In Class Group Brainstorming
From CS160 User Interfaces Fa06
Class on Sep 11, 2006
No Slides
Readings
- Shared Family Calendars: Promoting Symmetry and Accessibility. TOCHI. 2006. Plaisant et al.
Ramy Ghabrial - Sep 11, 2006 03:50:38 pm
This is an interesting study that mostly serves as a warning of possible difficulties in dealing with our target groups. While reading, however, I felt that there were many unanswered questions. For example, how did the families take the changes in interface in the second test period? Were these changes successful? Which ones resulted from suggestions by the families? How were any of the original ideas (eg the pinching jewelry) used? Why were docking stations used instead of bluetooth? Overall, the paper felt somewhat disjointed and incomplete.
Robert Taylor - Sep 11, 2006 07:48:08 pm
Some thoughts:
This is a very practical reading in that it serves as a great (if somewhat more intricate and exhaustive) example of the process we will be going through, from the abstract prototyping, to the extensive research and long periods of testing on multiple worldwide target groups.
The research phase provides a lot of insight on things we might normally take for granted: "For about tweo weeks the Paternal grandparents entyered information but never syncronuized. A password prompt came up but was inadvertently ignored and the window soon was covered by other windows and forgotten until a researcher came for an interview." Thinking about how we should deal with these types of issues and habits seems especially difficult because these types of things seem so improbable to us.
I think an idea many may not have thought of is using Anoto a a segway into computers, as one of the grandmothers does. Although in this case it was inadvertent, it still seems like a good idea to have different user "levels" in conjunction with the Anoto pen to help people learn how to use computers. While in this case it didn't really work, I think it was more because the intermediate step was too much of a jump (as noted in the reading) rather than the idea itself being flawed.
I like that what Anoto lacked in developed ideas these guys made up for with ingenuity, like the calendar paper printed double-sided. That they chose not to use OCR for the calendar is also interesting, and a sign that the technology still isn't and probably will not be for some time ready for really practical, common tasks.
The researchers also kept somewhat rigorously to a design cycle with of evalutaion/feedback/protoype. While real prototyping abnd speccing out the system occurred at the beginning, that seems to be all that was necessary- it was just tweaking and bugfixes after.
Regarding the above poster, I think most of the suggestions used by the family were done at the beginning, when they had the families help with prototyping. The phone and bracelet were just ideas to get them familiar with the design process, not to actually implement those things. As for the bluetooth, I they mentioned the docking as a way to circumvent the issue of battery life. It might've also just been cheaper/more readily availible/easier to work with.
Bowen Li - Sep 11, 2006 07:48:09 pm
I agree with Ramy. The paper seems to leave something to be desired. It seems as if the team had a great concept, but weren't really prepared for the "realities" of field testing. They describe running into connection issues, software conflicts, and the families not having enough time to update or check each other's caledars. There are a few interestings points though: Does this system rely on "technology" too much? If someone doesn't enter something into the calendar, that doesn't mean they aren't doing anything, but it may be perceived as such by a distant relative viewing their calendar.
Maksim Lirov - Sep 11, 2006 08:09:24 pm
I agree with the above posters that this paper provides good insights into the design process that we will soon be experiencing for ourselves.
One thing to keep in mind as a project is being implemented in the field is that most likely there will be problems encountered, including software errors and design flaws that were not apparent in previous stages of the design cycle. No matter how much design and preparation one does on a system, errors and problems likely will happen. The researchers in the paper encountered errors in their software, bugs in the Outlook software, and issues with the computers of the study family's.
One aspect of the design process that I am more aware of after reading this paper is the need to listen to and understand the needs of the anticipated user group! The brainstorming sessions and interviews that the researchers had with the Junior family were heavily used in the implementation and evolution of the shared calendar system. Only through the interviews could the researchers have perfected their three-mode (expert, medium, easy) calendar system, cleverly using the Anoto pen as the entry device for the easy mode of the shared calendar system.
Bryant Yu- Sep 11, 2006 09:02:14 pm
In the paper the researchers started with a very ambitious project. It sort of seemed they were tackling a general issue of how do we improve family communication by adding technology. Then they came up with these solutions and started with their brainstorming and ideas. With such an intenese overdose of the design cycley ,tt seems that it's due to this lack of refinement of what we want to do and how we're going to do it that makes this paper a jumping off point for other researchers or industry. As it was constnatly evolving i wonder if the system implementations suffered due to this constant change while not hardening out concepts and tools that would be built on. Designing such a system from such organic experiences is difficult. As we saw minimizing the impact of upgrading to the new system as well as code that does what it's supposed to is difficult to implement in an environment that is constantly evolving in reckless bounds and not solid steps.
Jason Shangkuan - Sep 11, 2006 08:13:54 pm
I think that the subject matter this article addresses emphasizes the constant research and effort made to improve the overall efficiency and hurdles in our daily lives. As mentioned in a previous posting, this is done by utilizing the design cycle. The evaluation phase was interesting because the researchers focused heavily on the target group and what a typical household was like. They compared different cultures too. From their evaluation, they realized a significant portion and difficult area was trying to educate an older demographic to utilize technology since they contribute a significant portion in the family life. The focus on the older users also emphasizes a previous article mentioning how those who are accustomed to a certain way such as using paper have difficulty transitioning and in order for them to really want to use the technology, the solution had to be better than the original. As a result, much of the prototyping and product development, focused on feedback generated from the older generation since their input would most likely have a ripple effect on the ease of use with other users. I think this article brings up an interesting point of trying to focus and generalize a user group simultaneously in order to achieve the most effective results.
Jonathan Yen - Sep 11, 2006 09:52:55 pm
This study is quite detailed and covers many different aspects of the project that was conducted. Personally, I think the most interesting component of this project was how they had to deal with users across several generations. It was somewhat expected to notice how much difficulty that the older users had with the shared calendar system compared to the younger generation due to the use of computers involved. I wonder whether anything can be done about user interfaces so that it becomes more suitable for older users, as they are coming from a different background than the designers of modern UIs.
Hiroki Terashima - Sep 12, 2006 12:06:23 am
The most important idea that I got out of reading this paper was taking pictures of the users and their computers and referencing the pictures in the paper to justify their decisions. I think that taking the pictures helps us keep the user in mind. I hope to try it with my project.
An important point mentioned in this paper is how the researchers tended to underestimate the time it'd take them to implement a change in the system due to various circumstances. I hope to try to keep this in mind with my project also.
Overall, I thought that the researchers did a good job making the program work for the users; dealing with the non-technical people must have been difficult.
Simon Tan - Sep 12, 2006 01:33:39 am
The article could have really used some pictures to illustrate the software and the interface - at least the paper calendars or even the people would have been nice.
That aside, I agree with all the comments above me which note how complete this study seems to be. It really did go through several iterations, and took feedback at each stage, just as we are to do. Working with non-tech-savvy people such as the elderly was also an aspect of the study that I found to be very interesting - their perceptions of the technology had to be taken carefully into consideration. Even when they claimed they could use the more advanced version of the interface (the grandmother saying she has experience with a typewriter), it turned out that she would still have trouble and need a printed set of instructions.
All in all, this was a really feel-good article. The mix of interfaces really let every member of the family provide input to the calendar; as a result, they probably all became a little closer.
Chen Chang - Sep 12, 2006 04:29:14 am
I think that this shared family calendars: promoting symmetry and accessibility reading is perfect timing just before we get into our groups and hit the road to experiencing the design phase for ourselves. The researchers were very ambitious in their project, but they seemed to make a big deal by stating all the problems that occured with the software (outlook) and other computer related errors. I agree with a few of the comments above and think these problems could not have been seen forthcoming and come up only during the evaluation phase which then raises a red flag to get checked upon. With that said, there were a couple of things I liked about this reading also. I agree that the benefits of accessing the internet for older adults are plenty as they can communicate with distant family and friends, maintain independence by accessing goods and services such as shopping and banking at home, take advantage of online-learning opportunities, and gain access to healthcare information. With the elderly generation, accessibility and usability are the two problems preventing old folk from easily getting what they need online. Thats where the Anoto digital pen and paper came in, it was able to be an effective way to create easy-to-learn technology for the elderly. I liked the photographs at the end which provided visuals of the software and the interfaces talked about in the reading, its always nice to see to eliminate the need for any guessing.
Huangnankun - Sep 12, 2006 09:09:38 am
This paper outlines a very detailed design process for a system. The designers start by doing very detailed survey with families in order to determine their needs. This is followed up by an examination of existing technology such as web technology for older adults and digital paper and pen technology.
In the idealization stage, the designer’s main goal is to find the most effective way to translate the designer’s conceptual model into the user’s model through the system itself. In order to do this, the designer’s examines existing technology, related developments and new technologies.
The group of designers integrates some of the elements of these existing technology ( such as Microsoft outlook ) in order to take advantage of affordances which people have already gotten used of from using a similar program ( outlook ).
They developers also make use of the tablet PC kit to parse their writing. This is a good reuse of an existing technology.
After the prototype was done, the team did extensive field study of their prototype in order to further their development. The results of the field study was then used to update their interface and software.
However, I feel that the team focused too much on technical issues during the field test such as connection problems/VPN/software integration rather than the user’s feedback to the software’s usability and interface.
This whole design cycle is similar to the Boberg & Bagnell process as mentioned in lecture. They go through the process of Analysis -> Idea selection -> Implementation -> Evaluation. After that, this process repeats itself
David Hoffman - Sep 12, 2006 10:54:26 am
The shared family calendar paper is a very detailed study of how people interact with a new system. They are very thorough about examining how individuals interface with the hardware and software. One problem with it is that it uses a very limited sample size and looks at a narrow range of scheduling needs for a single family. The actual idea is interesting but not particularly innovative. There are group calendars already, implemented by google and some other companies. The real issue is developing a computer interface that gets older people more comfortable with computers and I'm not really convinced that this does that.
Yimin Yao - Sep 12, 2006 03:17:10 pm
The idea of shared family calender is indeed problematic and not so interesting; however the detailed description of their designing process through surveying, interviews, and testing prototypes with potential users are very enlightening.
It provides us with some preview of technical problems that may arise during our project such as limitation of OCR on free writing, compromised neatness without OCR, memory capacity of users' systems, synchronization issues, etc.
It also shows us examples of things we need to consider in working with potential users such as their availability, impact of our testing on their current projects/practices, etc.
Overall, it is a pretty good reference to help us plan out a reasonable design process to fit our time frames.
Ming Huang - Sep 12, 2006 02:19:49 pm
Although this paper is describing a very specific problem of calendar-assisted inter-household communication and coordination, many technical and design challenges appear on other aspects of our lives. Things such as unreliable hardware and software, poorly designed and understood user interfaces, and the burden of learning fancy, feature-rich technology for seniors and computer illiterate people are primary hurdles we must overcome in bring convenience and efficiency to collaboration by people from all ages and backgrounds.
Like the posts earlier mentioned, it is immensely valuable to involve users in the process when conceiving the intial design focuses. This allows the designers to pay attention to how the users approach the design problem and their evaluation of the potential success of the various proposed schemes. This practise has become widespread today, specially in commerical software design and engineering. In today's Internet the word "Beta" has become the norm, which shows software makers' concern over adequate user trials before going production (for the traditional sense of the word "production", i.e. RTM), and also to cover their behinds when something goes wrong (necessarily so for legal reasons). If we would spend so much time getting user feedback for a product that is already in beta, they would be better spent improving our designs early on.
For a new design it is not enough to take into account what users want, but also make informed decisions on the future development of the product. Despite rapid change and shorr life cycles, new designs should facilitate smooth transitions into future generations if it aims for any kind of broad presence. The pen and paper model provides the familiar mode of comunication, and coupling it with enabling technologies will do great length to ensure its continued acceptance. It is important to recognize the gap between reality and common perception about olderly people and technology. If designed properly, these people will not only benefit from it but also actively involve themselves. This is perhaps why we need to think "outside the box" when designing interfaces for grandparents.
Johnathan Hawley - Sep 12, 2006 03:58:10 pm
Shared Family Calendars: Promoting Symmetry and Accessibility - This idea seemed to be good on the surface but also seemed like there were too many technical difficulties throughout. In my house we don't really even use a calendar and all of our coordination is through the cell phone. It's not perfect but it works for us. I can see how grandparents would really be into this though. My grandmother is always trying to figure out what we're doing hour by hour. We constantly have to remind her, even if it's something that's fairly routine. I have a feeling that older generations are using technology more and more because technology savvy people are slowly getting older. Those generations that weren't raised around technology are unfortunately a lost cause in my opinion. Trying to explain cut and paste is impossible.
Tak Wong - Sep 12, 2006 03:58:20 pm
This is indeed a very interesting article that describes the testing process. I'm suprised by how much the family put up with the technical difficulties throughout the study. The time it takes to realize and fix these difficulties can take weeks, so during that time, they are unable to use the software reliably. I think incorporating the Anoto pen for the older people is the key thing that made this study sucessful. It lets the grandparents, who were not very good with technology, be able to take part in updating the calendar without much trouble.
CharlesLeung - Sep 12, 2006 04:14:10 pm
I agree that using the Anoto digital pen to help introduce technology to older people is a very interesting idea. I was surprised that the older people forgot to put the pen back in it's holder for a few weeks though, that makes it seem like the writers did not adaquately instruct the test subjects. In this paper, it really seems like that the writers learned a lot by follwing their test subjects for a prolonged period of time. For example, the learned that the old people would gradually become more comfortable with technology and that they need to add some critical features like privacy.
Alex Wallisch - Sep 12, 2006 06:15:59 pm
This reading reminded me of some elderly people whom I have tried to teach to use basic calendar applications. Many of these people eschew computers altogether in favor of pen-and-paper because of their inability to use computers. In this regard, having a pen-and-paper interface to an electronic system is a benefit. However, while the Junior family happened to have a strong desire to see what their family members were up to, many other families I am familiar with manage their own affairs and only sync up with others when necessary. In these instances, (non-digital) pen-and-paper works just as well as a computer, because if collaboration is unnecessary then a paper calendar provides all the functionality you would need.
In short, using Anoto pens to aid elderly people in using applications for which a computer is necessary seems like a good thing. However, I don't see the existence of these pens alone to be enough of an incentive to digitalize a task that has previously been accomplished sans computers.
Joe Hart - Sep 12, 2006 06:08:25 pm
This article did a great job studying the psychology of family dynamics and how technology can be employed to help with family communication. It fell short on selling this particular use of the Anoto pen. It seemed that the older participants did not really get much use out of the Anoto pen interface. They used the pen interface to write down their appointments but it was unclear if this was an improvement to the systems they were already using. It was also clear that the older kids did not really care about the increased communication with their parents. So the real innovation in this article was with the shared calendar between households, which was done with outlook. Maybe the digital pen interface just isn't different enough to be worth changing from the standard pen and paper.
Suthee Chaidaroon - Sep 12, 2006 06:13:22 pm
SFC: The paper presents a prototype of an electronic calendar that can be shared among family members. About one-thrid of this paper includes an analysis on their target users in many important aspects such as their collaboration behaviors, computer experiences, and the needs for a new technology. I like when they did a survey on how they handle an incomplete calendar information. This is a method of defining an existing problems, and is commonly used for gathering users' requirements. Another interesting aspect of this prototype is their interface design. They implement a numerous functions for advance users, while provide simple interface to avoid overwhelming those users who have limited computer knowledge. Understand their users probably is a key of good interface design.
Anirudh Vemprala - Sep 12, 2006 07:09:24 pm
It was interesting to see that the researchers chose to create an easy-to-use layer on top of Outlook to create this application. With advent of web services on the internet, it might be a trend we'll have to get used to as GUI designers (though most "web 2.0" sites these days tend to have good UIs anyway).
It was also interesting to note that they chose not to OCR the text they were picking up from the pen. Is it because there is no good OCR software out there or is it because users value digitized versions of their handwriting?
Lastly, I didn't see why the paper had to go into such detail regarding what their users did at every single step - it made discerning useful information harder than it should have been.
Sean Carr - Sep 12, 2006 07:56:52 pm
Very good idea. I've always struggled keeping all of my calendars in sync and they are all on electronic devices with networking capabilities. The problem I have with this system, and the other Anoto based collaboration systems we've seen, is that data only flows one way. Data entry can be with the pen or the computer, but when the data is syncronized you must use the computer to view it. The general problem is that its easy to digitize the pen data but its hard (expensive/slow) to print the digital data with the frequency that these calendars are updated. I don't have a solution to this problem at all, but I think that the grandparents shouldn't be forced to use the computer when they want to use their paper calendar instead. The system is close to being usable by each group in the way they are most comfortable with except for the grandparents having to use the computer for viewing. Also, if you have a paper pocket calendar that you take with you it won't have the events on it that you entered on the computer. You would basically be forced to enter all of your data solely into the paper calendar rather than the computer.
This is a good attempt to solve the problem but there are still many obstacles to overcome before this system can be easily integrated into the daily lives of a variety of users.
Scott Friedheim - Sep 12, 2006 08:28:53 pm
This project of theirs was a good case study. It provided a lot of insight into how different generations interact, or would like to interact, with technology. I can imagine how happy the grandparents were to be able to be a bit more in touch with life around them. I know my grandparents would love to be able to interact in a similar way.
I think that the researchers were working to hard though. I can see this project being much better executed as a web based application and a point for central storage of data. Doing this removes the operating system, Microsoft Outlook, and other system security features out of the picture. Then for the grandparents all that would have to be done to create a script that runs when the computer is turned on that loads the calendar web page automatically. Of course I understand why they didn't do this in this case and that was to accommodate the users and the software they already had data on (although I would wager they could have archived the existing data and integrated it into a new system).
Melissa Jiang - Sep 12, 2006 08:46:40 pm
This was a good study that had good results for people of many different generations. I was rather shocked that the older generation was so not as xenophobic with technology as I thought. The fact that they did put up with the many technical difficulties and still wanting to continue the process impressed me greatly. All they needed was something that was familiar to them and the digital pen and paper was the perfect item.
Also, the researchers pointed out that the process of deploying the experiment was very tough in the beginning. I can imagine why. Many bugs are not anticipated until actual usage happens. Hopefully when we deal with our programs, it wouldn't take us a month just to debug.
Eric Yoon - Sep 12, 2006 09:26:36 pm
It's a pretty fascinating article. I also appreciated how much time and effort was involved in repeatedly tracking what the various generations of people wanted. It was thought-provoking, because I just have never experienced a thing like this before -- being an older transfer student, my family could not have possibly contemplated using a common, digital calendar. But it made me realize that with the onset of new technologies, families will now have these options, but will face difficulties in finding an interface that works across multiple ages and degrees of tech-saaviness.
It also made me appreciat the great challenge, but great potential, of making technology accessible to the elderly. America is aging, and there will be a lot of elderly with a fair amount of time on their hands. It was encouraging that technology such as the Anoto pen was useful to those who never grew up with computers or the Internet.
Patrick Rodriguez - Sep 12, 2006 10:32:21 pm
I agree with Robert that many of us didn't consider the possibility that Anoto technology could help people transition to using computers for the first time. Sometimes we forget that our generation was basically the first to grow up using computers en mass. When someone questions the need for pen and paper, as I do, they should be reminded of the many older people who are more accustomed to that interface. At the same time, I like how the grandma wanted to learn about using the computer in a more traditional way, by typing. Typing is the quickest and most accurate way to interact with the computer, so it really is a good skill to learn. If everyone knew how to type and operate a computer at a basic level, then we could take advantage of all the research that has gone into making products like Outlook easy to use and efficient. Perhaps more research could go into teaching computer skills to adults?
Randy Hilarbo - Sep 12, 2006 10:30:59 pm
It's nice to read about a very detailed account of their study. You can really see how difficult the design process is. It shows what to look forward to when designing an application: a lot of unanticipated problems can occur. It also shows how important it is to closely engage with your target user group and allow them to shape the project's idea early in the design process. In this article, I also find it very important to perform an actual study with your target users once the design is finalized. This introduces a lot of scenarios and bugs in the application that the designers may not be able to come up with themselves. This process can really refine their design. I also find it very interesting how motivation on the user side can play an important role in the success of an application (ex. the grandmother don't bother to write in the calendar because she thinks no one will look at it). I also see another need/want of the users in this field study. While it's important for them to see their family's calendar, they seem to want to use this calendar as also a way to send messages with their family.
Bryce Lee - Sep 12, 2006 10:24:15 pm
The multi-generational calendar system is an interesting application of the anoto pen, as the digital pen could have been positioned as a replacement device (for a regular pen) for the non-tech oriented older generations. However, there were aspects of the experiment which hinder its effectiveness and findings. First, the computer seemed more of a distraction for the older participants than anything else. It mentions that the grandmother wanted to type text, yet had a difficult time with it. The power of the digital pen for this generation is its seamless integration into their current skills. Without the help of the research team, the learning curve of this new technology would have been very different. Also, the study seemed to have a very narrow scope; the particular background and characteristics of the Junior family may have leant towards better results.
Michael Moeng - Sep 12, 2006 11:03:31 pm
I like the idea of using Outlook's calendar and networking it digitally--the project failed somewhat by bringing in paper. A paper calendar is impossible to update correctly unless the user prints out lots of sheets of digital paper--one way to solve this might be to use post-its, but that doesnt lessen the need to print updated calendars, it only removes the need for digital prints since the post-its can be digital (although knowing the date would be difficult). Since the paper calendars were meant primarily for the older generation, and since "Both sets of grandparents reported checking the calendar at least once a day" (pg. 13) then I believe that the project would have been much more successful without the paper element. Calendars are probably not the best device to use anoto pens since the paper to digital is not nearly as useful as digital->paper for them.
Heung Tai - Sep 13, 2006 12:08:10 am
The researchers try to integrate technology into the families' calendar record habit. This is a good start. However, since they only use prototype to do the experiment, the subjects face a lot of system crash or other difficulties dealing with the computers. I think the researcher picked a wrong aspect of life to study. There are really not that many people record their calendars rigidly. The technology offered by the researchers helped the problem of synchronizing between different calendars, but it doesn't motivate those grandparents enough to use the calendars program since people don't check it often. I think introducing a new technology has to be applied on the area that people really want it and are willing to use it regularly.
Yen Pai - Sep 12, 2006 11:33:10 pm
It's nice to read a detailed explanation of how background user data might be gathered, though I wasn't convinced nor was it evident in the reading about the effectiveness and conclusions gained through the "probes." The experiences and reactions of the grandparents mirrors the attitudes and experiences of my parents. Sometimes it's hard for people who grew up with digital technologies to imagine how foreign computer UIs can be. However, my biggest takeaway from the article echoes something that was mentioned in POET: that designers have very few chances to get a new product right. I don't think the designers should have started testing until the system was reasonably stable. Also, how can you have a well-designed UI test if the solution is unreliable? This is especially true since the researchers admit that the main family did not use the solution because it was buggy and that one set of grandparents didn't bother to use the solution much because they knew that their kids/grandkids were not using it. As one of the major points of the solution was to foster interfamilial communication and event coordination, I don't think the UI was tested as well as it could have been.
Patti Bao - Sep 13, 2006 12:21:16 am
I also found this project very interesting - in particular, I was interested in how the authors transitioned from their initial research findings to the deployment and evaluation of their calendar prototype. Although I think a lot of good observations were made about family dynamics and older user groups, I am not entirely convinced that the prototype addressed the main problems discovered during the web survey, or even the actual needs of busy families. As far as I can tell, the prototype merely allows members of a family to see other members' schedules, but it is still on a computer screen (much like any other calendar software), and cannot be accessed from anywhere outside of the home.
The study reports that these particular grandparents "appreciated" being able to see their children/grandchildren's schedules, but the reverse was not true, and so the grandparents were less motivated to update their own calendars. Why didn't the flashing reminders idea (p7) get implemented? Given that the younger generations already had existing shared calendars, it seems that the greatest benefit of this prototype was to the older generation, in which case, I don't know if this is the best solution to their needs. Why would a grandparent need to see that her son is having lunch tomorrow with someone she might not even know? To be sure, my parents also like to keep tabs on what I'm doing, but it feels much more personal to talk on the phone about significant events rather than stare at a computer-based calendar full of unfamiliar details.
Sung Yi - Sep 13, 2006 12:10:10 am
I was surprised to read this paper because this exact project was in my mind right after submitting my project proposal. Anyways, the study shows that many people are using more than one calendar (electronic or paper), and thus they have major problem collecting all the stuffs they have written on the number of calendars into one place. Having many sources to jot down abrupt events must be useful and not having to transfer one note to another provides a facilitator. So the idea of shared calendar sounds very tempting. One feature I would like to add to the shared calendar is handwriting recognition.
Andrew Tran - Sep 13, 2006 12:29:32 am
I didn't expect this article to really go into detail about their whole experiment. It just showed me how inventing and designing something is a really long process. There would be a lot of testing and evaluation that would take up a lot of time. My thought about this device was that for the most part it was useless. I can see how the grandparents would like to use the calendars, but now a days everyone has cellphones. The kids don't need cell phones, if their soccer practice or music lessons were mostly on the same day, then you really only need to remember that much and not have to right down all the time so and so has this on a particular day. If in the future this calendar system goes out into the market, i believe it would only be a hype for a short period of time. Technology changes fast and pretty soon something better and more practical would replace it.
Natalie Nguyen - Sep 13, 2006 12:23:33 am
A detailed and very thorough case study ...
The medium of paper falls drastically short in its static nature. I felt this frustration while I was brainstorming, over and over... that there's only so much you can do with the paper and then you sync it with the computer... and then what do you do with the paper? If you update the paper, you can update the digital version. But if you update the digital version, nothing's going to magically appear on the paper.
It's kind of frustrating to me -- yes, we are the generation that grew up with computers; but I think that the older generation can learn how to use computers if someone really took the time (like how I unfortunately showed my mom how to use ebay!). I feel that the digital pen isn't really that effective a segueway. On a tangent, I feel like there should be "touchscreen" computers. I often try to walk my mom and my older relatives and even my young 5 year old cousins on how to use a computer/some software, and invariably they always touch the monitor to try to make something happen. And it makes sense in a way -- if you didn't grow up with a mouse in hand, what does a button mean to you? You don't "click on" a button -- you push it, with your hands.
Antonis Mannaris - Sep 13, 2006 12:24:25 am
As a project idea, the "Shared Family Calendars" idea is very unique and especially useful since as it is mentioned in the calendar the aging population is growing. As far as the idea goes, the only problem I see is that even though elders today are not familiar with computers, this will not likely be true in the future. Nevertheless, a simple to use synchronized and versatile family calendat will certainly be of use. As many of my co-posters mentioned, the design cycle outlined in the reading is indicative of what we might be facing pretty soon. We see the importance of "understanding the users" right from the beginning, to make sure you take into serious consideration their abilities and current habits. We also see how hard it is to take a good population sample. Using a "chain letter" may have produced a lot of responces, but was definitely not representative enough. We also see the importance of layered interfaces, to accomodate a wide range of users. This is true with most projects, since restricting your design to a single interface limits both the number and type of user you may help. In closing, I'd like to say that the reading reminded me of the important of research resources, which are often undervalued. It takes a lot of time and energy to conduct a thorough research of your potential users, and failing to do so will definitely be the doom of any project.
Kimberly Lau - Sep 13, 2006 01:23:53 am
Older generations always have more difficulty adjusting to newer technology, so creating an interface that allows these older people to employ practices they are already accustomed to is advantageous to all. As a designer, it is always important and beneficial to find the untapped user groups and then somehow draw them out with an innovative creation. The design process described in this paper, with repeated user interviews, user feedback and creation of prototypes, is very effective and a great way to find those potential users. I enjoyed reading such a detailed description of the design cycle that the authors followed, as it provides good guidance for how to organize our project and future ones and reminds us of just how much work must go into anything that is to be successful.
David Eitan Poll - Sep 13, 2006 01:18:40 am
I found it particularly interesting that the choice was made to conduct a web survey to analyze this product's audience. They assumed that their audience would be middle-to-upper class families that are tech savvy, and so they distributed a survey by chain e-mail. Clearly this helped them gain some insight into how best to tailor their system. I think this underscores the importance and practical usefulness of getting input early from the targeted users.
Kang Chen - Sep 13, 2006 01:15:48 am
Shared Family Calendars: Promoting Symmetry and Accessibility: By reading the study, I am convinced that the usage of shared calendars did help the older generation keep tabs on their children. However, the reversed cannot be said. The learning curve, various hardware upgrades, and technical issues that were mentioned seemed only to place more burden on the user. First, it defeated the purpose of having a cheap and easy to use interface such as the paper if you have to buy more memory for the computer. It's unlikely that the older generation will be able to get this done without additionally help. Second, the lack of OCR turned out to be quite an issue. As mentioned, the grandmother wanted to have her entries be neater but was unable to do so without learning how to operate the keyboard. Finally, what happened to the mobility of this system? All the families still depended on a computer to access the shared calendar.
Aleksandr (Sasha) Ashpis - Sep 13, 2006 01:42:07 am
The shared calendar is an effective tool for the 21st century family on the go. I am impressed with the research done especially towards the older generations who find computers to be daunting and hard to use. I personally help my parents and grandfather fix problems when tasks go awry, and no matter how hard I try it is very difficult to get them to remember or learn how to fix a problem themselves that’s outside there very basic skill set. On a side note, it seems like part of my project proposal has been already implemented by Anoto, although I found no mention of it on the internet.
Udam Saini - Sep 13, 2006 01:59:26 am
It was interesting to understand how the researchers spent quite a bit of time discussing and working with the families to help improve their design. It was interesting to note how the design of the calendar kept changing due to the feedback from the family. With more iterations, it may have become a good product that both the Junior family and the Grandparents would use regularly to communicate with each other. Any small flaw in the design of the product caused at least one of the families to stop using the device. This shows that a good design will not alienate any one group.
However, the calendar idea may/may not be that useful in real life otherwise. I know that I don't use a calendar at all, and neither do most of my immediate family members. We usually use other means to communicate and keep in touch with each other. I'm not sure how most family members keep track of each other, but I believe that the researchers would find that they should use other means/methods to send/receive events from family members other than using calendars. Using only one family in the US seems very flawed even for research purposes because you don't get that much variance in the schedules and lives of different people living in the United States.
Tony Yu Tung Lai - Sep 13, 2006 02:24:13 am
So far, this is the first reading that talked extensively about the interaction between designers and subjects/users. A couple interesting thoughts occured to me. First, the interaction and collaboration between designers and users was a lot more than I thought. I imagined that the designers might get to see the users once in the beginning of the experiment, once in the middle for evaluation, and once more at the end of the experiment. But it seems like I was way underestimating the collaboration between the two. Also, the paper pointed out the problems that they encountered when trying to implement the system into the home computers that families own. Another source of problem that I've never quite thought of.
Anton Mikhailov - Sep 13, 2006 02:55:07 am
It was interesting to me to hear that one of the grandmothers requested to use a computer instead of a pen. This really shows that the technology made a leap closing the generational gap. I believe that if there were more personal and social tools like this, they can easily motivate older generations to make use of computers. It seems most older generations feel that computers are for crunching numbers and doing obscure tasks that dont really matter. In the case of children, they may consider video games, but never anything they would want to partake in.
It was dissapointing however that the team didnt attempt to use handwriting recognition to suit her request, instead of dumping Outlook on her. I felt that that jump may have been too much for her. If a person is concerned with her handwriting being neater, it must already be pretty neat and shouldnt have issues with recognition...
Leo Chen - Sep 13, 2006 03:39:27 am
I'm actually quite suprised at the small sample number of families used in this case. 7 families, isn't exactly representative of a whole spectrum of usage methodologies. I mean, each family is quite large, but due to the similarities between family members, and the habits that may stay constant within a family, I believe such a small study may produce signficant bias.
Rayhan Lal - Sep 13, 2006 04:27:08 am
My first major critique of this paper is the sample size, n = 1 U.S. family. The final decisions seemed general enough to make many happy; but I’m absolutely sure you can find other families who have some other complaint or request. Unfortunately, a group of researchers does not come packaged with the software and if the families were not motivated to instruct their grandparents before this project, I don’t see why others would be later. As mentioned by others the generational gap is closing and soon the elderly will be as accustomed to the mouse-keyboard interface as we are.
One delightful issue I can’t help bringing up is the privacy for the grandparents. If you want your data kept private – kept in the pen and paper world – just write it with a regular pen. (By the way, there is an easy way to bring additive changes back from the digital world to the real world. All you need is a printed copy of the document before revisions and a record of when it was printed. For additive changes just put that paper back in your printer and have a program print out the strokes since the previous timestamp. So for the calendar if one of the children added something, the grandparents need only throw their old copy of the calendar into the printer and receive the changes.)
CarrellKillebrew - Sep 13, 2006 04:23:22 am
It was interesting to hear how they went through multiple iterations. They interviewed participants, brainstormed, did mock up designs, etc. Learning about one way to design an interface and actually seeing it put to use is nice, because sometimes it can seem like some steps can be skipped (who needs to interview participants, I know what they need. That type of thing). I also found it highly amusing how the grandparents would not enter much into the calendar because their kids did not check it. Especially how the grandfather entered illogical entries to see if anyone was paying attention. I think an important lesson is to debug your shit as much as possible BEFORE giving it to your participants so that you are not being called to debug all the time and frustrating your users.
Michael Mai - Sep 13, 2006 04:39:39 am
I enjoyed reading over this abstract about the research into the shared calendar, however, I found several issues that bothered. First, the scalibility of this project seems to be very limited, what happens when you start adding brothers and sisters into the picture? What if the Junior family father had a brother with his own family? The calendar becomes rapidly cluttered, confusing, and complicated.
Another issue was that there seemed to be a big issue with repairing the Junior family computer. Why not just give all 3 families new equipment/computers and let them use their own personal computer for their own purposes? I got the impression that this was a major issue and headache.
Finally, I feel the as the calendar gets used longer, it'll be taken for granted. Like the maternal grandparents, the events will start to seem routine and people will slowly stop posting up information. Essentially, it'll revert back to the families just calling each other and using their own calendars.
Qingyun Tang - Sep 13, 2006 05:21:59 am
I think this reading is right on time for us just before we discuss about our project in groups. Most of the article has talked about how the designers observe and consult with the experimental groups to adjust their designs. It is very important for us designers to get in touch with the people who will actually use the products before we physically develop the products. I am actually surprised at the feedbacks experimental groups gave, thus I understand testing the products among real users is a must do. For the project we will be working on, ideally, I think we will have several target groups try out several times until everybody is satisfied.
Siu Pang Chu - Sep 13, 2006 09:13:27 am
The article not just describes the Shared Family Calendars product. What I learned from the article is how they approached the problems. First, they recognizes there is need: Grown children want to see if their parents life is normal or not, and grandparents also want to know more about their grandchildren’s daily lives. Then, they target the current problem is that keyboard is hard for the grandparents to use. So, digital pen and paper will be the best solution to give a shared calendar. The most interesting point for me in this article is “our goal was to help them become our partners in the design of new technologies.” This is a great idea. As I read from the article , when the target user have involved in the design process, they also bring up some good designs. Also, field study is another important part. Through the experiment, user tells what they need to change. e.g. the grandparents complain that they could not easily read the text, day names of the event.
Tabassum Khan - Sep 13, 2006 10:00:12 am
Critique: 1. This study is very interesting but at the same time kind of confusing because the goal as mentioned was to provide easier communication between older and younger members of the family, however, later in the study it was mentioned that occasionally separating families by gender or age was effective. 2. It started with 400 survey responses and ended up experimenting on 1 US family. 3. Paternal grandparents had to move closer to the junior family home. Why?
Recommendation: The problem that one of the grandparents encountered was putting the pen into the cradle the proper way. This could have been eliminated with the use of some kind of visual or audio feedback i.e a beep or green light when the pen is correctly in place and no beep or red light when it is not.
In all the readings that we have had so far, the most important point that has been reinstated over and over is the vital role of understanding users needs and behavior in designing.
Julius Cheng - Sep 13, 2006 10:14:57 am
This article is an interesting in-depth look at the design process and how real users are and should always be an integral part of it. I found it to be a very useful exposé on this part of design and appropriate as we move into group brainstorming.
As for the product itself, I have always had the need to know how something works in order to be fully comfortable using it. I feel that this product gives older people a lot less credit than they deserve, because it's designed so that *they* don't have to use the computer. "It's okay, grandma, just use this pen, we'll take care of the rest!" As for myself, I don't like using things that I don't understand at least partially, and I'm very sure a lot of older people don't either. How can they feel comfortable using this family calendar system when they might know nothing about how the pen works, how data is synchronized, and how it's edited on the computer?
A lot of these kinds of products are a valiant effort to keep people from having to understand how things work. I don't know yet how many other people besides myself don't like using systems that they don't understand or understand only partially, but it would be interesting to find out. It certainly appears that a lot the older people in the study enjoyed it, but would a broader user test reveal some skeptical and unwilling ones?
Robert Held- Sep 13, 2006 10:50:39 am
I think this paper illustrates how the Anoto pen can be used in situations where the benefit is questionable. The prevalence of technical issues seemed to frequently frustrate the users. One may argue that a more polished product would be more robust and reliable. However, many of the issues had to do with MS Office needing to be upgraded, elderly users not understanding the concept of a password entry box, and ISP unreliability. Therefore, while the elderly participants seemed to enjoy the project the most, they were also the most likely to need individual help from the researchers. The authors even admit that when they carefully wrote step-by-step instructions, they were ignored. Therefore, I think the biggest challenge presented by this paper is how to create a technologically advanced product that can be used by an older, less tech-savvy customer base. The solution may involve computer systems assembled exclusively for the product, to ensure compatibility and facilitate technical support. I would be interested to see a follow-up study that investigates the issue.
Suneet Shah - Sep 13, 2006 10:57:19 am
I think other people hit on this idea as well, and that was this article woudl have greatly benefitted from a picture or better description of the interface the families were using. I thought the concept was good, if done purely digitally. Networking outlook calendars is a great idea and can be done today. MY family keeps all our calenders in sync by using the Google calendar, which allows you to subscribe to other people's calendars. We kep a family calendar this way, so this article hit close to home. But bringing paper into the mix complicates a lot of things. Calendars change very often. It is difficult to keep paper copies synced up.
I think the other thign the article did was expose us more to some field study concepts. It showed us how they went about picking a target group to test with. I think it woudl have been more to their benefit to design the product while working with the families. I think their idea of giving disposable cameras to the families to understand their culture better was genius. It is always great to see more applications of the Anoto pen system.
Jonathan Chang - Sep 13, 2006 11:05:16 am
It makes sense to try to bridge the digital divide that exists across generations. I know this is a problem not only grandparents, but even some older parents of this strange generation that seems to have been born with mice in their hands. Anoto and other similar digital pens can go a long way towards making this technology more accessible on a wide basis, since it utilizes an interface that we're all familiar with. Like an earlier poster, I'm also surprised that they pulled experiences and impressions from such a small set of households, not allowing for potential differences in tech savvy based on socioeconomic background, but I suppose there was a limited set of people willing to have a bunch of grad students invade their lives for such a long time.
Jason Lee- Sep 13, 2006 11:19:06 am
The article was insightful in that it fully documented every detail in the process of testing out a new prototype of a system. I liked reading about all the technical difficulties and different demographics that were involved with testing out the synchronized calendar. It was particularly interesting to read about the backgrounds and interactions involved with the set of grandparents, as their experience ranged from fairly experienced with computers to completely computer illiterate. While a product like this seems useful, I think I agree with the Junior family's conclusions in that such a product would not be consulted very often within a family setting, as simply talking to each other on an everyday basis is a good reminder for everyone when things need to be done or schedules exist. A synchronized calendar would be helpful for settings in which users do not talk to each other on a regular or daily basis, such as an office or a separated family.
Jae Chang - Sep 13, 2006 10:50:26 am
In the article "Shared Family Calendars", the topic itself was very interesting. Using computers and internet can be very difficult tasks for older people. By providing easy interface and the Anoto Pen, the Shared Family Calendar enables older people to communicate with their family through internet. I have doubts that many older people will be comfortable with computers even if the application's user interface is using pens and papers. Also, the way they approached to the problem such as brainstorming and surveys was very practical. I believe that the reading is a very good example of the design phase and the group project.
Roland Carlos - Sep 13, 2006 12:06:12 pm
Despite being put off by the size of the reading at first, the details it provided in the design process were invaluable. It focuses on the niche market of the older generation, a group that has been left relatively untapped by modern technology. Therefore, a good deal of the design process had to figure out a way on how to handle this "problem" group of users/customers. The process also highlighted how important hands-on testing before full release is. The developers can only think of so many problems, but the real improvements come from the beta testers.
Besides this, I did enjoy reading a little bit about the family dynamic. It was a well-documented case study that I'm sure the developers will take into account for future development.
Siyan Wang - Sep 13, 2006 12:18:31 pm
I think this is a pretty creative use of the pen and paper interface in that older generations are probably more comfortable using it, and would thus appeal to their usual ways of handling things, by writing it down. However, as the article described, this interface still requires a computer and at least some technical competence from the users. When they can develop a system that bypasses the computers entirely, or transfers it to one user, such as the Junior family, I think it would be much more successful.
Tom McClure - Sep 13, 2006 12:18:35 pm
Shared Family Calendars
What a fun study! I'm glad the authors spent a lot of time documenting the experiences with the grandparents. These are your baseline target users, people! It's easy to write software for a computer-savvy audience, the real challenge is reaching this baseline of people who have never used (or sometimes never even seen) a computer. The Anoto pen seemed to go a long way toward making the application accessible to these people but obviously there were still technological hurdles that needed to be overcome. For instance, docking should not require any terminal interaction -- or better yet, why not make a dockless synch available? Well, except that the pen does eventually need to recharge its batteries, and the dock reduces the opportunity for the pen to get lost.
Vahe Oughourlian - Sep 13, 2006 12:04:44 pm
The authors of this paper seem to have a great idea, but I'm disappointed in their seemingly overwhelming reliance on the test families. It's admirable that they try to provide solutions that mimic the current standard of interaction, but moving to more abstract ideas, such as what needs to be done, might have been a better direction in this case. I'm also somewhat disappointed in the power that the researchers allow the test subjects to have. If adding more memory to a system will make the study better, one should at least be able to explain it to this (apparently) tech-saavy family (that is the Junior family), since adding RAM is a non-destructive operation. The fact that the family had any "anxiety" in regards to throwing in a stick of RAM speaks to the researchers' inability to properly interact with their userbase.
Another part of my concern is the lack of iteration in regards to the implementation. It may not be clear from the document, by my impression was, after the first few problems (VPN disconnects, repeated appointments, etc) little effort was made to advance the design while it was implemented, in that they could have tested some new ideas or reimplemented some of the features in a more stable enviornment. Instead (and it could just be a function of the date the paper was written) that this was the only live test run, and that no further tests to develop the idea were made. This is important because, in my experience, part of a user's use of a system (which does pop up here and there in this paper) is the consistency of a system, as well as the percieved reliability of the system. This study could have brought more to the table, I think, if the study were repeated again with the same family with better impelementation, or perhaps a different family.
The last point is that this family already had backups for family to know what was going on between families; namely, the constant physical proximity and phone connections. To show the merits of this system, one would have to test it with a family that was far apart, that had little to no other means of communication, but had the desire to know more about the other family members' activities.
Michael Udaltsov - Sep 13, 2006 12:39:14 pm
This paper shows the challenges of connecting older and younger generation using a mixed calendar system that accepts input from multiple households using either a computer or the Anoto-based digital paper. It's interesting to see that a lot of the technical problems resulted from Microsoft Windows and Office, and not the custom software or the users of the system. This shows that a good implementation of such calendar system would either have to operate independently from other software, or need to have a solid compatible platform as the back-end. It also seems that the need to do a lot of software and hardware upgrades before using the system would prevent widespread adoption of such systems, although more current computers may require less updates. It was mentioned several times that parts of the software were too complex for the grandparents to use, and required detailed instructions, which resulted in limited use (such as reading messages but not writing). It seems that in addition to a stable and working system, a simple and intuitive interface is required before such a system could become successful. The article lists some incremental improvements made to the interface, but it seems that the core input methods were still limited to what was offered by the underlying Outlook system.
Keenahn Jung - Sep 13, 2006 12:20:19 pm
This product seems very interesting and provides an important service. I think it is great that the team spent so much time initially interviewing and getting to know the families before engineering a solution. Knowing your target user group and their needs/limitations is one of the most important steps in the design cycle. Specifically, I was very impressed that they put the needs of the elders foremost and came up with a system that was easy for those less computer savvy to use. This also removed barriers that prevented people from recording events. The study showed that one grandfather dilligently recorded everything, while another grandmother read it every day, but rarely entered anything. As soon as the act of recording the event becomes too difficult and time consuming (i.e. turning on a computer, opening outlook, and typing things in) people will skip it, but because it was as easy as using a pen and paper, a system the elders were already accustomed to, they were able to record and distribute information that they would not be able to otherwise.
Dexter Lau - Sep 13, 2006 12:46:54 pm
This is a fairly basic problem and solution of schedule sharing. The real meat of the article is found in the way the user interface is tested in a real environment. By testing it with real families, they could see that the elderly members didn't synchronize that often. The younger ones were more sensitive to changes because they were more intimitely involved with their computers whereas the older members were happy to let the researches alter their computer.
Testing it not only tested the regular use but also the ability of people's ability to adopt new technology. In this case it took a very long time to get the users aclimated to the software.
Eric Vacca - Sep 13, 2006 12:40:15 pm
This seems to me to be the most obviously implementable application of the Anoto Pen. As it is with all new technologies development happens in bursts randomly, so until products actually start coming out, unless you're in the developers loop, even searching google, does not yield anything.
In regard to the small sample set used, i disagree. The researchers did a broad focused user study on the onset, to get an idea about the prospective users. Then they went on to 3 specific families. I think this is a correct size because in order to develope the interface in conjunction with the families the researchers need to be accesssible, and if they're performing the study on 20 families, the scope of the problem becomes intractable. I think they should stay with the small sample size for research, and then when a workable interface is found test it on a larger sample group
Andrew Hao - Sep 13, 2006 02:40:02 pm
Despite the challenges they faced, the research team deserves plaudits for wrangling with so many variables - third party software, the human learning curve, design challenges. I am particularly surprised that the grandmother chose to use the keyboard as entry rather than the pen - her complaint? Surprisingly, that her handwriting "didn't look as neat". Researchers certainly would not have expected that response - a perfect example of the need for user feedback and input in the design process.
Utsav Shah - Sep 16, 2006 07:04:56 pm
This was very interesting to read because not only it was fun but also it taught us the process of designing a prototype. I think it's going to be really helpful for us when we are working on our project. It followed that design cycle mentioned in the class to the certain extent. They reached out to the target users, interviewed them, had experiments and altered their design according to users' needs.
As far as the context of the project is concerned, I think it's always hard to deal with elderly people when it comes to technologies. The calendar idea seemed useful but I'm not sure if people want to use it because now not only they have to write things down but also have to deal with technology. People for whom english is a second language, it could be bit challenging. Also, I think it's useful when families are far apart as in different states or maybe even different countries. If they're like walking distance away and always stay in touch via phone, there's not much this cool calendar can do.
Charles Lee - Sep 17, 2006 09:29:47 am
Shared Family Calendars 1:
The shared family calendars could be integrated with Google Calendar as well as Outlook. This would provide Google Calendar's feature of scanning emails and searching them for event dates/times/locations, then providing links to add to a calendar. Emails could be created from letters written with the Anoto pen. Usage could become nearly ubiquitous.
Shared Family Calendars 2:
The age considerations are an interesting problem. Older people did not update often because they were unaccustomed to the fact that their updates were instant, as opposed to something that would be seen when within physical viewing range, whereas younger people made the connection between instant messaging and instantly transmitted calendar details. I believe with time, older people would get accustomed to updating more often, when they are more exposed to seeing other people's calendar updates immediately.
Edward Karuna - Sep 17, 2006 04:50:07 pm
Comment 1: (On digital Post-its) The concept of digital Post-its is an interesting one. This concept has been brought to life here in the form of the MessageProbe, which seems to me like a reworking of 3M's Post-it note software to work with electronic tablets. 3M's Post-it software provides the capability for you to not only type notes to yourself and "stick" them to your desktop, but also to type out notes and then "stick" them onto other computers in your Windows workgroup that are also running the Post-it note software. The MessageProbe appears to provide this same functionality, but only to facilitate communication, not to leave notes to yourself. On the other hand, it provides the ability to send notes to any other MessageProbes in the same set, which allows for remote communication, not just over a Local Area Network.
Comment 2: (On Calendar Software) The merging of the paper calendar with Outlook strikes me as a particularly apropos way to try to bridge the generational gap here. It uses the traditional paper calendar, which the grandparents used, providing a theoretically painless way to export the appointments and notes written down into the Outlook format through the digital pen. Unfortunately, the process appeared to be one way, as there was no discussion of bringing the Outlook appointments back onto the paper calendar, which would involve some sort of printing element applied to the calendar.
Yang Wang - Sep 19, 2006 03:39:44 am
This is a very thoroughly written project. It covered all the basis and answered all the questions I had. But there are a couple things that I want to comment on.
First, I found it to be very interesting that author said "The dizzying array of new technologies available to help families accomplish these tasks, from cell phones and PDAs to Internet calendars, seems only to have added to the existing confusion of paper calendars Post-It notes, and answering machines". It is very ironic that we have all these technology that is suppose to "help families accomplish these tasks", yet they "seems only to have added to the existing confusion". The technology is important. But a technology that is not developed well serves only to waste more time. For example, I don't really know that I save or waste more time using my Pocket PC. It is suppose to be a tool that increase productivity and efficiency. But since it is so difficult to use, I found myself fiddle with it for hours trying to make it sync and work the way I want it to. At the end, I do not know whether I have really increase my productivity.
For the grand-parents, it is the computers or outlook. Becaue they do not help the grand-parents in obtaining the information or increase productivity. Making a phone call make be much more convinent. But the author and his team tailored their technology to work with the grand-parents. I find this to be very profound.
Yang Wang - Sep 19, 2006 04:09:11 am
I also want to comment that why this reseach project is successful.
It is very important that the research team had done its homework before it start. There are two important discoveries that shaped this project and they are listed in the "Related Work" section:
1. Web Technology for Older Adults
2. Coordination in the home with technology
The research team has focus on two of the very popular problems in the modern society. Although we used computer on a daily basis. But those who are aging came from a generate that is before the establishment of IT communcation. For them, it is very hard to adapt to such a new enviroment with "complex procedure of buttons and menus". Another problem lays in the kind of family structure we have today, where both parents work and kids have to attend a lot of extracurricular activies. In this case, coordination and sychronization becomes crucial.
The success of this project lay in the fact that the team has done its research, and even with much experimenting beforehand. But their meticulousness paid off, they have chosen a very good target group who are willing to embrace this kind of technology
Rory Martin - Sep 20, 2006 11:27:08 am
Comment 1: While I understand that learning to use a computer can be difficult, especially for the elderly, shouldn't the point of designing this software be to make it easy enough for anyone to use. The grandparents already have to use the computer to access the shared calenders, so what's stopping them from using the keyboard? While a keyboard may not be as comfortable as a pen, it is very intuitive to use due to visibility, all characters (that are regularly used) are printed on the keys. It seems as though the myth that the elderly cannot use computers is perpetuated by the search for alternative methods that are aimed specifically at their demographic. I know plenty of people over 60 that spend the majority of their time searching the internet and emailing friends. If the researchers had spent the time to teach them how to use the pre-existing interface, then they would have a much more valuable skill set, and at the end of the study, the grandparents wouldn't feel like the knowledge that they gained was pointless because they no longer have access to these anoto based calendars, they could switch to more popular calendaring systems.
Comment 2: The entire time that I was reading this I was thinking about privacy, which the developers didn't seem to address in their calendar system. The problem is that the pen based interface solution was to write the event with a regular pen, which would therefore only be available on the paper based model. This is a problem because the whole point of the project was to integrate all of these calendars; therefore, the grandparents get screwed over because they still need to review multiple calendars. It would have been easy to incorporate a character that could signal the status of an event as either public or private.
Heng Kuang - Sep 20, 2006 11:42:04 am
Among all the Anoto related technologies I have seen so far (including those from readings and those I saw while searching the web), this is the most impressive. Compared to some of the other projects, it has a boarder potential user crowd, successfully ties into the current technology, and requires little extra cost.
From reviewing their user interviewing process, I realize the importance of objectiveness and passiveness in the process. The authors were stunned by the level of interest grandparents have in other family members’ daily activity, but it seems very naturally for me. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if I were doing the interview. The difference in presumptions proves the dangerousness bringing personal experience/opinion into a design process.
Another interesting fact found by the authors in the surveys is that “more than 90% of the ‘single maintainers’ were women”. It is a pity that the authors didn’t fully investigate about the reason behind it. It could be another very substantial research project on its own.
After all, from reading this article, I see more of the necessities of conducting value user inquiries.
Cheng-Lun Yang - Dec 07, 2006 01:44:13 am
1.I praise the research group for finding different families from three different countries for their study. From my observation, older generation is more resistant to changes and therefore, harder to satisfy with the new technology. The study included older generation in the families. I believe their comments would be overly critical due to their unfamiliarity of technology. This affect should be taken into consideration.
2.The calendar idea with Anoto pen bridges the gap of execution for the older generations. However, the computer interface causes them more trouble. The designer can not assume the older generation is tech savvy. The whole idea of the digital calendar is to make it like traditional calendar. It is worth thinking how they can bridge the gap for the older generations.
Robin Franco - Dec 15, 2006 11:27:47 am
Comment 1: In every new technology, the current generation is quick to adopt while older generations are slow to use it. There is much work done to lower the learning curve on these technology in order to increase the sphere of adaptability. We can see this being done in this reading. Personally, I believe not much time should be spent on adopting technology for use with previous generations. They had their own ways of dealing with problems. It worked for them all through their lives so its hard for them to adapt a new way of doing things. It's best, I think, to leave them on to their own devices and instead focus on pushing the technology forward to future generations.
Comment 2: I like how we could saw an “inside view” of innovation in action. The innovators were able to come up with novel solutions to the problems at hand. The one problem I found was that this solution does not scale when applied to a family with a lot of brothers, sisters, cousins, etc. However, this technology applies mainly to middle to upper class families. These families also tend to be relatively small. This leads to another interesting topic: since technology is created BY middle or upper class developers, it is mainly only FOR middle to upper class people. This is unfortunate because some of those who would most benefit from technology are in the economically lower class of the population.
