Lesson04

Interfaces
- Introduction
- Interface Types : …..
- Natural User Interfaces and Beyond
- Which Interface?

http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 2
Objectives
The main aims of this chapter are to: Provide an overview
of the many different kinds of interfaces. Highlight the
main design and research issues for each of the
interfaces. Discuss the difference between graphical
(GUIs) and natural user interfaces (NUIs). Consider which
interface is best for a given application or activity.

http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 3
Introduction
Until the mid-1990s, interaction designers concerned themselves
largely with developing efficient and effective user interfaces for
desktop computers aimed at the single user. This involved working
out how best to present information on a screen such that users
would be able to perform their tasks, including determining how to
structure menus to make options easy to navigate, designing icons
and other graphical elements to be easily recognized and
distinguished from one another, and developing logical dialog boxes
that are easy to fill in. Advances in graphical interfaces, speech,
gesture and handwriting recognition, together with the arrival of the
Internet, smartphones, wireless networks, sensor technologies, and
an assortment of other new technologies providing large and small
displays, have changed the face of human– computer interaction.
During the
http://fpt.edu.vn
last decade, designers have had many more opportunities
12/01/24 4
for designing user experiences
The range of technological developments has encouraged
different ways of thinking about interaction design and an
expansion of research in the field. For example, innovative
ways of controlling and interacting with digital information
have been developed that include gesture-based, touch-
based, and even brain– computer interaction. Researchers
and developers have combined the physical and digital in
novel ways, resulting in mixed realities, augmented realities,
tangible interfaces, and wearable computing. A major thrust
has been to design new interfaces that extend beyond the
individual user: supporting small- and large-scale social
interactions for people on the move, at home, and at work.

http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 5
There is now a diversity of interfaces. The goal of this
chapter is to consider how to design interfaces for
different environments, people, places, and activities. We
present a catalog of 20 interface types, starting with
command-based and ending with brain–computer. For
each one, we present an overview and outline the key
research and design concerns. Some are only briefly
touched upon while others – that are more established in
interaction design – are described in more depth. It
should be stressed that the chapter is not meant to be
read from beginning to end but dipped into to find out
about a particular type of interface.
http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 6
Interface Types
Numerous adjectives have been used to describe the
different kinds of interfaces that have been developed,
including graphical, command, speech, multimodal,
invisible, ambient, affective, mobile, intelligent, adaptive,
smart, tangible, touchless, and natural. Some of the
interface types are primarily concerned with a function
(e.g. to be intelligent, to be adaptive, to be ambient, to
be smart), while others focus on the interaction style
used (e.g. command, graphical, multimedia), the
input/output device used (e.g. penbased, speech-based,
gesture-based), or the platform being designed for (e.g.
tablet, mobile, PC, wearable).
http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 7
Rather than cover every possible type that has been
developed or described, we have chosen to select the
main types that have emerged over the last 40 years.
The interface types are loosely ordered in terms of when
they were developed. They are numbered to make it
easier to find a particular one It should be noted,
however, that this classification is for convenience. The
interface entries are not mutually exclusive since some
products can appear in two categories. For example, a
smartphone can be considered to have either a mobile or
touch interface. Table 6.1 suggests which interfaces are
related or have design issues in common
http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 8
http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 9
Natural User Interfaces and Beyond
As we have seen, there are many kinds of interface that can be
used to design for user experiences. The staple for many years
was the GUI (graphical user interface), which without doubt has
been very versatile in supporting all manner of computer-based
activities, from sending email to managing process control
plants. But is its time up? Will NUIs (short for natural user
interfaces) begin to overtake them? But what exactly are NUIs? A
NUI is one that enables people to interact with a computer in the
same ways they interact with the physical world, through using
their voice, hands, and bodies. Instead of using a keyboard and a
mouse (as is the case with GUIs), a natural user interface allows
users to speak to machines, stroke their surfaces, gesture at
them in the air, dance on mats that detect feet movements,
http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 10
smile at them to get a reaction, and so on
The naturalness refers to the way they exploit the
everyday skills we have learned, such as talking, writing,
gesturing, walking, and picking up objects. In theory,
they should be easier to learn and map more readily onto
how people interact with the world than compared with
learning to use a GUI. For example, as Steve Ballmer, a
former CEO of Microsoft, noted when the idea of NUIs
first came to the fore: I believe we will look back on 2010
as the year we expanded beyond the mouse and
keyboard and started incorporating more natural forms
of interaction such as touch, speech, gestures,
handwriting, and vision – what computer scientists call
the ‘NUI’ or natural user interface
http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 11
Instead of having to remember which function keys to press
to open a file, a NUI means a person only has to raise their
arm or say ‘open'. But how natural are NUIs? Is it more
natural to say ‘open’ than to flick a switch when wanting to
open a door? And is it more natural to raise both arms to
change a channel on the TV than to press a button on the
remote? Whether a NUI is more natural than a GUI will
depend on a number of factors, including how much learning
is required, the complexity of the application/device's
interface, and whether accuracy and speed are needed
(Norman, 2010). Sometimes a gesture is worth a thousand
words. Other times, a word is worth a thousand gestures. It
depends on how many functions the system supports.
http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 12
Consider the sensor-based faucets that were described in Chapter 1. The
gesture-based interface works mostly (with the exception of people wearing
black clothing that cannot be detected) because there are only two functions:
(i) turning on by waving one's hands under the tap, and (ii) turning off by
removing them from the sink. Now think about other functions that faucets
usually provide, such as controlling water temperature and flow. What kind of
a gesture would be most appropriate for changing the temperature and then
the flow? Would one decide on the temperature first by raising one's left hand
and the flow by raising one's right hand? How would we know when to stop
raising our hand to get the right temperature? We would need to put a hand
under the tap to check. If we put our right hand under that might have the
effect of decreasing the flow. And when does the system know that the
desired temperature and flow has been reached? Would it require having both
hands suspended in mid-air for a few seconds to register that was the desired
state? We would all need to become water conductors. It is hardly surprising
that such a system of control does not exist – since it simply would not work.
Hence, the reason why sensor-based faucets in public toilets all have their
http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 13
temperature and flow set to a default.
This caricature illustrates how it can be more difficult to design
even a small set of gestures to map onto a set of control functions,
which can be accurately recognized by the system while also
readily learned and remembered by the general public. It also
highlights how gestural, speech, and other kinds of NUIs will not
replace GUIs as the new face of interaction design. However, it
does not mean they will not be useful. They are proving to be
effective and enjoyable to use when controlling and manipulating
digital content in a number of tasks and activities. For example,
using gestures and whole body movement has proven to be highly
enjoyable as a form of input for many computer games and
physical exercises, such as those that have been developed for the
Wii and Kinect systems. Furthermore, new kinds of gesture,
speech, and touch interfaces have proven to be very empowering
for people who are visually impaired and who have previously
http://fpt.edu.vn had
12/01/24 14
This caricature illustrates how it can be more difficult to design
even a small set of gestures to map onto a set of control functions,
which can be accurately recognized by the system while also
readily learned and remembered by the general public. It also
highlights how gestural, speech, and other kinds of NUIs will not
replace GUIs as the new face of interaction design. However, it
does not mean they will not be useful. They are proving to be
effective and enjoyable to use when controlling and manipulating
digital content in a number of tasks and activities. For example,
using gestures and whole body movement has proven to be highly
enjoyable as a form of input for many computer games and
physical exercises, such as those that have been developed for the
Wii and Kinect systems. Furthermore, new kinds of gesture,
speech, and touch interfaces have proven to be very empowering
for people who are visually impaired and who have previously
http://fpt.edu.vn had
12/01/24 15
For example, the iPhone's VoiceOver control features
enable visually impaired people to send email, use the
web, play music, and so on, without having to buy an
expensive customized phone or screen reader. Moreover,
being able to purchase a regular phone means not being
singled out for special treatment. And while some
gestures may feel cumbersome for sighted people to
learn and use, they may not be for blind or visually
impaired people. The VoiceOver press and guess feature
that reads out what you tap on the screen (e.g.
‘messages,’ ‘calendar,’ ‘mail: 5 new items') can open up
new ways of exploring an application while a three-finger
tap can become a natural way to turn the screen off.
http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 16
An emerging class of human–computer interfaces are those that
rely largely on subtle, gradual, continuous changes triggered by
information obtained implicitly from the user. They are connected
with lightweight, ambient, context aware, affective, and
augmented cognition interfaces and are especially found in high-
performance tasks such as gaming apps (Solovey et al, 2014).
Using brain, body, behavioral, and environmental sensors, it is now
possible to capture subtle changes in people's cognitive and
emotional states in real time. This opens up new doors in human–
computer interaction. In particular, it allows for information to be
used as both continuous and discrete input, potentially enabling
new outputs to match and be updated with what people might
want and need at any given time. However, brain, body, and other
sensor data are different from GUIs. Future research needs to
consider how best to exploit this more subtle class of input12/01/24
http://fpt.edu.vn in order 17
Which Interface
In this chapter we have given an overview of the diversity of interfaces
that is now available or currently being researched. There are many
opportunities to design for user experiences that are a far cry from those
originally developed using command-based interfaces in the 1980s. An
obvious question this raises is: but which one and how do you design it? In
many contexts, the requirements for the user experience that have been
identified during the design process will determine what kind of interface
might be appropriate and what features to include. For example, if a
healthcare application is being developed to enable patients to monitor
their dietary intake, then a mobile device – that has the ability to scan
barcodes and/or take pictures of food items that can be compared with a
database – would appear to be a good interface to use, enabling mobility,
effective object recognition, and ease of use. If the goal is to design a work
environment to support collocated group decision-making activities then
combining shareable technologies and personal devices that enable
http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 18
people to move fluidly between them would be a good choice.
But how do we decide which interface is preferable for a given task or
activity? For example, is multimedia better than tangible interfaces
for learning? Is speech effective as a command-based interface? Is a
multimodal interface more effective than a single media interface?
Are wearable interfaces better than mobile interfaces for helping
people find information in foreign cities? Are virtual environments the
ultimate interface for playing games? Or will mixed reality or tangible
environments prove to be more challenging and captivating? Will
shareable interfaces, such as interactive furniture, be better at
supporting communication and collaboration compared with using
networked desktop technologies? And so forth. These questions are
currently being researched. In practice, which interface is most
appropriate, most useful, most efficient, most engaging, most
supportive, etc., will depend on the interplay of a number of factors,
including reliability, social acceptability, privacy, ethical, and location
12/01/24 19
concerns
http://fpt.edu.vn
Assignment
In Activity 6.4 we asked you to compare the experience of
playing the game of Snake on a PC with playing on a cell/smart
phone. For this assignment, we want you to consider the pros
and cons of playing the same game using different interfaces.
Select three interfaces, other than the GUI and mobile ones
(e.g. tangible, wearable, and shareable) and describe how the
game could be redesigned for each of these, taking into
account the user group being targeted. For example, the
tangible game could be designed for young children, the
wearable interface for young adults, and the shareable
interface for elderly people. a. Go through the research and
design issues for each interface and consider whether they are
relevant for the game setting and what issues they raise.
http://fpt.edu.vn 12/01/24 20
For the wearable interface, issues to do with comfort and
hygiene are important when designing the game. b. Describe a
hypothetical scenario of how the game would be played for each
of the three interfaces. c. Consider specific design issues that will
need to be addressed. For example, for the shareable surface
would it be best to have a tabletop or a wall-based surface? How
will the users interact with the snake for each of the different
interfaces; by using a pen, fingertips, or other input device? Is it
best to have a representation of a snake for each player or one
they take turns to play with? If multiple snakes are used, what
will happen if one person tries to move another person's snake?
Would you add any other rules? And so on. d. Compare the pros
and cons of designing the Snake game using the three different
interfaces with respect to how it is played on the cell phone and
12/01/24 21
the PC.
http://fpt.edu.vn