About miscellaneous - computer user interface and usability.

                                        
                                        
                                        
                    ╔════════════╗      
                    ║  ABOUT MISCELLANEOUS  ║      
                    ╚════════════╝      
                                        
                                        
                                        
 USER INTERFACE.      
                                        
  Today, thanks to a completely unexpected
data (by the standards of 5 years ago)
using computers, the user
The Chinese interface is becoming more and more attractive
attention. Unfortunately, like anything fashionable
word (artificial intelligence, multimedia
dia, Internet)term "custom
interface"  immediately began to use
use as an advertising argument
ment, as a result its meaning became much
less certain. In this situation it was
it would be strange to claimtruth, one-
Due to some considerations the author of these
 I would like to share with the reader.  
    -first, into the concept of user
interface (PI) includes not only, and even
not so much,the picture on the screen is three-
measured, animated, simply executed
in fashion design, how many ways to interact
user actions with the system. In this
context, it is very interesting to compare the math-
rials by PI  in Russian computer
press(reminding me of reviews used
art critics for art exhibitions)
and the classic book by Donald Norman
"The psychology of everyday things" ("The
Psychology of Everyday Things"), where the main
a new example of a book was design
door handles.                          
  Another book very popular among
American PE specialists, analysts
promotes the development of cutlery in
Middle Ages. In both books the design is
There is a subordinate position.  His main
the goal is to make the item easier to use. 
 This look is radically different from
it is widely believed that
The user interface  is a set
 interface elements" and their locations
on the screen. The nomenclature itself is accepted
in the environment of Windows interface elements
Comrade raises serious doubts that
on its basis you can really create
convenient interfaces.                     
  For example, this interface element
how the scroll bar is in the opposite direction
contrary to one of the basic principles
psychology of perception: a person can
be only one point of active attention
nia.  When using the same line of pro-
you have to look at the handle in two directions
distinctly different points - on the scroll -
my image (isn't it time to stop-
xia) and to the ruler. Everyone knows the unpleasantness -
problems with the mouse not hitting the desired target
ku when scrolling or with"jumping"
mice from a ruler are an obvious consequence of your
the above-mentioned contradiction.              
  We are, of course, no stranger to the fact that
unnatural things are declared the most
correct, but still no persuasion
marketing moves are notwill do the right thing
    and convenient that which contradicts      
 human nature.                  
  Let's assume that neither windowed,
nor any other interface yet
exists and we need to figure out a way
communication between a person and a computer. First and
important note - it is necessary to distinguish
professional user (i.e.
user running on the computer
your professional work and, roughly
speaking, receiving money for it) from
user having fun and especially
in any case, not sentenced to prison
behind the display. A good analogy might be
become a car for a professional
driver and amateur driver.               
  The first one can be offered practically
any interface. He has time and ability
tivation to adapt to whatever pleases
but complex and unnatural in-
interface.  The time he spends with
computer, large enough to
even large training costs are recouped
 .  Moreover, constant communication with
    The computer prevents possible damage
being learned. And finally, he can't
maybe just spit and stop using it
deal with an inconvenient system, especially if
There is no convenient system nearby with similar
possibilities.With an amateur user everything is the same.
mouth While the criminal code does not provide for
possible punishment like "imprisonment in
user interface", it has
right to choose (not between one program
and the other, and between the computer and the television
sight or even a book). He wants
have fun with the computer and waste time
energy and strength to master the inconvenient inter-
he can't handle the face. The exception is
there are fans communicating with the computer via
principle"hunting is better than captivity."           
  You will say that people still learn.
This is not true, because today
There are literally no amateur users.  Before
lately on computers love-
The bodies could only play games. (By the way-
 popular games have a very good interface
    th and not window at all.) Today
Internet has become for ordinary people
powerful incentive to buy
computers.  And criticism is already heard
voices about the interface being difficult to understand
ordinary users. You can be sure
It’s impossible to predict what will happen next
worse.   Users will increase
only by amateurs.So let's leave it to the professionals
the interface they are used to
(do not throw away the money spent on
their training), and let's think about the principles
in a hurry to build an interface for amateurs.  
  The starting point of every good in-
interface is a metaphor. Setting
on the screen and ways to interact with
the system must appeal to the situation,
well known to the user. Yes, windows
The interface was intended as a metaphor
desktop with documents. Use
the use of metaphor kills several
rabbits Firstly, it is easier for the user
 mother and interpret the image
    screen. Secondly, he doesn’t need every
the next time to look at the manual to
find out how something is done
action.   At least some
actions should"naturally"follow
from a metaphor.  Thirdly, the user
there is a feeling of psychological com-
fort, characteristic of a meeting with something
well known. (This is the secret, by the way.
popularity of old melodies. All gastro
lers know that the audience is not asking them,
if they don't do something for a long time and
well known.)                      
  However, in the use of metaphor there is
several underwaterstones.  Still
user interaction process
takes place not in the real world, but with the help
such artificial devices as
screen, mouse and keyboard. Therefore somewhere
we have to correct the metaphor "correct".In addition
Moreover, the possibilities of the world inside the computer
usually wider than the capabilities of the physical mi-
ra, and this can be successfully used
 more powerful interface. Finally,
    there is an established practice of using
computer skills from professionals, and
this practice seems to be a natural creation
developers of new interfaces.                
  As an example of a successful metaphor in
interface can be givenLotus Organi-
zer,whose appearance resembles
a familiar weekly journal whose functions
and performs this product. An example of non-
dacha metaphor, or rather its complete abandonment
presence where it is needed, can
serve Explorer Windows 95.           
  So we came up with a wonderful meta-
head start for our interface. Let's save it
kept secret as a trade secret and understood
let's move on.  Now we need to do
conceptual interface design. What
is this? Within the framework of our metaphor, we
must develop a systeminterface
elements, a kind of alphabet of inter-
actions, having studied which the user
can easily do what he needs.
We also have to find an elegant way to represent
 understanding of both individual elements and
    groups. And finally we must choose
general inventive style that was
would be easily recognizable and pleasing to the eye.   
  Our (un)successful predecessor - windows
The new interface solved only the first problem
conceptual design. It has a
understanding "controls" - interface elements
those with whom it mostly happens
interaction. In Windows 95 it is made
tortureof developing a general visual
style for controls. About the general style of e-
there is no early image of speech at all,
unless you count it as such a set
"theme" included withMicrosoft Plus.
 An example of good conceptual design
interface design (in addition to some computers
computer games) the system can serve up to
horn signs.  Its design is wrong
simple as it may seem at first
look.  Pay attention to the combination
"realistic" ictograms with "abs-
path",for combining many
signs hanging together on "pho- dictionary
 .  In addition, we managed to solve
     a titanic task - the signs are noticeable
and do not spoil the beauty of the surrounding nature
where this beauty is. And, most importantly,
this system works well and does not require
from its higher education users
nia. In many interfaces, road signs
ki occupy a significant place.         
  Conceptual interface design should
wives be based on the idea ofinterface
environment.  Essentially, while working with
system, the user is immersed in the environment
do interface is similar to when arriving
on safari, the tourist immerses himself in the environment
wildlife. Here the word "medium" is
changes not for beauty, but as a signifier
typical for human behavior in
different environments of the bundle  "signal-action-
twee".                                  
This idea belongs to psychologistGibson
(do not confuse with popular science fiction) -
book"Ecological approach to psychology
perception."He claims that our
perception is based on motivation in that
le, that if we are hungry, we see
    to edible things, and if you are tired -
then only pieces of furniture intended
new for relaxation. That is, the person did not ask
he sees, but interrogates the environment, the leadership
based on various motives. In my opinion
In fact, the environment gives a person different signals
cash.  Along with answering his queries,
there are priority signals (or always
requested),related to physical
danger.  Based on the received data
cash, a person carries out various
actions.                               
  For artificial environments (for example, system
highway topics) such a model with
obviously true.  Gibson, however,
believes that it is also true for natural
nyh environments. In any case, how to send
nary point for interface design it
very productive. So, the buttons are different
dialogs in a standard window interface
all can be interpreted as signals to their na-
reaping But these signals are extremely weak,
since all the buttons look the same,
 relying only on the texts in them, and the functionality
     they are completely different. That is
fromthe whole variety of visual arts
means - shape, size, color, text -
in dialog buttons using only
text.  It is considered good form to have
the buttons are the same size and neatly placed
false to force the user
read the text every time. Exceptions
The one that confirms the rule is
button OKwhich does not look like
text, but as an image (hieroglyph). Not
by chance, in none of the localities known to me
calizations, the inscription on this button does not
translated into another language.               
  To understand that diversity is not
begins an aesthetic disturbance, looking at
rome on remote controls
TV or VCR. In them
buttons scattered in a seemingly disorganized
row, have different sizes, most
indicated by pictograms, and the text is
tal is very short (for example,Play) and
also rather plays the role of a pictogram.
 you do not have a remote control
    They look nice and are quite easy to use
use. At the same time, users of this
interface are exactly the ones for whom we
we are conceiving our new interface with the computer
term.                                  
  The concept of environment and the concept of metaphor are close
ko are connected. If the environment looksand some
other supporting elements will resemble
something already familiar to the user, he
will be able to adapt to it faster.
However, the chosen metaphor can
dictate all visual decisions
interface design. However, one should be careful
argue with the photographic similarity of the environment
on the computer with the chosen metaphor. (Here
there is an analogy with painting.)  Still
computer environment is artificial and half-
repeat all the elements together
actions from the physical world will not succeed.
A photographic similarity may
provoke the user to
use this artificial environment in
accuracy, like the one it resembles
 The first time the user
    encounters the difference, he will experience pain
yellow psychological shock that can
lead to complete failure of the system.  
  This is the secret of the unpopularity of many
computer games with excellent graphics.
But other games, say Tetrisand so on
same popular todayColor Lines (balloons)
ki),have a very simple and conventional environment
do, providing psychological com-
user's fort.                      
  Here we come to another important thing.
the principle of interface design -
balance betweeninteractive capabilities
the program and the complexity of its representation
body row.  Same as when creating
games, the main thing is the balance between complexity
the game and its fascination, the level of
which takes up most of the time,
so it should be provided in the interface
balance between functionality
programs, manipulative capabilities
tions by her and her pictorial range. Pros-
This program does not have the right to be difficult to manage
 exist, this is obvious, but it does not have
    right to overly sophisticated graphics -
a sin typical of today's products
Comrade                                    
  A complex picture is psychologically prepared
vit to a complex life with the program. From
This, by the way, does not follow that a complex
programs must have sophisticated graphics
and complex ways of interaction. (Important
reminder - we're not talking about
programs intended for professional
national activities!)  Better than this one
complexity "pull out"gradually, gradually
like a rabbit out of a hat or like a folk-
mastering levels in computer games.   
  The user will forgive you for deceiving, concluding
the expectation is that it is simple at first
the program's view gradually opens
their new (including interface ones)
possibilities.  This may happen
tea, when the user out of habit
will try a technique mastered in general with
another program, and with joyful surprise
will discover that your program is correct
 but I figured out what he wanted.
    the effect can also be natural-
development of the environment, when from the mastered
the user will perform simple actions in
conclusion that there must exist and not
something complicated, and the program will please you again
his mutual understanding.  It is important that these
difficulties did not appear at first
getting to know the program, scaring off but
vichka. Thus, the picture on the screen
remains the same, and the usability
valves expand.                     
  In fact, from this position it is good
the mainproblem of the window inter-
face. All interface elements are declared
are present from the very beginning, they are always there
are present on the screen. To allow the user
it was easy to interact with them, they
should occupy a prominent place on the screen
(otherwise it will be difficult to hit them with the mouse).
As a result, space for information holders
tions about the environment and functionality remains
very little, but the screen is impressive
deletion of the desktop, which has not been for a long time
irali. True, even in standard windowsinterface there are a couple of hidden information
interface elements, for example elements
changing window sizes.  But the designers
of this interface, these elements were considered to be original
exception to the rules, although on their basis it is possible
but build very good environments, of course
leaving the main elements"visible".   
  If the reader has the impression
that I'm scolding the window interface, it's not
yes.  I use it as everyone knows
source of analogies and examples. Window
the interface was in the early 80s equally re-
revolutionary and played an equally positive role
similar role to the text interface
70s.  There's just time for everything. Today
computing capabilities of machines allow-
give the user interface developer
to use means about which one and a half
ten years ago it was scary to think.  
  In all centers known for developing
new interfaces (XEROX PARC, MIT Media
Lad, Apple Computer, Carnegie Mellon
University), various designs are being developed
 interface design based on
    animation capabilities. Before describing
dump them, I want to make my point
view of "interface physics".Main
user interface problem
isattention point synchronization
user and system activity points.
This problem must be solved on both sides.
rona. On the one hand, the user must
wives be able to tell the system where and what he
wants to change (usually this is done
click the mouse in the right place).C other
hand, the system must be able to attract
the user's attention to the place where the most
current changes.                   
  When moving from alphanumeric
displays to the graphic display field ka-
got too big and that's a problem
synchronization of the interaction point was
the most difficult. Her decision was carried out
according to the principle"divide and conquer".After
the screen was broken into rectangles-ok-
on, and all the work was carried out in only one
of these the so-called active window. Od-
 the form of the text has changed
    ora, and, very importantly, he started
wink.  This was required to facilitate
understanding the problem of searching for a text course -
ra in the window. Searching for the same mouse cursor when it
loss from the user's attention (to
still) is performed by twitching the mouse.  
  In fact, both ways
use the obvious fact that the movement
a moving object attracts attention more easily
tion.  But the main waylocalization
the user's attention was geometric
some screen splitting, in particular because
that the more active use of animation
tions at that time seemed fantastic. Se-
today there is no visible reason not
attract the user's attention with movement
position at the desired point on the screen. At the end of the
tsov, are used in many applications
different forms of image dynamics, which
some are called the fashionable word multime-
dia.                                    
  This is not only a theoretical possibility
realized, but for about five years has
 I am at the stage of experimental research
    nia.  Two animated environments
face were developed in the same company XE-
ROX PARC, which we owe the appearance of
window interface ideas (and even in groups
not the sameSteward Card, whom
the author of this idea belongs). Od-
on-"Conical trees"are visual
lization of the computer file system and
looks like a system of children's pyramids,
each level that corresponds
file directory level. The files themselves are from
catalogs are displayed in three-dimensional formcarousels under your catalog. Salt fashion-
is that the desired file can be "approximated
"Zit" by rotating the carousel (maybe not
one),running in animation mode.       
  The second model -"Wall in perspective-
ve"-also displays the file system,
but outside its hierarchy, according to two
some parameters, for example the rotation frequency
options for the file and its size. This is normal
small wall, only very long,
divided into three sections. The average one
 appears flat on the screen, and two
    they go into perspective. User-
he can make any segment the average
walls, also in animation mode.
For Frame, animation is a fundamental mo-
ment in the user’s perception is identical
property of the object", i.e. it is easy for the user
correlate objects at the end point of movement
working with objects in the elementary.          
 This property of the animated inter-
face should pay special attention.
In the GUI the user
deals with the sequence of the picture
nok.  Programmers boast about speed
their programs, measure time, "lose-
mine" between the pictures. However, psychologists
those involved in the interface talk about co-
with this friendtime, - time when
user can start interaction
with a new picture on the screen. In this in-
The interval includes not only the withdrawal time but-
howl of pictures on the screen, but also time to realize
knowledge of it by the user, because it is determined
a lot of time and effort are wasted
 to understand how each
    The second picture corresponds to the previous one.
cabbage soup                                    
  Animation by increasing time
transition from one picture to another (and
precisely the time of the animated transformation
of images) significantly reduces
time to realize a new picture. In psycho-
logical sense of the new picture and not
exists, there is a transformed
old, and since all the transformations were going on
"in front of amazing spectators", then
the user almost immediately
ready for interaction.                   
  There is one more property of animation:
on-line user interface, co-
which significantly improves its usefulness
compared to graphical inter-
face, namely dynamic visual
signals.                                
  Dynamic visual cues are
changing the image on the screen to
provide the user with additional information
mation.  Already in the standard window inter-
 e we can see examples of such sig-
    c.  When the program runs for a long time
action, the mouse cursor becomes
hourglass shape. This is a signal that
that the system responds to user actions
will not respond temporarily. Second
example - changing the image of a button when
clicking on it with the mouse.  This is a signal about
that the system believes that the user
The body interacts with this button
coy.                                    
  The trouble is that in the windowed interface
dynamic visual cues are
the nature of ingenious discoveries and non-formative
They have a complete logical system. As
analogies I will note the difference between the alphabet
and hieroglyphs. Having learned the alphabet, you can read
write any text.  Having learned hieroglyphs,
It is impossible to guarantee that it will not appear
new.                                  
  When creating an animated interface, you need to
lay down a system of dynamic visualizations
signals from the very beginning, subsequently
since they are just as natural
 as much as a necessary part of animation
    th interface.                      
  In addition, the information capacity
(i.e. the number of different variations)
dynamic signals are enormous. Modern
advanced displays display millions of colors,
but these are things into myself, because even
if the human eye is able to
to see so many shades, human
the brain is unable to give them meaning.
On the other hand, even such a simple sign
cash like flashing has really
millions of well-conscious shades,
associated with changes in the brightness of an object during
time.  An analogy with music is appropriate here.
some, where from a small number of notes
an innumerable variety of me-
lodius.                                  
  However, solving many problems for
user interface, animation
poses serious problems to the program
mist and designer.                    
  Many programmers still remember the work
period in creating programs, upgrading
 driven by events, as required
    naya environment. To use animation
tion interface you will have to go
to time-driven programs. Outside
depending on user activity,
program based on animation
interface, there is always something to do (eg
For example, change the blinking phase). At the same time,
naturally, it must always be
accessible for interaction, but, in
difference from many of today'smulti-
dia-programs, do not interrupt the displayed
flow, and smoothly change it according to
twee withuser influence.       
  Such requirements are most easily implemented
are implemented in a specific software architecture
time-controlled frames.  On every
the program is rebuilt
image on the screen, and the events initiated
user-defined, such as input from
keyboards are only worked out
changing the program state.  Corresponding
The corresponding change on the screen occurs
dit (maybe not right away)next
  So by two
    normal levels of program functionality
visualization is added to the interface and
al.                                 
  For specific interface designers
products, the work is also significantly more complicated
threads.  Animation interface - weapon
very powerful and therefore requires special
caution. Attempts to shake the world can
lead to rapid fatigue of the user
agent and, as a consequence, rejection of the system
topics.  The main task of the designer is to
the organization of a non-moving space is developing
space, but a whole series of spaces, not
inextricably linked. Analogy
with the making of films is presented here
very appropriate.                         
  For the design of a specific program, three
developing your own environment is mutually
interaction (aimed at the implementation
specificfunctionality)based on the
the generally accepted system of dynamic visualization
nal signals. In this case, the program should
have a unified style. Almost unanimously
 another positive example can be taken
    television, namely a series of screensavers
Levin  to the programsNTV. All computer-
new programs radically change their design when
moving from one window to another.      
  After developing a general style, it is necessary
we can draw pictures called u
animators"backgrounds". More precisely, call them
stationary component of the movable
images.  On each background you need to place
put animated elements together
actions.  And finally, the most difficult thing -
visual transitions need to be designed
between significantly different states
niyami.  And all this while maintaining the selected
style!                                  
  Who needs it? The user who
won't notice anything, but it will be
much simpler and faster interaction
deal with the system. Good interface looks like
on comfortable shoes - no one noticed him -
no, but if you pay attention to it,
the answer you will receive is indifference "So what?
who?". But everyone has a bad interfaceon
 and on the lips.                        
     in fact, a good user interface
by the callers is noticed subconsciously, and,
when you like him, the sympathies are transferred
to the functional part of the program. (About
"DISCO Commander" many say that he
good, but NOBODY says what exactly.)
 Unfortunately, today it has become the standard
bad interface, not even that bad
done, how much "received"
by itself."  So, the most fashionable now
application of computers - wandering around
Networks have the interface that you
comes from the HTML language, and he, in his
right, it gives the impression of a “temporary building”,
which, as is now clear, came in earnest
and for a long time.                              
  Favorite quote from interface review -
"The interface of this program is unnatural,
because the ALT + F4 key does not close
applications". Talent is already required here
Darwin,to understand the origin of that
what kind of naturalness!               
  Many interface problems are
 a natural continuation of marketing
    Izheniy.  Let's assume that your company
enters the market with a new audio model
tape recorder, different from all OS-
tal by some possibility A. Forus-
quick sale of this model that button on
control panel that implements A,
should be as noticeable as possible. Then
the potential buyer himself will ask: "A
what is this?"- and your product will be sold
mucheasier. However, having purchased it and turned it on
home, this buyer will most likely be
go, use standard buttons
for standard actions, showing the possibility
Possibility A only for guests.               
  Thus, there is a contradiction
following from two different functions of one
and the same product. The first function is pro-
give oneself at the expense of attractiveness
unusual or unusual appearance, and
the second is to be used for its intended purpose. C
seller's point of view (and often the manufacturer
driver), the first function is much more important -
her.  Therefore, the "standard"is imposed,
 aimed specifically at the success of the first
    tions.  Replace the audio recorder inter-
facial environments, and it will become clear that
I mean.                          
 (For those who want to see this problem in close-up
I plan to invite pirates to the market
CD-ROM,where the buyer makes a decision
about the purchasein general, not a cheap product,
looking only at the wrapper and even being
confident that the content in some me-
re does not correspond to it.)                
 A number of interface problems are associated with
specific struggle in the software market.
Perhaps the main one is what forms
must accept copyright for in-
interface solutions. On the one hand, it is clear
but what to come up with and implement good
interface is a very complex task, and av-
tors of such an interface should receive
not only moral reward. C
on the other hand, if  "protect" such
solution by patent with subsequent licensing
payments, this may trigger
search for authors of new products
, less traveled and often worse paths in
    rface.  As a striking example
you can try to imagine the situation
consequences of patenting the use of cla-
Vishy F1 to call help.             
  Licensed protection of interface solutions
niy - a direct path to the fact that they are the same
interface functions will be implemented
vary in different products, and
This is far from being in the best interests of the user.
With all my dislike for the actual mo-
monopolies of the company Microsoft in the opera market
tion environments, I should note that the position
residentthe result of this monopoly
appeared"free"standardization of in-
interface forWindows.                   
  With the problem of copyright protection
user interface linked two
high-profile lawsuit - Apple Compu-
tag against the same Microsoft, where the subject
volume was the window interface itself, and Lotus
against  Borland, where from a legal point
view disputed inclusion inQattro
Rgo  (along with several others) in-
Eisa Lotus 1-2-3. It is impossible to say
     decisions in these cases can be used
be called precedents, since they are interested
they hardly take into account the users'
failed, and the result, as often happens,
corresponded to the financial costs of the
ron.                                    
  Unfortunately, the current state
The software market is
that it is not the best who pave the way for themselves
solutions, and solutions that have  "largepenetration force", mainly associated with
financial power of the companies offering them
niya.  This is especially true for users
Tel interface.  If you look at
viewer programsWWW, then it’s generally difficult
but talking about interface design is semi-
I thought it was how it turned out.  Tolerable, but not
more. But these programs are used by-
more people than any other
others.  Now such an interface has become
appears to be the de facto standard, which means
reads that the subsequent transition to a more EU-
test interface (which, of course,
 and the software is as follows:
     It’s not the best who pave the way for themselves
solutions, and solutions that have  "large
penetration force", mainly associated with
financial power of the companies offering them
niya.  This is especially true for users
Tel interface.  If you look at
viewer programsWWW, then it’s generally difficult
but talking about interface design is semi-
I thought it was how it turned out.  Tolerable, but not
more. But these programs are used by-
more people than any other
others.  Now such an interface has become
appears to be the de facto standard, which means
reads that the subsequent transition to a more
test interface (which, of course,Surely, sooner or later it will happen) will
associated with severepsychological withdrawal.
 Let's hope that such a breakdown is useful
callers will have to experience only one
times, and not several, as is quite possible
can happen when replacing one bad one
interface to others.