Well, the TNG variant at least. The “Okudagrams” that characterize the controls of the USS Enterprise-D (as well other ships within the same timeframe) actually seem counter-intuitive. Granted, the bright colors and adaptability—similar to how an iPhone changes whats on screen depending on what app is running—make the futuristic interface look cool. But nobody’s ever considered just how easy it is to use (or not).

Hard to Understand

For starters, if fan-made Okudagrams are any indication:

…then the learning curve in the Star Trek TNG universe must be very steep indeed. As we unconsciously know, the best interfaces communicate immediately what you can do and how you can do it. And both Okudagrams did a great job of obscuring both.

The examples above were full of rounded shapes that looked like buttons—imagine my surprise when practically none of them worked! And imagine my confusion when I ended up on succeeding pages at lcars.org.uk. Suddenly buttons were everywhere, but I only found this out by moving my mouse over each and every shape. Such a cumbersome way to redirect the plasma flow into the quantum manifold of the navigational deflector, no doubt.

Text Input Without a Keyboard?

Call me a luddite, but after using devices like the iPhone and the LG Cookie, I’m convinced physical key input is still the fastest and most reliable way to enter text. At least until they finally perfect mind-to-machine interfaces.

Yes, you see our heroes (especially Data) input text furiously by tapping rapidly on the touch panel. That may be easy for an android like Data, but who’s willing to bet that Starfleet’s secretaries prefer actual keys to touch-type on?

Dependency on Power

Remember those scenes where the starship is under heavy fire, and those control panels flicker all over? Wouldn’t that make it harder to change interfaces, much less actually use them? Sorry Captain, I can’t vent the plasma—my buttons keep on disappearing!

Granted, those old-school panels of buttons can fail, if their completely cut off from the rest of the ship. But I’d rather rely on controls that work on minimal power, and not on interfaces that depend on a steady stream of power to function properly.

If the trailer is any indication, the upcoming Star Trek movie will feature physical controls. Self-changing plexiglass panels of virtual buttons may look cool, but nothing beats the real feeling of an actual button or lever. Love ‘em or hate ‘em, let us know what you think through the comments below.

(All images are screenshots)

Post from: The Gadget Blog

To sum it up, Nokia simply did not maximize their touch interface. Primarily because pre-existing patents limit the functionality the Finnish company could provide, and emphasis on the old way of doing things.

Applying the Old to the New

In other words, Nokia applied what worked so well with physical buttons to virtual ones. The process of selecting and activating the 5800’s features is more or less similar to other mid- to high-end Nokia smartphones. Right down the emulation of the alphanumeric keypad on the lower part of the phone’s large display.

That is actually a great touch (pun intended), as it allows people who are used to the “normal” kind of phone to enter text without much trouble. But tapping numerous times to access something gets pretty tedious after a while. For some reason, this doesn’t seem as cumbersome with physical buttons and keys; touch interfaces make this kind of frustration easier to achieve.

Touch Screen Creativity

The whole point of a touch-screen is that since the interface is virtual, the chance to get more things done with less interaction with the device is greater. The interface can change to suit the situation, conceivably to provide a more straightforward experience for the user—unlimited by the traditional constraints of physical buttons. The 5800’s quick access menu is a great (but not revolutionary) example of this so-called interface creativity.

Unfortunately, it seems that Nokia did not consider these possibilities fully (or they did but couldn’t execute it). That’s why using the 5800 is actually a very familiar experience for long-time Nokia users, who have accepted and work with the limitations of a physical control-scheme.

Of course, it’s good that Nokia is quite consistent with its interfaces, even if they’ve gotten rid of most of the buttons in the case of the 5800. Familiarity is always crucial to getting loyalists to switch to the new product and make the company more money. Yet, with a little bit of creativity, Nokia’s developers could’ve taken what made traditional Nokia interfaces work, and add some new elements, all without losing the Nokia “feel”.

Some Examples

For instance, for the main menu of the device, a scroll bar on the right side of the screen allows the user to scroll through the icons (touching an icon selects it). While the scroll bar is functional, it would’ve made more sense to place relatively large up and down buttons on the top and button of the menu screen. These would’ve been easier to press than the thin scroll bar.

The same solution also works on the Nokia’s media browser. The video playback controls, which fade away from view anyway to provide a full view of the movie, could’ve also included prominent next and previous buttons. Users are forced to exit the video player and select the next item—just like on most high-end Nokia models.

My example and proposed solution are definitely not the best one, and that’s the point. The Nokia 5800’s generously-sized screen offered a world of interface-improvements to its engineering team. It’s too bad that an opportunity was missed here.

Sure, certain factors may have limited Nokia from adapting gesture-driven comands, or considering unorthodox interface layouts. But if the company wants a big piece of the touch-interface market, it should consider those for its next touch-driven offering.

A full review of the Nokia 5800 XpressMusic to follow.

(Images from Technograph)

Post from: The Gadget Blog