Even the world’s top Apple blogger is losing it over a new MacBook Pro problem

Even the world’s top Apple blogger is losing it over a new MacBook Pro problem

by Chris Smith  @chris_writes

Apple’s newest MacBooks apparently suffer from an unexpected problem, a keyboard issue that’s not easy to fix. Affected models include 2015 or later MacBook and 2016 or later MacBook Pro models. These laptops are thinner than ever, and Apple redesigned the mechanism under each key so that it could manufacture butterfly keyboards with an even slimmer profile.

Incredibly, it turns out that simple particles of dust can render individual keys on these machines useless, and dislodging them to fix them isn’t as easy as it was on older MacBook models.

Reports recently published in The Outline and 512pixels indicate that some users are experiencing serious issues with their keyboards.

The Outline explains that replacing a faulty keyboard isn’t possible. Apple has to replace the top case, which has a $700 price tag if the MacBook Pro is out of warranty. Apparently, plenty of buyers are affected:

It’s unclear how big of a problem butterfly switch keyboards are. Apple forums are overflowing with reports of Geniuses who have told customers that Apple is “collecting data” on the issue. One corporate issuer of the MacBook Pros in question reported to me that its business has encountered a significant number of keyboard issues, but “less than 5% for sure.” Another Genius explained to me that he had seen an overwhelming number of the computers with keyboard issues, the spacebar in particular — while some keys can be very delicately removed, the spacebar breaks every single time anyone, including a professional, tries to remove it. This is a big problem, since, according to the Genius I spoke to, it’s the key most susceptible to acting up from the aforementioned piece of dust. “I would say it’s THE issue on this computer,” he told me. (Apple declined to comment.)

What further proves the new butterfly keyboards have a dust issue is this Apple support document that’s basically insane. If you need to have this guide on your site, it means a significant number of MacBook buyers experience keyboard issues, and it’s not a problem that is going to go away:

You need a particular set of skills to clean the keyboard by yourself and not drop the MacBook in the process. The best thing about it is holding the Mac at a 75-degree angle “so it’s not quite vertical,” before using compressed air to eliminate the dust.

Even John Gruber, a diehard Apple fan and respected blogger, is upset about it. “I find these keyboards — specifically, the tales of woe about keys getting stuck or ceasing to work properly — a deeply worrisome sign about Apple’s priorities today,” he said, in a response to The Outline’s story.

What’s worse about it is that we have a song for this issue created by Jonathan Mann, the same guy who mocked Apple’s “Antennagate” issue.

Read More

What would be the worst possible design for a sink?

What would be the worst possible design for a sink?
Answers from Quora.com:

____________

Carlo Sirna

This one:

Stunning Wooden Sink

Looks great right?
OK, now wash your teeth, spit the toothpaste into it and try to clean it.

Why this homemade wooden sink is so much shared in woodworkers forums is a total mystery to me.

___________ 

Henry Reed 

Take a glance at this sink:

Clear Blue Tempered Glass Sink

Looks like a normal sink right? Take a closer look at it? Where do you put the soap? Or anything? You finish brushing your teeth right? You put the toothbrush down on th- Oh wait, there's nothing around the sink, the vanity. You can put a towel on the bottom to dry off your hands, but there's really no point because your hands won't be clean…(no soap).

____________ 

Annals of REALLY Bad Design: Faceted Crystal Sink

by www.improvisedlife.com

photo via unicornhornsandlgitter

___________

Wet Sink

Copyright © Michael J. Darnell 1996-2010

We recently moved into a newly-constructed building at work. The picture on the left shows one of the bathroom sinks in the new building. 

After the sink is used a few times, the top of the counter becomes covered with water. (See the arrow.) The problem is that as one adjusts the faucets with wet hands, water drops down onto the counter and accumulates there. 

Design Suggestion

A larger sink could be used, designed so that the faucets are a part of the sink instead of a separate installation on the counter. When the faucets are adjusted, a larger sink would allow the water that drops down to drain back into the sink, rather than to run over the top of the counter.
Another solution is to install faucets that automatically adjust the water flow without having to move one's hands away from the sink.

____________ 

Hansgrohe ComfortZone

Hansgrohe ComfortZone test

Irritating water splashes due to mismatched combinations of mixer and washbasin – perhaps that’s something you’ve already experienced. As of now, your customers‘ associated annoyance is a thing of the past.

Read More

Why are traditional knobs not replaced by touchscreens in cockpits?

Why are traditional knobs not replaced by touchscreens in cockpits?
by Aviation Stack Exchange

Answers
Look at the switches and knobs in an airplane up close some time. You'll notice that nearly all of them have different textures,heights,sizes or shapes. That's intentional. Pilots train and train and train and train on checklists, especially the emergency ones. Muscle memory is a big part of quickly and correctly executing an emergency checklist.

As an example, flap levers/switches normally have a cap or top that is flat and parallel to the wings. It's easy to identify solely by touch.

Checklist item: "flaps up" Action: Hand to flap lever (automatic after doing it a hundred times in training), verify feel of lever, move, look to verify

Without the tactile element, every motion would have to be verified by looking before it's made. With the tactile element, the movement can be made and then verified visually while the hand is moving to the next item. In an emergency, every second counts and the savings from tactile + verify matters.

Beyond emergency procedures, they're simply safer. The plane I fly the most has a touch screen display and several non touch devices. In turbulence, the touch screen is basically useless. But, the important devices all have buttons and knobs. I can be banging my head on the ceiling (literally) and still adjust the auto-pilot or radio. In that kind of turbulence, the touch screen device is completely useless.

_______

Flicking a switch gives clear haptic and audible feedback. Compare that to a touchscreen where you can never be sure if your intention has been interpreted correctly. This might not seem to matter much, but if you need to throw 20 switches in a hurry, the mechanical solution is head and shoulders above anything with a touch input.

Mechanical switches can be operated with gloves on. Touchscreens generally cannot.

If the computer driving the touchscreen crashes, you are out of control. Mechanical switches don't have this failure mode.

Mechanical switches are far easier to debug than touchscreens. You can make sure if the switch works by using a screwdriver and a voltmeter. And some knowledge of the routing, admittedly.

Inadvertently flicking a mechanical switch is so much harder than one on a touchscreen, especially if it has a cage to protect it from movements in an off direction.

_______

Mechanical switches gives a better visual inspection than digital touch screens. For a pilot surrounded with so many switches, just a visual glance would be enough to find the position of the control.

_______

Beyond the obvious aviation reasons of cost and so on, I can think of a few reasons why I'd not want an over reliance on touchscreens in the cockpit:

• If a touchscreen fails, you've lost all the controls that were related to it.
• Likewise, if a touchscreen (or portion of) fails then the whole thing has to be replaced rather than just the button
• Feedback - phones and similar devices offer things like haptic feedback to register a positive touch. I can't imagine that being implemented and working well in a fixed monitor. Pressing a button provides a positive reinforcement that you did press the button.
• Using touch-screens is hard if they're not still - it's far easier to press a physical button, without pressing an adjacent button, than it is to press an area on a screen without accidentally glancing another area.
• Some controls are designed to be easy to operate, while being hard to do accidentally - for example flaps, gears, mixture etc. All of these require some positive force.

With that said - you've posted some advantages and, in honesty, I suspect it'll all happen one day. So, for that reason, in the meantime I give you the stock answer to any "Why isn't..." aviation question:

• Cost
• Certification
• Proven reliability
• Market demand

Unless pilots and airliners are crying out for it, and a manufacturers think it will make the difference between whether they buy a particular aircraft or not, they simply aren't going to spend the time and money necessary to make it a reality.

Additionally, it'll almost certainly come in slowly. It's one thing to add some touch functionality to a flight computer but I wouldn't be expecting flap and gear levers to be touch sensitive anytime soon!

_______ 

Don't try at home experiment:

• Spill lots of water on a touch screen and try to use it.
• Close your eyes and use your touch phone or tablet.
• Try the same with knobs and switches.

Also, it is easier to specially and individually protect mechanical actuators against accidental manipulation than making hundreds of dedicated touch screens and protect those.
It makes no sense if each knob/switch needs to be implemented as a dedicated touch screen, with a fallible control computer or some electronics behind it (in addition to the switching logic behind the knob or switch).

Read More

Reach Out And Touch Something … Screen or Knob?

Reach Out And Touch Something … Screen or Knob?
by Doug DeMuro

I recently had the chance to test out the “new” Volkswagen Passat, which is so new that the designers were explaining to a whole group of journalists how the position of the rear reflectors has changed compared to the outgoing model.

Actually, I kind of like the new Passat. It was impressive in a lot of ways, right down to the new touchscreen, which finally sees Volkswagen catching up to some of the technology and features rival models have been using for roughly five years. As I was driving it, I couldn’t help but think to myself: I like a good touchscreen.

What I don’t like is a knob.

It seems that these are our only choices in today’s infotainment world: a touchscreen or a knob. Some cars have touchscreens. Some cars have knobs. And given that basically every new car has an infotainment system, this is an important choice. Do you want to control your screen by touching it, like a smartphone? Or by moving around a controller located on the center console, like a computer?

Automakers appear to be largely split on this issue. Most mainstream car companies, the Fords and Chevys of the world, offer a touchscreen. You touch, it screens. The benefit of this is that you touch exactly where you want, and the system does exactly what you want, unless you are in a Chevy, in which case it does what you want after it thinks for a few seconds/minutes/it’ll do it this weekend.

High-end brands tend to prefer knobs. Lexus has its famous Remote Touch Controller, which is sort of like a computer mouse in the sense that you move around a little arrow and you click on stuff, but not really like a computer mouse in the sense that you’re supposed to do this at 75 mph. BMW’s iDrive and Audi’s MMI both work similarly: you move a dial to control the infotainment system. You could touch the screen, but it wouldn’t do anything, and you’d just end up getting fingerprints on it.

Me, I personally prefer a touchscreen. Let me tell you why: because it’s incredibly easy to use. A button says “MAP.” I press “MAP.” The MAP comes up. This is very different than in, say, a BMW 7 Series, where a button says “MAP,” so you grab the little dial, and you move over to the button, and you’re about to click on it, but then there’s a bump in the road, and you accidentally click somewhere else, such as on a button that says “CLIMATE,” and now you have no idea where you’re going, so you crash into a bus shelter.

Of course, I am not saying that the BMW 7 Series is scary. What I am saying is that the BMW 7 Series is incredibly scary.

But the manufacturers that use knobs don’t see it that way. They say that if they put the knob in the center console, they can move the infotainment screen higher on the dashboard, away from your reach, which means you have to take your eyes off the road less in order to do things. This is true, of course, but I would like to point out that I would take my eyes off the road even less if I could just touch the damn screen wherever I want.

Maybe the best manufacturer is Mazda, who undoubtedly had this argument in some engineering meeting, which likely led to raised voices and harsh words and maybe even some good old-fashioned chair throwin’. So what they did is, they put in a knob and a touchscreen. This allows you to use both hands to control the screen at any one given time.

No, I’m just kidding, what it allows you to do is use the touchscreen when you’re feeling touchscreeny and use the knob when you’re feeling knobby. I think this is Mazda’s greatest decision since 2002, when they decided to start making decent cars.

Unfortunately, it’s not a decision anyone else seems to be making, as other automakers have all staked their claims: some have gone touchscreen. Some have gone knob. But I will continue to hope that in this great war of in-car screen controls, the touchscreen people will slay the knob people and claim victory over the Great Land of Infotainment. Until then, I will do my best to keep from crashing into bus shelters.

by Doug DeMuro

Read More

Five worst new car features reinvent the wheel for no reason

Five worst new car features reinvent the wheel for no reason
by Robert Duffer    -   Contact Reporter  - Copyright © 2017, Chicago Tribune

The shifter of a BMW 740L diesel is seen at the media preview of the 2014 Chicago Auto Show at McCormick Place in Chicago on Feb. 6, 2014. Gear knobs that default to a middle setting make it unclear what gear a vehicle is in. (Terrence Antonio James / Chicago Tribune)

The state of the auto industry is one of opposites. There are sport utility vehicles with more horsepower than sports cars, and pickup trucks equipped like luxury flagships. Americans hold on to their cars for over 11 years yet new car sales broke records in 2015 and again in 2016. Yet we're also paying record high prices of more than $34,000 to load up our vehicles with stuff that aggravates us.

So much stuff. Even though there are few new car duds, consumer complaints are on the rise because of technology ranging from balky voice commands to glitchy touch screens and enough dings, blings and dongs to make you dizzy.

In this cutthroat competitive market, where horsepower and mpg are incrementally maxed out, the next place an automaker can stand out is with in-car technology. At best, it makes us safer and provides convenience. At worst, and too often, it makes us confused.

Complaints on the suite of systems generally known as infotainment accounts for 22 percent — the largest category — of consumer complaints in the first three years of ownership, according to the 2017 J.D. Power vehicle dependability study.

From voice recognition fails to Bluetooth drops, either owners are expecting in-car technology to be as intuitive as smartphones or carmakers are hamstrung about how to safely offer such levels of connectivity.

"Increased complexity equals increased problems," Consumer Reports warned consumers (and automakers) in its 2016 car reliability survey.

Here are the biggest sources of new car frustration.

Touch screens

Looking at it from an evolutionary view, touch screens had to happen to get to the next thing. With the backup camera mandated in all 2018 model year vehicles, it made sense to combine audio, climate, navigation, phone and vehicle info functions into the screen. But too often, especially in Asian makes, the buttons are too small, the interface too layered to safely execute a simple command. It becomes something many drivers would rather not use.

On the other hand, Tesla's massive 17-inch touch screen is intuitive and excellent. Most automakers are dialing down touch screens with the return of climate and audio buttons in sleek, spartan designs that complement the display screen. While we prefer the Germans' and Mazda's use of a control dial to access all that valuable information and all those pricey functions, some makes such as Chevrolet have done well using redundant steering controls to access the info in a condensed screen in the instrument cluster. It's as easy to use as setting the cruise. The roads would be safer, and drivers less frustrated, with the elimination of the touch screen.

Touch-sensitive controls   ... continue on Chicago Tribune

Read More

In Praise of Knobs

In Praise of Knobs
by Phil Patton (writes about design and cars for the New York Times)

Don't call it a comeback: Knobs could save infotainment.

I like knobs. Steve Jobs liked knobs. John Varvatos, the fashion designer with his own Chrysler 300 edition, likes knobs. In fact, Varvatos has created what might be thought of as a temple dedicated to knobs. In his New York store, occupying the former CBGB’s, the legendary punk bar on the Bowery, he displays a prime collection of 1960s and 1970s audio equipment with large, brushed-metal knobs, solid as the turrets of Admiral Dewey’s battleships, faces gleaming with ever-shifting reflections. Touch the knobs on such equipment and they convey to the fingers a solid feel, light but sure. Turning carefully calibrated knobs can be immensely satisfying. They have the quality we are searching for and find largely missing in the many interfaces in our lives. We want the same happy relationship of finger to surface in a touch screen, say, as we swipe and pinch or drag and zoom. No wonder the knob is making a comeback. Especially in the complex infotainment systems where voice and touch have come up short, knobs are back. Ford executive Joe Hinrichs recently said he would fix the much maligned MyFord Touch with more knobs. Steve Jobs, who of course put a knob on the original iPod (Apple called it a “scroll wheel”), was also a big fan of the stereo equipment on display at Varvatos—those huge units from Pioneer, Marantz, and McIntosh, with big two- or three-inch knobs that could be tuned precisely. Jobs loved stereo equipment, and legend holds that McIntosh, along with the apple, was one of the inspirations for the Macintosh name. However, the ultimate knob experts may be Audi’s knob gnomes, researchers who are part of the company’s haptics team, which focuses on sensory—especially touch—experiences, in Ingolstadt, Germany.
The knob gnomes are proof that car knobs have become more than simple utilitarian controls; they are now elements of brand differentiation. Jaguar’s shift knob rises dramatically from the console on startup, and Audi is proud of what it calls the “Audi click.” The lab guys can show you on a machine the exact resistance that makes for the Audi click (it’s really a double click). Getting a knob’s feel right would seem easy, but after visiting Audi, other vehicle knobs suddenly felt sticky or mushy. A good knob can be as satisfying as precise steering or well-balanced brakes, while a bad one ruins the experience.

Knob design is part of the haptics discipline. The sense of touch depends on ­several different kinds of nerves. Each is named for a scientist; Ruffini endings and Merkel mechanoreceptors convey pressure and texture, for example, and Meissner’s corpuscles offer information from a lighter touch while Pacinian corpuscles, located deeper beneath the surface, require more pressure. But measuring the responses of these nerves is difficult. “Haptics are difficult to express in numbers. Haptic evaluation is very subjective,” explains Audi’s Johann Schneider, director of the company’s lab. The goal is for the driver to immediately feel comfortable and have a sense of precision. The knob team tries to define such elements as ease of motion, well-defined end stops, uniform actuation sound, and clear feedback. “You won’t be able to please every customer,” says Schneider’s colleague, Manfred ­Mittermeier. “Actuation haptics and operating acoustics are usually perceived subconsciously. If we achieve 80 percent, that means we have a very good concept.”

People often speak of good controls as intuitive, but that usually means they follow familiar patterns. Although a knob’s operation generally needs no explaining, it is not an especially apt control tool for every job. In his classic 1959 text, The ­Measure of Man and Woman: Human Factors in Design, designer Henry Dreyfuss states that the input device needs to fit the nature of the input. He advocated one- or two-inch knobs for selecting amounts of things or quantities. Push buttons are ­better for choosing among discrete entities, such as park and reverse.

Even so, knobs in cars are taking over new functions. Ram is very proud of its dashboard shifter knob and highlights it in television ads. Car knobs are indirect evolutions of stereo knobs, and are, in part, based on the turn-and-push knobs devised by the late legendary designer David Lewis for Bang & Olufsen electronics. He told me once that he first devised these knobs for a 1960s audio project, inspired by the big knobs already on stereo equipment, but placed flush with the surface and equipped with a “dimple” for fingertip control. “That tactile feedback of turning and clicking is reassuring,” Lewis said. “The idea was to concentrate many functions in one button.”

The best interfaces, he said, are those based on years of familiarity. “We were building on established conventions that were known and understood, going back to the early telephone.” Considering that today’s handheld phones are often nothing but a screen, tomorrow’s knobs will have to be good if they are to survive.

Phil Patton

Read More

Why Does Every Car Infotainment System Look So Crappy?

Why Does Every Car Infotainment System Look So Crappy?
by Thorin Klosowski

from Cadillac's CUE

User interface design is hard, but we've been getting better at it over the years to the point where even a thermostat is easy to use. Automakers, however, seem to have their heads in the sand, taking their design inspiration for their infotainment consoles from old Winamp skins instead of any type of modern interface.

I've been car shopping recently, which means I've sat in a variety of models new and old with a salesperson attempting to justify why their shitty infotainment system — the little dashboard that usually controls at least the radio and phone options — is better than the competition. Pair that up with a number of rentals over the years and I've seen about every car infotainment system around. With a couple very rare exceptions, they're universally horrible and feel like they're designed by someone who hasn't used a computer since 2000.

Most automakers have their own brand of infotainment systems and their bad design is more than skin deep. For example, Audi has MMI, an insane system that uses dials for menu navigation instead of a touchscreen unless you pay to upgrade it. Audi isn't the only one to eschew modern innovation either, BMW's iDrive and Mercedes's Comand both rely on dials for input as well. For years, Lexus has relied on what was basically a mouse for navigation which is as insanely stupid and challenging to use in real life as it sounds.

Most carmakers at least use touch screens, though their interfaces are cluttered and ugly. Ford has SYNC, Nissan has Connect, Toyota has Entune, Kia has UVO, Subaru has STARLINK, and so on and so on. As an example, here's Entune one of the worst options, which looks more at home on a laptop running Windows ME than it does in a brand new car:

On most of these infotainment systems, the menus seem devoid of logic, settings you need to access frequently are often buried beneath several submenus, and when there is a touch screen, they seem sluggish and clunky. There is a 100% you will need to look in the manual to change a very basic setting. Even something simple, like icon design, is the worst. The icons on Chevy's MyLink look like they were pulled from a cheap clipart collection:

On most of infotainment systems you'll find horrible icons that are probably included free with MS Word, weird fonts that don't suit the screen's size, and app integration for services that I'm pretty sure nobody actually uses. Like, who goes to movietickets.com and why would I use whatever Aha radio is? After sitting in a bunch of cars, I was actually longing for classic Winamp. Heck, cram this into a Toyota's center console and I'll buy it today:

I'm not going to even touch on how bad the navigation systems included with these things are, but rest assured, they're as horrible as you remember. For whatever reason, classic car GPS systems have been behind smartphone options for a long time, and even if it didn't take 35 minutes to type an address into one of those things, there's a very good chance that all you'll see on the screen is a pixelated blown-up mess of a map that's near impossible to read.

It's not all bad news, of course. Tesla at least seems to be on the right track, though the 17-inch touchscreen includes in their cars is so comically large that I imagine it's a huge distraction. Not that I'd know, since I can't even afford to sit in a Tesla let alone drive one. Volvo also seems on the right track with Sensus, which for some oddball reason is a vertical screen instead of horizontal, but is otherwise the minimally designed interface that you'd want in a four ton moving vehicle. It's easy to use, you can customise it to a small extent, and it's generally inoffensive. It's also brand spanking new though, and the previous Volvo systems weren't much to look at.

Then there's Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, which feel like what happens when the carmakers give up on their own systems and just let someone else make it. Both options leverage the power of the phone you already use for music and navigation to power the car's infotainment options as well.

This comes with its own set of pros and cons. Android Auto and CarPlay are pretty much universally improvements to automaker's awful first-party infotainment options, but they still have some issues. Namely, apps have to actually support the two services, which means that you can't always access every app. For example, with CarPlay, you're locked into mostly first-party Apple apps, like Apple Maps. For iOS users, this is a huge downside, because even though Apple Maps has improved over the years, it's still not as good as Google Maps or Waze. Thankfully, you're not locked into Apple Music or Apple Podcasts at least, as Spotify, Pandora, Pocket Casts, Overcast, and others support CarPlay. Android Auto is a little better, but still pretty limited in the third-party options you have. With either option, there's a good chance at least one of the apps you use for audio won't work with it.

One minor quibble with both is that you'll still need to actually use your car's shitty infotainment system occasionally, as neither CarPlay nor Android Auto can handle any car-wide settings changes. Still, both are an improvement, and if nothing else is at least a sign that automakers have given up entirely on trying to force their awfully designed systems down our throats.

But still, not everyone has an iPhone or Android device, and not everyone wants to link up their phone to their car stereo in the first place. No matter what, these car infotainment systems and their stupid names will be a part of lives for years to come, so it'd be nice if they could at least look like they were designed in the last decade.

We don't need much here! Just don't nest menus deep inside other submenus, hand over your icon design to an actual designer instead of snagging some icon from Shutterstock, use large buttons that are easy to tap while driving, and spend a few extra bucks to give the whole thing a modern sheen so it doesn't look straight out of 1998.

Look, I know this is hard and expensive to do. I know that cars often only have ancient hardware in them that can't run much more than a text interface. I know this is near the bottom of the list of priorities in cars, but maybe it's time to move it up a bit.

Heck, you could even cut off access to any setting that could get me killed if I adjusted it wrong, then open up the entertainment portion Linux-style so I can install whatever I want on there. If nothing else, it'd be nice to at least have OS upgrade option so that I could at least have hope of change.



lifehacker.com.au

Read More

The 2017 Hyundai Elantra Sport: when physical buttons make more sense than a touchscreen

The 2017 Hyundai Elantra Sport: when physical buttons make more sense than a touchscreen
by Ashley Carman  @ashleyrcarman

Photography by Amelia Holowaty Krales / The Verge

Cars have become expensive, rolling gadgets that are full of screens, speakers, and sensors — but are they actually good gadgets? In our new series, ScreenDrive, we'll review cars just like any other device, starting with the basics of what they’re like to use.

I pulled up to my friend Colin’s apartment in Queens, New York two weeks ago in a silver 2017 Hyundai Elantra Sport. “Damn girl,” I think were his words. The shiny metallic exterior, the leather seats, the two displays: this car is sharp. And considering we usually meet at a corner on our block and walk to the subway together, he really couldn’t complain.

The affordable Elantra Sport has a $21,650 base price and can be upgraded with additional tech and gadgets. My Sport included two displays: an eight-inch, high-resolution, full color touchscreen and a 3.5-inch TFT (thin film transistor) monochromatic display on the dash. Throughout my weekend with Colin and the Elantra, the screens proved helpful for getting around and controlling music, but ultimately, the car’s physical buttons became my go-to. Sometimes, even when you have the option to tech, the old way of interaction just makes more sense.

My core problem with the Elantra isn’t its hardware. The displays look fine, and actually, I grew to love the smaller, middle dash display, which became my default reference point when looking for directions. It clearly laid out my next step and other essential stats, like trip mileage and tire pressure. No, the Elantra’s biggest issue is Hyundai’s confusing software. The Elantra runs Android Auto, Apple CarPlay, or Hyundai’s proprietary software. I spent my driving time with Hyundai’s software, and found that the company’s user interface truly makes no sense.

The space to enter an address, for instance, sits in the right-hand corner of the display and blends into the map. Even after entering multiple addresses, I struggled to remember where that bar was and how to access it. Other poor UI decisions include listing directions from the bottom up, so my next direction populated the bottom of a list as opposed to the top, which again, makes no sense. Maybe I have an odd way of comprehending directions?

More than anything else, I continuously struggled to return to the main menu to access different apps. Hence, the physical buttons. When I was already in an app and wanted to get back to music, for instance, I didn’t always remember how to get there. This shouldn’t ever be a question. While yes, a virtual back button exists, it didn’t stick out as the proper way to navigate. I instead ended up resorting to the physical buttons that clearly stated “media” and “map.” These never failed me, made sense to use, and didn’t require scrolling through a page of apps while operating a vehicle. However, other than the strange UI decisions, the software itself functioned. It got me where I needed to go and generally worked well. I wish I could have natively loaded Google Maps on the car’s main display, but I have an iPhone and can’t use it through CarPlay. That’s not Hyundai’s fault.

Hyundai knew how to get me where I wanted to go but its maps lagged a bit if I strayed from the chosen route. During one drive, the navigation redirected me when I crossed through a parking lot but still took the initial street it suggested. Errors are bound to happen but a slow refresh time is a killer. I missed exits and opportunities to get back on track while the car was thinking. But hey, at least I still got to my destination.

The Elantra also struggled a bit with voice commands, like when I tried to navigate to Mister HotPot in Flushing, New York at 33-42 39th Avenue. The Hyundai couldn’t handle that hyphen. Good luck using voice control in cities plagued by hyphenated addresses. Siri wasn’t any help, either. Every voice-controlled gadget struggles with complicated phrases. Addresses are long, so I don’t fault Hyundai necessarily, but it’s just one more pain point. I’ve learned to be patient after spending hours playing around with different devices, but for drivers like my friend Colin, who don’t play with new tech every day, it’s infuriating to deal with glitchy voice control.

Now, with that all in mind, the driving experience itself was fabulous. It was smooth, and I kind of felt like I was floating. This makes it easy to speed, so I had to set my cruise control for small towns where the limit drops to 30 mph. I guess my tip would be maybe don’t take your Sport through small towns, or rather, don’t do what I did.


Generally, I enjoyed driving the Elantra and was sad to give it back. Its microphone worked well during phone calls, its navigation got me where I wanted to go, and it was an easy ride. I only wish Hyundai would work on its UI and more thoroughly consider how people interact with its displays. If you’re looking into a package for the Sport, I don’t think you’ll need the premium one for $2,400 to make the car worthwhile. However, for the SE, I would suggest the tech package for $1,300, solely because that 3.5-inch dash display was a godsend. Ultimately, as long you have those physical buttons installed, you’re going to be just fine controlling the Elantra.

The Verge

Read More

Ford admits touchscreen defeat, puts the buttons and knobs back into Ford Sync

Ford admits touchscreen defeat, puts the buttons and knobs back into Ford Sync
by Bill Howard

Ford Sync is getting a new look. Again. This time Ford is adding more knobs and buttons to Ford Sync. At the same time, Ford says voice control will do more with fewer, shorter commands. More Sync-linked applications will be offered for your smartphone. Look for the changes on Ford’s major-redesign 2015 models, including the Ford Mustang sports car and the Ford F-150 pickup truck.

Lincoln, Ford’s upscale sibling, is moving away from the capacitive touch volume and fan sliders. It will also offer a built-in telematics modem, much like GM’s OnStar. Previously Ford and Lincoln handled telematics through the driver’s connected smartphone.

The All-New Ford Mustang GT

Sync continues to evolve (so it doesn’t die?)
The All-New Ford Mustang GTFord Sync has been out since 2008 and today covers virtually all the Ford and Lincoln line. Sync is a phone-and-music, Bluetooth-and-USB link to the car, co-designed with Microsoft. Ford Sync has been though two major iterations of the screen interface and five or so Sync software versions. The second-generation interface, currently in use, is MyFord Touch. It’s based around a touchscreen, 8 inches diagonal except on small Fords such as the Ford Fiesta, and a screen segmented into quarters.

The touchscreen home screen has four quadrants with phone commands upper left, navigation upper right, entertainment lower left, and climate control lower right. That’s pretty much how MyFord Touch has looked since 2011. Software revisions increased the font size in between and some text was dropped to clean up the screen.

But note all the physical buttons and knobs on the new Mustang: seven for audio, 15 for climate control, with plenty of overlap with the touchscreen, such as the seat heaters and seat coolers. Some physical controls on older Fords have been changed to knobs.

Ford’s Amy Marentec, a Ford group marketing manager, said the changes were based on customer feedback. More accurately, Ford has gotten hammered on J.D. Power Initial Quality Survey and downgraded by Consumer Reports. They are near the bottom on both surveys.

“Ford is making the change due to negative feedback they’ve received regarding several aspects of MyFord Touch,” says Chris Schreiner, director of Strategy Analytics‘ user experience practice. “The system can be sluggish to the touch, while knobs and buttons obviously have a much quicker response. The four-quadrant system is also very text and information heavy, making it overwhelming and confusing for some to do even simple tasks.”

Big buttons on the Ford F-150

The 2015 Ford F-150 carries the same MyFord Touch interface and almost 30 infotainment and climate control buttons below the touchscreen on this vehicle. It is virtually the same center stack as on the 2014 F-150 because buttons never quite went away on pickups. Ford says, “Designers have optimized the physical interface for MyFord Touch to accommodate truck users who may be wearing work gloves.” As for MyFord Touch, the screen “interfaces for climate control, entertainment, navigation and hands-free touch are identical” to Ford cars, meaning it would get the simpler voice structure. The new F-150 is expected to ship late summer or fall.

ExtremeTech

Read More

Designing A Sexy, Safe Touch Screen For Cars Is Harder Than It Looks

Designing A Sexy, Safe Touch Screen For Cars Is Harder Than It Looks
There are reasons why the latest concept dashboard UI hasn’t been made a reality.
by John Pavlus   

A few weeks ago, a gorgeous concept video of “a new car UI” made the rounds of the Internet, gathering praise as it went. With good reason: The video, created by product designer Matthaeus Krenn, shows a working prototype of a simple, sleek touch-screen interface that relies on glance-free gestures instead of cluttering the screen with tiny skeuomorphic buttons. The idea is simple: The less you have to look at the touchscreen in your car to effectively manipulate it, the better.

Then Apple’s CarPlay system came out. What was the result of Cupertino’s vaunted think-outside-the-box interface design process? A screen filled with tiny buttons. Sure, there’s a lot of voice control on offer via Siri, but if you want to use that touch screen, you still have to take your eyes off the road and use them to aim your finger at haptically invisible digital controls. What’s stopping designs like Krenn’s from becoming a reality?


David Young, an interactive designer and former creative director at BMW Designworks USA, expressed misgivings about Krenn’s concept on Twitter, so we asked him for some constructive criticism. (Krenn did not respond to interview requests.)

Young praised Krenn’s design as a “beautiful, innovative, and unexpected” alternative to “the current hierarchical menu-driven interfaces, and all-buttons-at-once touch-screen interfaces we’re currently seeing.” However, Krenn’s focus on re-creating the gestural simplicity of physical controls comes at the expense of flexibility. “Vehicles are increasingly complex systems, with lots of information to display and a wide range of customization and configuration options. Krenn’s interface, however, only supports adjusting eight settings,” Young says. “It’s not nearly expandable enough for the complex demands of a modern vehicle.” Instead of truly solving the problem of “too much information and buttons on a car’s touch screen,” Young suspects that Krenn’s design merely avoids it.

There’s also the problem that all gestural interfaces still have: They’re unfamiliar and all have different rules that must be learned.
There’s also the problem that all gestural interfaces still have: They’re unfamiliar and all have different rules that must be learned. Krenn’s UI is admirably “logical,” and “everything works fluidly,” Young says, but “at a glance, it’s not immediately obvious how things work.” That might amount to a minor quibble on a smartphone app. “But for drivers unfamiliar with the interface–new drivers, infrequent drivers, car renters–it will be as perplexing as the icons on your clothes that give washing instructions,” Young says. By re-creating an iPhone-like, icon-driven interface for CarPlay, Apple may not have wowed any futurists. But in the year 2014, pretty much anyone who gets behind the wheel of a car also knows how to operate an iPhone. That said, CarPlay is designed to augment the iPhone’s display, not function independently like Krenn’s. But Young’s point–that in the context of safely operating a motor vehicle, usability and familiarity are nearly synonymous–is well-taken.

Smartphone screens vibrate–by now, a familiar kind of haptic feedback–so why can’t dashboard touch screens do the same?
Finally, Krenn’s UI has no haptic feedback. “So when changing a setting that doesn’t give immediate feedback, such as changing a climate option, the driver is required to look at the display to see if their gesture is complete,” Young says. This is less a criticism than an acknowledgement of hardware limitations–the iPad that Krenn used to mock up his concept has no vibration feature, after all. But there’s nothing stopping car manufacturers from including this kind of haptic feedback into their designs. Physical knobs and dials often have catches or “detents” in their movement, which let you know that the knob has been turned sufficiently to register a change without having to look. Smartphone screens vibrate–by now, a familiar kind of haptic feedback–so why can’t dashboard touch screens do the same?

This isn’t to tear down Krenn’s creation. Like any concept design, it exists primarily to drive constructive dialogue, and we’re glad that David Young has added to the back-and-forth. Carmakers can do better–and the more voices we have telling them how to do so, the safer our dashboards will become.


[Matthaeus Krenn’s touch-screen concept]

Read More

The Sad Death Of The Knob, Switch And Button

The Sad Death Of The Knob, Switch And Button
by Jason Torchinsky        jason@jalopnik.com     @JasonTorchinsky

The Sad Death Of The Knob, Switch And Button

I want to start by coming out and saying I'm not one of those car luddites who think everything should hover in some magical past; while I'm very fond of old-school cars, there's an amazing amount of amazing new tech in cars, and LCD dashboards in so many new cars here at the Detroit Auto Show are a genuinely great advance. Except for one big issue: Knobs, switches and buttons? They're now officially doomed.

Knobs are still around, albeit in reduced numbers, but it's very clear they're considered vestigial holdouts and it's just a matter of time before they're done away with completely. Looking at forward-thinking cars like the Tesla Model S demonstrates this, as its dash is basically just two big iPads, one in landscape orientation and the other in portrait.

A booth from Denso, a major supplier of auto parts and electronics, shows a prototype cockpit of the future — and it's all touch screens. Touch screens are great on our phones and tablets; so why wouldn't they be great in a car, right?

The problem has to do more with the "screen" part than the "touch" part, though both are factors. On your phone, you're looking at the screen, interacting with it very directly; the visual feedback is essential for operating the interface.

When you're driving, ideally you're looking mostly out of the big window in front of you, and you operate most of the ancillary controls with no more than a quick glance. Touch screens don't work like that; little buttons on smooth glass surfaces have to be targeted with a pair of eyes.

All you need to do to prove the point is to look up.

Have you ever peeked in the cockpit of an airplane and seen the levers in between the seats? Those levers have funny-shaped knobs: Spool-shaped, crown-shaped, star-shaped — it's the marshmallows from a Lucky Charms box. There is, of course, a great reason why they're like that: so pilots can know what lever is what just by touch.

That's exactly what is being given up when controls move to the touch screen. Tactile feedback and the ability to feel what a control is has long been part of driving.

Traditionally, we can feel and know what's a radio knob, what a climate control lever feels like, how the notches feel as we move them from one setting to another, and it's worked great. Even without any interior lights or dash lights I bet most of us could find and use the essential controls on our cars.

Touch screens are awesome for many, many things. They look great, they can show an incredible amount of information, but they should never be the only components on a dash.

Oh, but that's not the only problem. Some cars, like the Chevy Volt, the Cadillac ATS and everything from Lincoln are replacing standard buttons with sleek capacitive touch plates with big clusters of identically-shaped buttons. Capacitive technology refers to using electrodes to sense the conductive properties of objects, such as a finger. So, basically, rather than physically depressing a button you've fumbled for while your eyes remained on the road, you'll turn on and off four different things before finally looking down to find what function you want to change. Then you crash and die.

So those suck in about the same way touch screens do, and they look like they came off a VCR. So knock that off, too.

Automakers, I'm pleading with you, spare the life of just a few knobs, just some essential ones, even if they have redundant touch-screen controls. Leave me some knobs in the cars of the future. Nice, chunky, clicky knobs, and maybe a lever, switch and button or two.

I'll even let you make them look cool and LED-lit or whatever you want.

http://jalopnik.com

See also:
Any Carmaker Still Not Using A Touchscreen For Their Infotainment System Is An Id...
by Jason Torchinsky

... I like physical controls for things like, say, radio volume and tuning, too. This is not a screed against physical controls. It’s a screed against terrible physical controls used to control an on-screen interface that is clearly, obviously, much more suited to touch controls.

Read More

Foundations of Human-Computer Interaction

Foundations of Human-Computer Interaction

Goal and Outcomes.

This course introduces students to the field of human-computer interaction.

Introduction

The body of knowledge of Human-Computer Interaction can be perceived as resulting from the following five interrelated aspects, depicted in the diagram bellow:

(N) the nature of human-computer interaction;
(U) the use and context of computers;
(H) human characteristics;
(C) computer system and interface architecture; and

(D) the development process.

This course touches the (N) aspect but mainly targets the (H) aspects illustrated in the diagram above. It comprises seven modules:

Visibility, Affordances, Mapping, Constraints, Conceptual models

Seven stages of action, Types of knowledge

Feedback, Errors, Forcing Functions, Gestalt laws, Responsiveness

The Human Processor Model, Fitts Law

Interface Efficiency, KLM, GOMS

State transition diagrams, Petri nets

History and vision

After successfully attending this course, students will know how user interfaces have developed over the past decades, and what constants of human performance need to be considered when designing user interfaces.

Further details are available including…

• The pedagogical script;
• The technical script;
• The assessment criteria; and
• The bibliography.

Foundations of Human-Computer Interaction

Read More

Wichita State University’s Engineering 101 courses

Wichita State University’s Engineering 101 courses

Human Factors Ph.D. Program

Welcome to the class blog for Wichita State University’s Engineering 101 courses.

Engineering 101 is a three-hour course specifically designed for College of Engineering freshmen and transfer students in their first year at Wichita State University. This course provides application to being both engineering students and practicing engineers.

...
In human factors, of course, we are specifically concerned with human interfaces. Typically, research in this field is geared towards improving productivity and reducing errors and injuries, and you can usually separate this into two categories: the application of human psychology and the implications of human anatomy.

Good psychological human factors design would include systems which are intuitive – someone new to the interface can operate it with little or no instruction. Can you think of any examples?

Good anatomical human factors design includes systems which are physically natural – using the system requires little strength or effort, or it could be used many times or over a long period without stress or injury. Can you think of any examples of this? ...

********************* 

Human Factors submissions

An example:

Human Factors – TuTh0930 – Spencer Shield


The problem:
The problem with spray bottles is that it is hard to read whether or not it is open at first glance. Most spray bottles have a labeling system of just being embossed on the nozzle with the words “on” or “off”. This way makes it hard for people with bad eye sight to understand whether or not it is open.

This is on.

This is off.












The solution:
The solution for this problem is to have the nozzle be color coded like stop lights. This makes it so people can tell if the nozzle is locked or not without having to strain their eyes. This solution is very practical and can be implemented easily in the production line. I think the original designers didn’t do this because of the cost of adding this step to the  production line.

The implementation:
The design would look like the fallowing. The red stands for when the nozzle is locked. The green stands for when the nozzle is unlocked.

Read More

Ikea mug notch

IKEA Trofe Mug: Dishwasherowned
by Travis Hudson

This isn't so much of a gadget, but an extremely handy device that I wish I would have thought of. This TROFE mug from IKEA has a simple notch on the bottom of the mug that prevents water from pooling up around the base during a dishwasher run.

Some comments from the website:

___________

Gizmometer
These are a perfect example of design without testing. The notch is under the handle. Most dishwashers load cups so that the handle points toward the center of the dishwasher and are tilted upward at the handle so that the spray can reach the inside of the cup. Thus, the notch is at the highest point of the cup when it's loaded in a dishwasher, making the notch useless. A few tests in a few dishwashers would have pointed that out. Now people will buy these thinking they're clever, only to find that they don't work as advertised when they get home.

___________ 

John Laur
I agree with the comments about poor design choice. It would have been easier to make the bottom flat or put two or 3 notches in it.

Plus it's not like Ikea invented this. Look at any cheap plasticware in any restaraunt and you will find drain notches. You can also use them to 'hook' one or two cups onto the rim of another and carry four or six drinks at a time without using a tray.

___________ 

jetstar7
I don't own a dishwasher. I am the dish-washer. I put stuff on a wire rack to drip dry. So this cup works. And the image of the cup is seen in IKEA's latest catalogue. No mention of it's intent to optimise dishwasher cleaning in there.

Read More

How to Create a UX Design Portfolio: Tips from a UX Recruiter

How to Create a UX Design Portfolio: Tips from a UX Recruiter
by Tom Cotterill

How to Create a UX Design Portfolio: Tips from a UX Recruiter

As a UX recruiter, my role involves not just identifying and developing tech talent, but also following the industry closely; going to events, workshops, and conferences to make sure I’m in a strong position to connect the dots and successfully match companies with perfect-fit employees.

Through the conversations I have day-to-day, I’ve managed to put together a clear picture of the industry as it stands in 2017 and what the expectations are for all levels of UX designer, from absolute beginners to senior UXers and UX directors.

One big aspect of my role is making sure that the candidates I work with are amazing at showcasing their skills, experience, and past achievements. One thing I get asked over and over again is, “Where should I begin with creating my portfolio? What’s the standard? How can I make it better?”

So, I’m going to share the advice that I frequently give out to candidates I work with, be it a beginner, mid-level or senior UX designer. I’ll be explaining why your portfolio is so important, what to include, where to host it, how much to include, and answering lots of other common questions.

Read More

The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd Ed.

The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd Ed.
by Interaction Design Foundation

Textbooks written by 100+ leading designers, bestselling authors, and Ivy League professors. The textbooks are assembled in a gigantic 4000+ page encyclopedia covering the design of interactive products and services such as websites, household objects, smartphones, computer software, aircraft cockpits, you name it.

Read More

Design With A Purpose: 15 Everyday Things You Never Imagined Had A Purpose

Design With A Purpose: 15 Everyday Things You Never Imagined Had A Purpose
by Suchismita Biswas

Technology has science behind it. Every small design has logic. Do you know the purpose of the small hole in your pen cap? I bet many of us don’t know the actual purpose of the feature. Like this, there are many everyday small things we use but don’t know the exact purpose of the features. This article is written to inform you such little things which you use but don’t know the purpose.

design-purpose-15-everyday-things-never-imagined-purpose

Read More

Can an application have a good result while measuring against "10 Usability Heuristics" but still have a bad experience?

Can an application have a good result while measuring against "10 Usability Heuristics" but still have a bad experience?

Yes, an application can give a bad user experience even when it has great usability.


quora.com

Read More

plug with a convenient hole to hook a finger into

Plug with a convenient hole to hook a finger into
by Katherine Bennett

You can accuse me of living under a rock because I haven't seen one of these before, but this is absolutely brilliant. I just bought a new contact grill and take a look at the plug on the cord set. For all of you designers out there who bemoan the "stupidity" of consumers, how they won't follow directions, bla bla bla, take note of this simple design solution.

The problem is as old as electric products themselves. People grab the cord rather than the plug to unplug an appliance, eventually ruining the cord.

more.... designinvestigations.com

Read More

7 Practical Skills of UX Designer You Need to Know

7 Practical Skills of UX Designer You Need to Know
by Tangerine

Nowadays, companies and users’ requirements for the design are getting higher and higher, and more and more diverse. What skills do you need to be a good UX designer? Here are seven practical skills of UX designers you need to know.

1. Lifelong learning and constant progress
2. Design inspiration and rich imagination
3. More than perfect
4. User-Centered design
5. Logical thinking ability
6. Good interpersonal relationship
7. Perseverance

www.mockplus.com/blog/post/skills-of-ux-designer

Read More