User Interface Service Software Developerís Guide - Hitech Projects

More documents

Recommendations

Info

January 2008 Public 30% 10% 7% 0% 53% strongly applies applies somewhat applies weakly applies does not apply Figure 6: Need for a single user interface Further, people were asked about the advantage of having a single user interface to their devices (see Figure 6). Obviously, the need for a single homogenous user interface for all (or many) devices in the home is very high. This is not surprising, as struggling with many remote controls is quite a common scenario in today homes. One of the most important question is of course about the preferred menu structure. As can be seen from Figure 7, the most popular menu structure is the simple “room-> device->function” (device centric) approach. That is, 2/3 of the people prefer to look at the devices from a hierarchical point of view. However, note that still 34% prefer another logical menu layout. The strong bias towards this simple menu structure is somehow surprising. A reason for this might be that people are currently used to look at functions from a device perspective because this is the currently the way functions are organized. As a result, this preference may change if more and more functions are embedded into the environment where no single device can be identified to be the host of a specific function. 17% 17% 66% Mock-up 1 Mock-up 2 Mock-up 3 Figure 7: Preferred menu structure In order to have more insight into the reasons why people prefer the menu structure 1 see Figure 8. Obviously, a big advantage of the simple menu structure is that people can more easily grasp the core idea that has been used to build it. Amigo IST-2004-004182 111/114
January 2008 Public 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% Mockup 1 Mockup 2 Mockup 3 10% 5% 0% very good good average bad very bad Figure 8: Can the menus be operated in an intuitive way? Note that efficiency does not play the first role when deciding about the preferred menu system. In the following figure, the efficiency ratings are presented. While the first menu structure is still the winner, the difference especially between the first and the second structure is not as big as the overall preference might indicate. 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% Mockup 1 Mockup 2 Mockup 3 10% 5% 0% very good good average bad very bad Figure 9: Efficiency of the menu structures In the figure below, the rating for the conciseness of the mock-ups is shown. Here, menu structure 1 can claim a significant better acceptance than the other approaches. Hence, conciseness seems to be a more important aspect of a GUI than the time needed to fulfil a specific task. 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% Mockup 1 Mockup 2 Mockup 3 10% 5% 0% very good good average bad very bad Amigo IST-2004-004182 112/114
Page 1 and 2:
IST Amigo Project Deliverable D4.7
Page 3 and 4:
January 2008 Public Table of Conten
Page 5 and 6:
January 2008 Public 3.2.3.4 Configu
Page 7 and 8:
January 2008 Public 1 Speech based
Page 9 and 10:
January 2008 Public Bugs - Patches
Page 11 and 12:
January 2008 Public 1.2 Deployment
Page 13 and 14:
January 2008 Public SWIsvcMonPort=
Page 15 and 16:
January 2008 Public # RealSpeak por
Page 17 and 18:
January 2008 Public 6666 20 10
Page 19 and 20:
January 2008 Public true C:/Temp/
Page 21 and 22:
January 2008 Public [Recording_TCP]
Page 23 and 24:
January 2008 Public Example string
Page 25 and 26:
January 2008 Public 1.3.2 Explicit
Page 27 and 28:
January 2008 Public • the user sp
Page 29 and 30:
January 2008 Public parameters. The
Page 31 and 32:
January 2008 Public In this example
Page 33 and 34:
January 2008 Public Assuming that y
Page 35 and 36:
January 2008 Public Step 3 Rebuild
Page 37 and 38:
January 2008 Public 1.4.1.3 Run Tra
Page 39 and 40:
January 2008 Public On a successful
Page 41:
January 2008 Public At the end the
Page 44 and 45:
January 2008 Public At the end the
Page 46 and 47:
January 2008 Public Step 5 In the S
Page 48 and 49:
January 2008 Public Step 8 In Serve
Page 50 and 51:
January 2008 Public 1.4.2.5 Run Voi
Page 52 and 53:
January 2008 Public 1.4.2.6 Run Voi
Page 54 and 55:
January 2008 Public As soon as the
Page 56 and 57:
January 2008 Public • SoapBox bas
Page 58 and 59:
January 2008 Public 2.2.1.1.4 Confi
Page 60 and 61:
January 2008 Public The gesture ser
Page 62 and 63: January 2008 Public • Folder Volu
Page 64 and 65: January 2008 Public After installat
Page 66 and 67: January 2008 Public Up 65 In
Page 68 and 69: January 2008 Public Figure below pr
Page 70 and 71: January 2008 Public Development sta
Page 72 and 73: January 2008 Public Tools Oscar Fil
Page 74 and 75: January 2008 Public Bugs None Patch
Page 76 and 77: January 2008 Public 3.2 Deployment
Page 78 and 79: January 2008 Public Scene descripti
Page 80 and 81: January 2008 Public 3.2.2.5 Comp
Page 82 and 83: January 2008 Public 3.3 Component A
Page 84 and 85: January 2008 Public 3.3.3 Multimoda
Page 86 and 87: January 2008 Public Fallback soluti
Page 88 and 89: January 2008 Public 3.3.3.4 Compone
Page 90 and 91: January 2008 Public 3.4 Tutorial 3.
Page 92 and 93: January 2008 Public scene, the imag
Page 94 and 95: January 2008 Public objectDesc VCR
Page 96 and 97: January 2008 Public 3.5 Assessment
Page 98 and 99: January 2008 Public 3.6 Appendix 3.
Page 100 and 101: January 2008 Public Intended audien
Page 102 and 103: January 2008 Public 3.9 Component A
Page 104 and 105: January 2008 Public interface input
Page 106 and 107: January 2008 Public Figure 7 Classe
Page 108 and 109: January 2008 Public different sub-m
Page 110 and 111: January 2008 Public Figure 3: Menu
Page 114 and 115: January 2008 Public Figure 10: Conc
show all

User Interface Service Software Developerís Guide - Hitech Projects

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?