Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
28 views5 pages

E3 Chap 04 6up

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1/ 5

why study paradigms

Concerns
chapter 4 – how can an interactive system be developed
to ensure its usability?

paradigms
– how can the usability of an interactive
system be demonstrated or measured?

History of interactive system design


provides paradigms for usable designs

What are Paradigms Paradigms of interaction

• Predominant theoretical frameworks or New computing technologies arrive,


scientific world views creating a new perception of the
– e.g., Aristotelian, Newtonian, Einsteinian (relativistic)
paradigms in physics human—computer relationship.
• Understanding HCI history is largely about We can trace some of these shifts in
understanding a series of paradigm shifts
– Not all listed here are necessarily “paradigm” shifts,
the history of interactive technologies.
but are at least candidates
– History will judge which are true shifts

The initial paradigm Example Paradigm Shifts

• Batch processing • Batch processing


• Time-sharing

Impersonal computing Interactive computing

1
Example Paradigm Shifts Example Paradigm Shifts

• Batch processing @#$% ! • Batch processingC…P… filename Move this file here,
• Timesharing • Timesharing dot star… or was
it R…M?
and copy this to there.

• Networking • Networking
• Graphical displays % foo.bar
ABORT
??? dumby!!!

Community computing Direct manipulation

Example Paradigm Shifts Example Paradigm Shifts

• Batch processing • Batch processing


• Timesharing • Timesharing
• Networking • Networking
• Graphical display • Graphical display
• Microprocessor • Microprocessor
• WWW

Global information
Personal computing

Example Paradigm Shifts Time-sharing

• Batch processing • A symbiosis of physical • 1940s and 1950s – explosive technological


and electronic worlds in growth
• Timesharing service of everyday
activities.
• Networking
• 1960s – need to channel the power
• Graphical display
• Microprocessor • J.C.R. Licklider at ARPA
• WWW
• Ubiquitous • single computer supporting multiple users
Computing

2
Video Display Units Programming toolkits

• more suitable medium than paper • Engelbart at Stanford Research Institute

• 1962 – Sutherland's Sketchpad • 1963 – augmenting man's intellect

• computers for visualizing and manipulating


data • 1968 NLS/Augment system demonstration

• one person's contribution could drastically • the right programming toolkit provides
change the history of computing building blocks to producing complex
interactive systems

Window systems and the


Personal computing
WIMP interface
• 1970s – Papert's LOGO language for simple • humans can pursue more than one task at a
graphics programming by children time

• A system is more powerful as it becomes • windows used for dialogue partitioning, to


easier to user “change the topic”

• Future of computing in small, powerful • 1981 – Xerox Star first commercial windowing
machines dedicated to the individual system

• Kay at Xerox PARC – the Dynabook as the • windows, icons, menus and pointers now
ultimate personal computer familiar interaction mechanisms

Metaphor Direct manipulation

• relating computing to other real-world activity • 1982 – Shneiderman describes appeal of


is effective teaching technique graphically-based interaction
– LOGO's turtle dragging its tail – visibility of objects
– file management on an office desktop – incremental action and rapid feedback
– word processing as typing – reversibility encourages exploration
– financial analysis on spreadsheets – syntactic correctness of all actions
– virtual reality – user inside the metaphor – replace language with action

• Problems • 1984 – Apple Macintosh


– some tasks do not fit into a given metaphor • the model-world metaphor
– cultural bias • What You See Is What You Get (WYSIWYG)

3
Language versus Action Hypertext

• actions do not always speak louder than • 1945 – Vannevar Bush and the memex
words!
• key to success in managing explosion of
• DM – interface replaces underlying information
system
• language paradigm • mid 1960s – Nelson describes hypertext as
• interface as mediator non-linear browsing structure

• interface acts as intelligent agent • hypermedia and multimedia


• programming by example is both action
• Nelson's Xanadu project still a dream today
and language

Computer Supported
Multimodality
Cooperative Work (CSCW)

• a mode is a human communication • CSCW removes bias of single user /


channel single computer system

• Can no longer neglect the social aspects


• emphasis on simultaneous use of
multiple channels for input and output • Electronic mail is most prominent
success

The World Wide Web Agent-based Interfaces

• Hypertext, as originally realized, was a • Original interfaces


closed system – Commands given to computer
– Language-based
• Simple, universal protocols (e.g. HTTP) • Direct Manipulation/WIMP
and mark-up languages (e.g. HTML) – Commands performed on “world” representation
made publishing and accessing easy – Action based
• Critical mass of users lead to a • Agents - return to language by instilling
complete transformation of our proactivity and “intelligence” in command
information economy. processor
– Avatars, natural language processing

4
Sensor-based and Context-
Ubiquitous Computing
aware Interaction
“The most profound technologies are those that • Humans are good at recognizing the
disappear.” “context” of a situation and reacting
Mark Weiser, 1991 appropriately
• Automatically sensing physical
Late 1980’s: computer was very apparent
phenomena (e.g., light, temp, location,
identity) becoming easier
How to make it disappear?
– Shrink and embed/distribute it in the physical world
• How can we go from sensed physical
– Design interactions that don’t demand our intention measures to interactions that behave as
if made “aware” of the surroundings?

You might also like