Friday, March 1, 2002
Learning Curved
Posted by Tycho Morgan in "THOUGHT" @ 01:04 PM
I've had a few thoughts about the learning curve of mobile technology, mostly in relationship to the idea of functionality and usability that I brought forward last week.
Obviously because of the drastically different form that mobile technology employs different types of interfaces, input options, and software applications, in order to provide a user experience that is practical. These optimizations are a good thing, especially on paper, but in practice it's hard to get used to some of the changes that the developers make when trying to streamline, and as a result some of the most potentially productive innovations in the Pocket PC, are rendered virtually useless.
It's hard for the developers to find the balance between innovative design, and the familiar methods that we are used to. Do you create a product that will allow users to input data with remarkable speed assuming they take the time to learn a new way of writing or typing? Input is obviously more subject to these kinds of challenges, but interfaces of all sorts can run in to this problem. A solution may have the possibility for exceptional productivity, but if the user must jump over too many learning-related hurtles, then the solution will ultimately flop.
The learning curve dilemma is present in many parts of today's Pocket PCs: feature organization, menu structure, and of course—for me--the never ending input drama.
Ideally there shouldn't be any learning curve, and this is why qwerty keyboards are appealing. Almost every computer user knows instinctively how to use one, and so these options are successful, despite not really being optimized or at peak efficiency for anything less than full sized keyboards, and some would argue that it isn't even at peak efficiency for desktop touch typing, but that's another story for another site. Unlike the qwerty based solutions where you don't have to teach yourself anything new, solutions such as Graffiti, Fitaly, and the twiddler keyboard are designed to provide mobile device users with a greater productivity possibility by making devices that are optimized for mobile tasks. We need such solutions in order to take full advantage of our Pocket PCs; otherwise our pretty little Pocket PCs will be virtually useless for any serious kind of task. Sadly, these solutions don't come without a price: They require us to learn new techniques and methods for doing something that we most likely already know how to do on our desktops.
On paper this doesn't seem like much of a problem, but when you go to use a new system, it becomes a problem of massive proportions. We are creatures of habit, and thus it is really hard, if not impossible, to get us to learn a new method of typing or writing.
What do you think the perfect balance between innovative design (with a learning curve) and adaptations of the same standards that don't require you to learn anything new? What would you suggest to the developer of an innovative new input or interface that might require users to learn a new and contrary system. Finally, to what extent do you believe developers should maintain backwards compatibility?
Obviously because of the drastically different form that mobile technology employs different types of interfaces, input options, and software applications, in order to provide a user experience that is practical. These optimizations are a good thing, especially on paper, but in practice it's hard to get used to some of the changes that the developers make when trying to streamline, and as a result some of the most potentially productive innovations in the Pocket PC, are rendered virtually useless.
It's hard for the developers to find the balance between innovative design, and the familiar methods that we are used to. Do you create a product that will allow users to input data with remarkable speed assuming they take the time to learn a new way of writing or typing? Input is obviously more subject to these kinds of challenges, but interfaces of all sorts can run in to this problem. A solution may have the possibility for exceptional productivity, but if the user must jump over too many learning-related hurtles, then the solution will ultimately flop.
The learning curve dilemma is present in many parts of today's Pocket PCs: feature organization, menu structure, and of course—for me--the never ending input drama.
Ideally there shouldn't be any learning curve, and this is why qwerty keyboards are appealing. Almost every computer user knows instinctively how to use one, and so these options are successful, despite not really being optimized or at peak efficiency for anything less than full sized keyboards, and some would argue that it isn't even at peak efficiency for desktop touch typing, but that's another story for another site. Unlike the qwerty based solutions where you don't have to teach yourself anything new, solutions such as Graffiti, Fitaly, and the twiddler keyboard are designed to provide mobile device users with a greater productivity possibility by making devices that are optimized for mobile tasks. We need such solutions in order to take full advantage of our Pocket PCs; otherwise our pretty little Pocket PCs will be virtually useless for any serious kind of task. Sadly, these solutions don't come without a price: They require us to learn new techniques and methods for doing something that we most likely already know how to do on our desktops.
On paper this doesn't seem like much of a problem, but when you go to use a new system, it becomes a problem of massive proportions. We are creatures of habit, and thus it is really hard, if not impossible, to get us to learn a new method of typing or writing.
What do you think the perfect balance between innovative design (with a learning curve) and adaptations of the same standards that don't require you to learn anything new? What would you suggest to the developer of an innovative new input or interface that might require users to learn a new and contrary system. Finally, to what extent do you believe developers should maintain backwards compatibility?
