Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
86 lines (65 loc) · 3.83 KB

10-1.md

File metadata and controls

86 lines (65 loc) · 3.83 KB
Raw

Wearables

CS 349 - User interfaces, LEC 001

7-4-2016

Elvin Yung

Slides

Smartwatches

  • We're deliberately not going to talk about things like Fitbits and Pebbles, because they're more specialized.
  • We'll focus on the Apple Watch and Android Wear, which are generalized.

Design Challenges

  • The first issue is that these things are tiny! You're constrained by the user's hand.
    • Things like the fat finger problem are much worse.
    • Physical buttons are important - you need buttons because there's no practical way a touchscreen works.
  • Limited attention
    • A smartwatch is not intended to be the device of choice for complicated use cases - you're not going to be manipulating spreadsheets
    • Instead, smartwatches are for quick tasks on the go - things you want to be able to do without having to pull out their phone.

Guidelines from Google

  • The watch is mostly an output device, not an input device.
  • Google suggests all computation to be done on the phone, and be sent to the watch - in other words, the watch should just be a dumb terminal.
  • The entire task on the watch should take <5 seconds - if it takes more, a watch is not the right device.
  • The watch is secondary - it's only auxiliary to the phone, designed for quick interactions.

Guidelines from Apple

  • Apple emphasizes personal communication on the Apple Watch. They emphasize initiating communicating, but it's not a very compelling use case.
  • There are dedicated apps (but no one uses them).
  • Interaction mostly via gestures, but there's also force touch, the "crown" dial, and the side buttons.
  • Emphasize coordination with smartphone - should be able to tap to answer a call from the watch, and then the control is transferred to the phone.

The Big Question

Why doesn't everyone have a smartwatch?

  • No "killer app" or other compelling use cases
    • Probably not good enough as a proxy for phone
    • Fitness tracking isn't sufficient for most people
    • Healthcare, monitoring blood pressure, heart rate, etc. - maybe?
    • Identification - Apple Pay, Android Pay, computer authentication etc. - maybe eventually replace passwords
  • Price
  • Battery sucks
  • etc.

Utilitarian vs. Fashionable Devices

  • Is a smartwatch a piece of jewelry or a utility device?

Ubiquitous Computing

  • Introduced by Mark Weiser, 1996
  • Basically a very old term for Internet of Things
  • Instead of having discrete devices that you carry, instrument the world around you to do things for you.
  • For Ubicomp to really work, you need:
    • Computation embedded into the environment
    • Something that ties the person to the environment - a device that helps identify the person. Can a smartwatch fill this role? Maybe.

Augmented Reality

  • Examples: Google Glass, Hololens

Design Principles

  • Don't get in the way of what the user is doing
  • Only give information that's relevant to what the user is currently doing. Don't always put the temperature in the corner!
  • Avoid showing things

Results

Google Glass didn't get wide adoption. What happened?

  • Technology was not super feasible - 2 hour battery life?
  • Principles of Ubicomp
  • Google Glass was considered rude or awkward - Glassholes
    • There were cameras mounted on them, and when someone is walking around with Google Glass on, there's no indication that they're not recording you
    • Is Glass a fashion device? Google tried to make it like that, but

AR definitely still has potential, though!

More Generally for Wearables

And also other new technology.

  • Why do you need a wearable?

  • A better mousetrap is not good enough - it needs to be solving a problem - 10x not 10%.

  • New technology takes time to mature! Remember old tablets and PDAs?