Saturday, July 21, 2007

HCI of Casinos and Slot Machines

This is the kind of article I love to read. It's about the human factors that go into designing slot machines and casinos. The article says that a slot machine is designed to be loud and visually appealing, especially when it pays off. The three wheels encourage the victim player to think that he's almost won when two of the wheels align, when there's no such thing as "almost". The slots are positioned just within easy walk of the tables, because table players don't like to hear them, yet the spouses of table players may well play the slots while they're waiting. It also talks about casino design in general, arranging that players can't see the outdoors, or even real outdoor lighting. No clocks, either, no way of knowing how long you've been there.

The slots are insidious in that they pay off only sporadically, which is how positive reinforcement works best. They pay off publicly, so everyone around is encouraged to keep playing. And they keep nurturing that "almost there" feeling.

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Usability as a Path to Failure? Surely Not.

Todd Wilkins at Adaptive Path has thrown down a gauntlet to usability professionals, claiming that usability is not only overrated, but even injurious and a path to failure. He cites successful artists who didn't worry about "usability" either. He says:

So, why oh why do people in this day age still hold up “usability” as something laudable in product and service design? Praising usability is like giving me a gold star for remembering that I have to put each leg in a *different* place in my pants to put them on. (Admittedly, I *do* give my 2 year old daughter a gold star for this but then she’s 2.) Usability is not a strategy for design success. The efficiency you create in your interface will be copied almost instantaneously by your competitors. Recently, I’m even coming to believe that focusing on usability is actually a path to failure. Usability is too low level, too focused on minutia. It can’t compel people to be interested in interacting with your product or service. It can’t make you compelling or really differentiate you from other organizations. Or put another way, there’s only so far you can get by streamlining the shopping cart on your website.
Ahem.

Rarely do I see a designer get this blatant. They may think this drivel, but they don't usually voice it before a plunge into happy hour. First, usability here might seem synonymous with "make stuff easy to see". We professionals know this is not anywhere close to being true. Second, it entirely overlooks that websites aren't works of art, unless they're private, non-commercial ones. Commercial (e-commerce) sites are for making money, and every visitor who snorts in frustration and leaves is a financial failure, not a failure to make a friend. Visitors don't need to be engaged, or have fun in most cases. They need to transact. They need to do the tasks they arrived to do. Much "design" merely gets in the way of that simple goal, and ought to be cut out like a splinter under the fingernail, because it provides about as much value. A big-time website isn't an opportunity to dance the visitor about. It's to enable him to act.

Of course any successful design will be copied. But then, there are only a few designs in human experience, and they're all copied every day. Graphic designers tend to think that their designs are unique and powerful. Most often the ones that are sold this way are actually glitz with no go, at their core simply reproductions of past designs with a few cosmetic changes. There are only so many ways to arrange elements on a surface.

In my view, websites are not akin to artworks, but more like cars. First you make sure the damned thing drives properly, and then you dress it up. Not the other way around. We tolerate few physical objects in our lives that are as poorly designed as "cool" or "artistic" websites, yet we complain about the physical and work our way around the virtual. This seems asinine to me.

Thursday, July 12, 2007

In The Same Room, But Apart

It's possible that the next frontier for social technology is to connect people locally, rather than across continents. When I work at home and my wife is in an adjacent bedroom/office, it's easier for us to use IM and email that goes out to servers from Memphis to Mongolia, than to use our own little network. Laptop users in public places can't readily recognize each other in cyberspace, not even through cell phones. Bluetooth has some limited capability, but it has a short range.

The problem is everywhere. If I see somebody with a cell phone and want to talk to them, I can't look up the number or ping them, even from just yards away. I have lots of occasion to be with people in short bursts of time, such as conferences, classes, professional group meetings, and the like. These are people I see rarely, but may desperately need to contact with questions or to have them render quick decisions. I may not even know them by sight, or by full name. For example, I'm a member of the local UPA, and we put on a yearly conference for World Usability Day. It attracts speakers I don't know, members I haven't seen in a long time, sponsors, attendees, and many others I might not be expected to pick out in a crowd. Another organizer comes up to me and asks "Does Dr. Willoughby (a speaker I haven't met) still need this wireless mouse?" Beats me, and I can't just ping him to find out. What would help is to have a short-distance option in my cell phone that would operate much as my laptop does when it enters a wireless field. My laptop seeks out whatever signal it knows, and if it doesn't find one it knows, it tells me that. Otherwise, it just logs on. I'd like to see something similar in cell phones. I could haul out my phone and open a screen that lists the profiles of everyone within, say, 100 yards. You could hide your profile if you wanted, so the phone would show only "Hidden Account". But prominent people who speak at conferences usually want to be noticed, so I would scroll down until I found "Dr. Lance Willoughby", highlight him, and press the "Go" button. I'm connected to his phone.

Thursday, July 5, 2007

Keeping a Usability Portfolio

When I scan the want ads for people in the design end of usability, I often see language like "Must show portfolio". Huh? Most of us would find that requirement very hard to fulfill, no matter how long we've been in the business. It's not like we're artists in a garret, and our work endures down the centuries. It may last only days or weeks. And it may be buried in the overall design of the site. Further, we may not be the graphical designer, who will get credit for the look of the site. Perhaps more importantly, websites are inherently team affairs, largely produced by committees. After the wrangling is over, any usability person might question where his or her work might be found and pointed out. Add to this the short life spans of many design companies or design departments. Even if the company name sticks around, the personnel turn over rapidly in some places. After we've been gone for a year or so, nobody there remembers us. The lesson here is that when a site goes live, we should take screen shots and put them away on a CD somewhere so that later we can make up "portfolios". Forget, and the opportunity may slip away forever. Put it into your design process.