I‘ve always thought text inputs from anything other than a keyboard were clunky. Cliff Kushler, the man who invented T9 (a word completion aid) has developed Swype, a new text entry method that capitalizes on eliminating the press and release component of the touchscreen. What was once a discrete target acquisition task becomes a continuous one.
In the CNET interview, Kushler points out his age (55) and his words-per-minute with Swype (50). Not bad.
If you’re interested in research on alternate text input devices, check out some of the following:
Wobbrock, J.O. and Myers, B.A. (2008). Enabling devices, empowering people: The design and evaluation of Trackball EdgeWrite. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 35-56.
So I finally made the plunge and obtained a Kindle E-book reader. This isn’t a gadget review site so don’t expect a full review but I just wanted to comment on some of the ergonomic/human factors considerations after using the device for the past few days. The bottom line? There are some critical “book behaviors” that the device does not afford but are critical to me. My reading material is primarily articles, reference books; not narrative fiction (that typically flows in a linear, page-by-page fashion).
The GOOD:
The hype concerning the display is warranted. It is extremely high contrast and easy to read even in dim light. What makes this different from reading on an LCD is that the pixels are actually closer to the reading surface (just like paper). The pixel density is also very high (167 dpi) compared to LCDs.
The device is very thin and light. The screen is small but not unusably so.
Search is a nice function. However, I am not sure if this perfectly replaces book indexes. With an index, you can rely on recognition instead of free recall (necessary in search).
Built-in 3G wireless for free.
The software is very simple and the navigation is easy. It is similar to an ATM with soft-options.
The BAD (in no particular order):
Page turning is a bit sluggish (probably .5 to 1 second). I don’t have empirical data to back up actual “performance” differences but it bothers me.
The page forward and backward buttons are too easily pressed when you pick the device up (not a big deal but an inconvenience).
I can dog-ear pages and include notes on pages or passages. My notes are accessible as a text file for use later. However, the text file is sort of meaningless. While my note is there, it is devoid of context (I don’t know where it goes). It would be nice if this functionality was improved.
The on-off switch is located on the back of the device. So when I want to turn it off, I always inadvertently jump a page or two.
Instead of using page numbers to navigate the text, it uses something called “Locations.” I still have not figured out what this is. At the bottom of the screen, it might display, “Locations 203-15″. Are these lines? Paragraphs? Pages?
There is the “previous page” button, but also a “Back” button…and they seem to function similarly under some circumstances but differently in others.
Anne and I are writing a book and I’ve been doing quite a bit of research with articles and books. Typically, I will read a page from a book or article and make notes. Currently, there is not an easy way to export these notes or even email them to myself from the device. As I mentioned, the notes it creates are unusable. Another big thing is that I cannot open multiple books or articles at once–this is a problem with the whole class of devices, not just the Kindle.
These are just some of my recent thoughts on the device. The tentative bottom-line is that I probably won’t be buying expensive reference books on the device (it just can’t yet replace a paper book for my use cases). But reading PDF articles and Word .docs is quite pleasant.
Here are some pictures (the device and the device’s text presentation compared to a real book).
The new law, which generally bars drivers from talking on their phones unless they use a hands-free device, takes effect today, nearly two years after the Legislature passed it. In the weeks leading up to the deadline, customers have been flooding into stores to buy hands-free devices, particularly wireless headsets.
With recent news that it is now illegal in California to use your mobile phone while driving (unless you have a hands-free device), I thought it would be interesting to note that it is not the “holding the phone” that is the problem, it is the cognitive requirements of multi-tasking (driving and talking) that is the problem. Hands-free will not solve this problem. As Strayer, Drews, and Crouch (2006) noted:
When drivers were conversing on either a handheld or hands-free cell phone, their braking reactions were delayed and they were involved in more traffic accidents than when they were not conversing on a cell phone.
Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A., & Crouch, D. J. (2006). A comparison of the cell phone driver and the drunk driver. Human Factors, 48, 381-391.
I‘ve heard of text messages being used to remind older adults, but this is an interesting take on that…I guess it addresses the same underlying problem in both age groups: prospective memory failures.
WASHINGTON - 4gt yr meds? Getting kids to remember their medicine may be a text message away. Cincinnati doctors are experimenting with texting to tackle a big problem: Tweens and teens too often do a lousy job of controlling chronic illnesses like asthma, diabetes or kidney disease.
It’s a problem long recognized in adults, particularly for illnesses that can simmer without obvious symptoms until it’s too late. But only now are doctors realizing how tricky a time adolescence is for skipping meds, too.
Many Americans are jumping into the fast, mobile, participatory Web without considering all the implications. If nothing really bad has happened to someone, they tend neither to worry about their personal information nor to take steps to limit the amount of information that can be found about them online. This finding dovetails with our previous work related to spyware — software that covertly tracks a user as they navigate the net. Internet users who said they had not encountered spyware were less likely to view it as a serious threat and more likely to say it’s just part of life online.
