and arrow icons)

8.     Evolution and expansion of elements (Like material design)

9.     Swipe in/Swipe out animations for text, with right directions, like roll down curtains and scrolls.

10.   Parallax scrolling, giving depth and showing different levels.

11.   No stark transitions between pages. The whole app is like one page, which transforms to show information.

12.   Translucent and transparent backgrounds for popups.

13.   Flat graphics and minimal 3D for buttons and actions. 

14.   Minimal but only reasonable skeuomorphism.

15.   Ofcourse neon graphics on transparent Displays (atleast the UI style with neon glow)

User interface is often an outcome of the ‘technology’ and the ‘ability’ of a system at any point of time in history. ‘Technology’ is the tricky bit to predict, but the ‘ability’ of a system can be obviously guessed -to be BETTER in terms of performance, response, animations and connectivity, all working together to improve the experience eventually. No one can be sure whether we will get to see a semi-transparent display or a 3D hologram next year, but you can be damn sure about the RAMs of current devices to get multiplied, to handle futuristic interfaces.

If one can search on the google keenly, there are already futuristic apps with these animations in the market, but are limited to high end phone to handle graphics and animations. And if one can google ‘UI navigation animation gif’ to find hell lot of .GIF files to depict cool and futuristic animations, but these only remain a concept waiting for the right technology which can handle them. Because we hardly see futuristic elements in the mainstream application interfaces.

Inspite of these fictions and visions of big giant companies, our research does lie in the present. And it is hard not to get carried away by technology that we saw in these videos (that we do not have right now), but only see the core characteristics in the UI, for us to get inspiration from. These points can be applied to any project/app to align them with the vision we have for the future as humans.

As we wait and anticipate for slimmer, cooler and unknown ‘technology’ from the future; ‘ability’ is something we can definitely be sure of and start designing interfaces for. Provided clean coding and using the right devices, which can handle the above animations gracefully,  the future does not seem impossible to be replicated the present. Atleast we now have some idea how the future is gonna be like, to design for the future from today itself.

Just like cinema has fantasized about every thing, from romances to the alternate worlds to futuristic technology, it also covered good ground in fantasizing about technology and Human computer Interaction at many levels. In this blog, we will be discussing what we can learn about interaction design from these fantasies on celluloid and all other media. And try getting a very rational and defined insight from this topic for us to use in our designs today.

Why listening to Fantacy?

Obviously, the first question that popped in my head was “How sane is it to follow some fantasy as research?”. But, I have tumbled upon a quote 

 “About half my designs are controlled fantasy, 15 percent are total madness and the rest are bread-and-butter designs.”-Manolo Blahnik

Which made me contemplate the process of design, which is nothing but fantasizing probable solutions within our understanding of a problem. In a way, designing and imagination have always been inter-dependent.                                                                                  

Movie Predicts Anticipates Future Technology

And then the second Question popped in my mind, “Do these fantasies ever come true?” And I was not disappointed at the following fantasies, which made to reality. Lets have a look at how these fantasies, which did hit the bull’s eye in predicting the future.

Oops… Microsoft, I’ll give you that.

And many more technologies, which we take for granted today…

And a lot of Over/Wrong predictions, which didn’t quite make it to reality yet….

So what do we fantasize about?

Apart from romance, these are the things we fantasize the most about in terms of pure technology.

  Human Computer Interactions(HCI) in Movies

HCI in movies can be divided into two types

Type 1: Where the system and technology is the protagonist

In these fantasies, the system and system’s abilities are highlighted, purely either by the ease of interactions or by technology. But in any case the audience is constantly made aware of the situation and interactions to follow the movie/Fantasy’s plot, by self-explanatory gestures and natural interactions. This fantasy leaves the audience in awe for the technology and age/world in the plot, where HCI is so natural that the audience can actually live the situation and feel what the protagonist feels.

Type 2: Where Tom cruise is the protagonist

Here the actor who is playing the protagonist is highlighted more than the potent technology. Where the total show seems to be in the protagonist’s control with the most complex gestures to leave the audience in total awe for Tom Cruise.

Well, we will be talking bout the first type in the rest of the presentation.

 Why does fantasizing about technology and future interest us?

What is so exciting and interesting about seeing technology we don’t even know about, and not even sure weather it is a probable possibility. Here are the couple of my inferences on why fantasy in technology gets our attention and interest.

Technology and potent Systems: Undoubtedly we are attracted to the potential of the fantasy world’s systems, where the technology seems possible but not superficial. Any thing that seems like magic can make our curiosity go in new directions, from futuristic to potter genre.

Natural, obvious and understandable: Audience love to live fantasies in movies for the couple of hours they are spending to watch. Often it is designed for them to feel as smart, capable and involved as the characters in the fantasies. Natural interactions and obvious gestures makes the audience feel as powerful and potent as any character in the movie, making the experience plausible and real. Unless the plot wants to maintain a mystery or highlight Tom Cruise, the audience want to catch up with what is happening in the movie and what are the characters trying to do.Even the futuristic videos made by Microsoft last year as their vision, the interactions were kept natural and effortless. Which promises us that the future is not only going to be potent but also as effortless as just we interact with the physical world.

If its natural & Intuitive, the experience just cant go wrong.

User Experiences & HCI in Fantasies 

Lets look at commendable Human computer interactions in recent movies and let’s discuss how natural interactions are the right ingredients in providing unforgettable experiences.

Natural Dismiss: Just like we have been doing to arguments and stupids since the beginning.

Delete: Just like the way we have been interacting with things in the physical world.

 Zoom In & Out: Except with elastics, Zooming is hardly seen in the nature. But somehow we tend to be very comfortable with the concept of pinching in and out to see things clearly. This does apply to limbs too than just fingers.

Animations and transitions: can say a lot more than we think they do. They can communicate the action, direction, hierarchy and even what is to be done next.

Selection and jogs

And a hell lot of interactions we can imagine which are really potential.

Future

If you are as intimidated as I am at this stage by these fantasies, and eagerly waiting for the technology to develop, think again. The future is not too far away. The future is now!

Leap Motion: a computer hardware sensor device that supports hand and finger motions as input, analogous to a mouse, but requiring no hand contact or touching.

Kinect: is also a line of motion sensing input devices by Microsoft for Xbox 360 and Xbox One video game consoles and Windows PCs. Based around a webcam-style add-on peripheral, it enables users to control and interact with their console/computer without the need for a game controller, through a natural user interface using gestures and spoken commands. 

So keep your eyes and mind open while you are designing interactions, these fantasies are as true and alive as you and I, in the time we are living in. And do not forget to fantasize and think young.

In the last chapter, we have discussed how easy it is to survive as an interaction designer by reading patterns and following them. But if it is that easy, why is the profession on the top jobs in IT industry? In this chapter we will look closely in the core reason for the existence of Interaction designer position in this industry in retrospect. Because unless we know where we have been, we cant figure out where to go next.

We all know the importance of ‘experience’ in interfaces… But what does ‘experience’ mean exactly in User experience? What is the ultimate experience we are trying to achieve by designing? Is there an ultimate end or a benchmark to experience? Are Interface designers really catering meaningful experiences or just giving creative alternatives in arrangement of buttons on interfaces? For us to understand what is happening now, we have to briefly look at what has happened and how designers contributed to the computing experience.

Back in 1960s, computers were not so cool. They were meant to be operated by only trained professionals, who ran the computers on text based commands and physical operations. In many cases there were no monitors or screens to see the operations, but only a final output. The term Interface came into play for computers in early 1970s where the idea of monitoring live and real time operations took over. Very few companies and individuals saw the potential in this idea, where a television cathode-ray-tube screen was used to project the operations and soon the rest of the world caught up with this idea too. But computing still needed training and commands to operate. The lines of commands in text and symbols were not enough to get designers onboard, because the computer hardy was an experience, but a tool.

In 1973, Xerox PARC developed the first personal computer called Aalto. It was not developed and considered as a commercial product by them, but an internal product and for few universities. This computer had a bitmapped screen, and was the first computer to demonstrate graphical user interface (GUI). This had a mouse, pointer, icons and many more for the user to interact wit a mouse.

Later Apple computers.Inc in 1984 took the GUI to the next level, which was more elaborate and highly inspired from Xerox’s Aalto. The intention of the design, which was very clear to Apple designers, was to make a personal home computer for everybody, which can be easily used by everybody. The reason behind imitating the physical was very clear to them, and the experience the machine offered became very crucial for it to be used by it’s target audiences, ie., everybody.

In this evolution of the Graphic user interface, a lot of design effort went in making the interface look like and work the real world. This ‘need’ to have the interfaces resemble/imitate the physical world, marks as the starting of the commercial need of the IT industry for designers. There were Objects to move, copy and cut; there were layers, windows, icons and a whole lot of metaphors to represent the outside world.  The real question is “Why real world metaphors? And all the pain to make it look real?” And “How is this supposed to improve our experience, give comfort and motivate us?”

If we see, its obvious. God/Creator/Evolution, whichever you believe has made us, have existed for 200,000 of years now, and successfully have been communicating, expressing, playing, interacting and getting motivated; with the world, nature and fellow humans. And all the computers, Internet, mobiles and technology, in the just the last 40 years just cannot change the habits and intuitions, which we are used to, since the beginning. So the computers started camouflaging their interactions into the world as we know and works, by behaving like the objects in the physical world.

Irrespective of the time, past or future, every technology and device is designed for humans to use or to be controlled by a human, and needs to be matched with his cognitive expectations and intuitions for him to function seamlessly. The user will have an advantage to use his inherent cognitive knowledge, to operate technology like any other physical in his world. In other simple words, the user instead of remembering commands and operations to move an object in the virtual space, can interact with the object like he moves in his world around. Although humans can be trained to use and operate complex interactions, proper user experience offers to exponentially decrease the time, effort in training and ease his cognitive load while working.

In many ways this imitation in today’s technology has not changed. With more elaborate gestures on latest devices for interaction, this is seen more evidently in today’s devices. And no matter how advanced the technology, where there is interaction and interfaces- the best way to achieve smooth interactions, is to imitate the way we interact with the physical world around. Because, man will and forever exist in a physical world, and comes with pre-cognitive rules to interact with things.

In product design, it is explained very elaborately. To analyze the affordability and the experience of a product, designers place a product in a hypothetical situation, without any user manual. The hypothetical situation can be either of an alien analyzing and guessing what the product could be to man, or simply with historic character in his time. The product’s experience is then judged on the way it communicates its use and purpose all by itself. For example, a spoon or a chair should communicate how it should be used intuitively; just by it’s shape and size.

If any interface that we use today is dropped in similar hypothetical situations, I doubt it can communicate. With interfaces, tens of operating systems, hundreds of interactions, thousands of gestures and countless applications today, every interaction with any interface is a challenge in itself. For the user to remember, analyze and execute all of these just to go thru his everyday life is not practical.

Designing for smart devices has always been a challenge, as the information needs special treatment to display effectively, compared to a desktop. In many ways, the controls, gestures and information has to be fed effectively on device to make most of these smart devices. Unlike a desktop, where the cursor, controls and methods can’t be compromised due to the display size input/control methods.    

Surviving as User experience Designer is very easy if one is smart at understanding patterns in information. The smart ones among us, with experience, can soon realize how to play safe in this field. Using standard design patterns specific for operating systems/Devices; which are tried, tested and tweaked for years to perfection. And this method is very easy to understand and can be aced with a little bit of practice.

Let me explain. Every operating systems/Devices come with a set of default applications like, contacts, messages, photos, email, notes, music, settings and very few other apps, which are exclusively built to function on these operating systems/Devices. And each of these applications manage a very specific kind of information in various types, sizes and quantities. If we can carefully see, most kinds of information’s patterns we design interfaces for can be substituted in these default application patterns, which work seamlessly with the OS/Devices. I’m not saying this is bad, In fact it’s a brilliant and smart way to design. Even Pablo Picasso said “Good artists copy but great artists steal.”. Not literally steal the way it is. If smartly executed, a little bit of mix and match of these patterns can make a good recipe for a perfect harmonious experience in any application.

Once the pattern is found, it becomes hard to see the information in any other way. This method also gives scope for a lot of improvement and creativity between these lines, because the primary functioning and flow is already perfected to standardization. This is a very commonly used method to stop the designer from investing so much time in designing by inventing the wheel all over again.

And these patterns are available all over the net. Below is the link to a compilation of more than the default apps. Most of these app patterns are time tested and tweaked to perfection.

http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2009/06/15/40-helpful-resources-on-user-interface-design-patterns/ 

Aaaaaaand of course there are comparatively very few other types of information patterns, which do not fit in these patterns, and demand a new layout. In many cases one can find a similar external app for rescue to provide the right pattern. But in rare and special cases where the information patterns are unique, designers fail to deliver the same balanced experience of the information and Operating system/Device. And inventing a new pattern is such a pain in the butt, because of the choices a designer has to make in every aspect is very high and need clarity of thought and approach to design.

At times like this, a thumb rule or a paradigm can come very helpful; for designers to constantly relate and check every decision they take consciously. And not just mere combinations of all the cool interactions and animations they can achieve to produce something that just looks new. A paradigm or an obvious manifest about interaction designing, which can be used as a quick litmus test, is essential. This can revolutionize the way we think and perceive about Human Computer Interactions and can also give a direction to the technology ahead.

Even more important is, what you won’t be finding on this blog….

1. Importance of UXD

2. Methods and processes of UXD

3. How to handle common UX problems

4. Bad/Good examples

5. Heuristics

Because, much has been said and written about this field already. With new additions, groundbreaking technologies and extended scope in smart devices every day, it is very difficult not to talk about the topics above. With special methods and processes easily available to learn, made every designer well equipped to survive in this field. But these are only working at a micro level, not looking at UXD from a larger point of view.

This situation is like empowering people with powerful tools like cars and skills like driving. But with a lack of direction to head, these things are just useless as not having them. By avoiding discussing the micro level design issues, we will be discussing the story and the sole reason of the experience, clearing all the fancy stuff in the present, giving a clear picture of UX future.

Because every problem is unique

I personally prefer reading experiences shared to factual information. In today’s world, information is easily available in tons of webpages, blogs and books about user experience, easily available like leaves, but experiences & inferences are rare like fruits. In cases, even the knowledge and experience shared by experts with a world of good and bad examples discussed are falling short to help us take the right decisions in designing user experiences. This is because every situation is unique and discussing all the possibilities is impossible; making ‘opinion’, ‘thought’ and ‘inferences’ the most valued things these days.

More than my experiences, I will be sharing my inferences how I constantly found logic with the Interactions I have designed, and the common theories I have associated design to, for my lazy brain to quickly make the difference between right and wrong interactions.

Having an opinion

After I started as a UX designer, I almost literally digested and blended the rules of operating systems, devices, guidelines and trends in my DNA. I aced dealing information and designing seamless experience across platforms and devices. But these rules and guidelines eventually became strong benchmark for me to judge and start any design, and comparatively impacted on my opinion of an ideal design. Incase of absence of these rules, devices and trends, I was absolutely lost.

If I was to design a whole new operating system or scheme for smart devices unlike the existing ones, I would have no idea where to start. I’m sure it’s the same with most of the designers today if they are given a task to design an operating system for a new product; lets say, like a smart watch. Even the UX critic’s reviews of products today are just relative to the counterpart’s features. How many critics and designers do you think can design a whole new operating system and design scheme, and still manage to justify without any reference to the existing products? This blog’s prime intention is to make the designers and critics equipped with thinking which implies the obvious purpose of interactions and experience on a whole new basic level.

With technology bypassing so rapidly everyday altering our roots and the direction of our thought everyday; Interaction designers who are so much drowned in the Silicon Valley rules and robotic guidelines, should be able to keep their head above the surface and to have an opinion.These factual chapters, with references to history, cognitive psychology and obvious sense, can bring a sense of direction to UX designers, who are footloose under the blanket of creativity, technology and corporate competition.

Never in the history there has been such a time, where such rapid development in any technology took place at many levels. The technology today has empowered the crowd to create, design and to publish anything. With this freedom to be able to create and execute anything, is increasing the chances for creativity. Which is good, but none-the-less giving a lot of scope to drift away from obvious purpose of designing. Because “with great power, comes great responsibility.”, but “with great freedom, always comes chaos”.

Let me explain, we live in a wonderland called “Today”, where there are tons of device types, operating systems, their interactions and apps. And the freedom to render almost any interaction in any of these platforms is with everybody. Now imagine the same wonderland after ten years, with millions of apps, gestures and interactions, where it will be too confusing for the user to remember how to interact with each of them, stretching the user’s cognitive load to buckle, in other words - confusion and chaos.

I’m not saying all the Operating systems should look and work the same, but its merely about interactions. Can there be a rationale behind assigning an interaction to any action? Can the user intuitively know how to go use any app irrespective of the platform? Is there a check or a system, which can regulate this freedom to design anything? Is there a thumb rule or a paradigm, which can help us take decisions easily?

The good news is, Yes. By referring to History, Cognitive Psychology and day-to-day lives, this blog I will try helping us to have a better understanding of the purpose of technology and design in retrospect, and in the future.