[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-usability
Subject:    Re: KDE 3.0.2 Usability Study - First Steps
From:       "Aaron J. Seigo" <aseigo () olympusproject ! org>
Date:       2002-07-18 5:08:46
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 17 July 2002 07:51, Sebastien Biot wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I posted a couple of days ago this short paper
> (www.viralata.net/kde_usability/001_01.html) summarizing the results
> of a usability test I conducted on KDE 3.0.2. This is the first of a
> series of tests I hope to conduct this summer and fall.
>
> I hope you find it useful.

thanks sebastien ... that's a great bit of work, i look forward to mining it 
for information as i work on various things ... i also hope to see more such 
studies from you, this one was just that good! =)

some notes:

the documents  / home directory buttongs being the same in the file dialog has 
been fixed: if documents dir == home dir, only the home dir button is created 
and shown.


as for embedded viewers, you are correct in your assessments IMO tha there are 
several limitations. some way of communicating immutability of the reader 
view needs to be created. also, here's a fun one:

 go to a web page that has a text file linked from it
 click on the text file (it opens in an embedded viewer)
 now enter a new url in the location bar
 
 the embedded viewer opens it up!!

as one of my users said: "what did i do? all i'm seeing is code!" embedded 
viewers need to be marked as such and they should also be temporary (e.g. 
entering a new URL clears the state of the viewer?)


i won't comment on the kcontrol section, since i kind of ranted on that one 
not too long ago. my opinion hasn't alterred since then (unfortunately)


on single vs. double clicking, let me steal gratuitously from "The Humane 
Interface" by Raskin (who did NOT invent the mac.. *sigh* megalomaniacs 
everywhere):

*********
Double Dyslicksia

The interface technique called double clicking, that is, tapping the GID 
button twice within a small time window and without any significant cursor 
movement between the taps, as an interface technique suffers from problems. 
You cannot always predict what objects on the display will or will not 
respond to a double click, and it is not always clear what will happen if 
there is a response. There is no indication on displayable items that double 
clicking is supposed to produce a response: The functionality is invisible. 
The way that double clicking is used in many current interfaces, the user 
must remember not only which items are double clickable but also how 
different classes of interface features respond to this action.

The first two burdens on the user could be at least partially alleviated by 
new screen conventions. The act of double clicking is, however, itself 
problematic. Double clicking requires operating a mouse button twice at the 
same location or at two locations in very close and, in most cases, within a 
short time, typically 500 msec. If the user clicks too slowly, the machine 
responds to two single clicks rather than to one double click. If the user 
jiggles hte mouse excessively between clicks, the same error occurs. If the 
user taps the GID button twice in too short a time period, as when trying to 
select text within a word while working within certain word processors, the 
machine considers the two taps as a double click and select the whole word.

A problem arises when the user is trying to select a graphical item that can 
be repositioned with the GID. Because the GID is likely to move when the user 
is pressing the GID buttons quickly, graphical applications, instead of 
reading a double click, may read a drag-and-drop and change the item's 
positoin. Similarly, to change the text in a text box, the user may find it 
necessary to reposition the accidentally moved box and to make the text edit 
originally intended.

Some of us are unaffected by dysclicksia: These lucky people never miss with 
the mouse; they single and double click with insouciance and panache, do not 
suffer from side effects of clicking, always remember what will and what will 
not respond to double clicking, and can shoot a flying bird with a 
.357-caliber revolver while driving along a twisty mountain road. But we 
can't assume that all users are so lucky. We must design for the dysclicksic 
user and remain aware of the problems inherent in using double clicks in an 
interface.[1]


[1] The term dyscilicksia, a disease for which the only permanent cure is good 
design, was couned by Pam Martin (personal communicaiton 1997)
********

in other words, double clicking is bad. just because everyone else fucked it 
up (including mr raskin when he supposedly designed the mac) doesn't mean we 
should too. 

the real question is: how long does it take a user to adjust to single 
clicking?

for me it took probably about a week (and i use computers a LOT) when i 
started using KDE in single-click mode. but i'm not your usual suspect. i am 
faster at some things, slower at others but almost never typical. long term 
study of this transition in other users would be most enlightening.

- -- 
Aaron J. Seigo
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler"
    - Albert Einstein
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE9Nk1f1rcusafx20MRAhtHAKCpxCejigtJh+ozlayNggliUaqlyQCffrmm
1GMTzcF7pxpbSKxnR4XuCA4=
=ou/v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
kde-usability mailing list
kde-usability@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]