Slashdot Mirror
Cutting Edge Computer Interfaces?
Senate Staffer asks: "I am doing some research for U.S. Senator on technology advancements, specifically in the field of computer interfaces. Human-Computer interface tools have not changed for quite some time. The keyboard was grandfathered from the type-writer, and although there have been advancements (ergonomic designs, different key layouts, even different shapes), the basic function has not changed. The mouse was a major new advancement for computers, and again, although there have been advancements (track-balls, optical mice, trackpads, etc) the function has remained the same. What cutting edge technologies are being researched today and where? What technologies are currently available to consumers, and what technologies are on the horizon?"
THIS is how our legislators get info? Through Ask /.?
The latest Slashdot meme.
These people have always been at the forefront of HCI design...
Xerox PARC laboratory projects
and
Some more projects
I'm not well versed on it, but check Wikipedia for information on haptics. I remember seeing a pen-like control device at the SIGGRAPH conference this year, that would track your movements with it in 3D space. Combined with force feedback, they described future implementations of this as incredible tools for surgeons, which I suppose it could be. Fun for 3D desktops and games, too.
For the blind, voice recognition and synthesis is becoming more and more advanced. I imagine a (near) future day when more and more non-blind people will interact with their voice and ears.
I'd also look into all the research that has been done in various disorders and disabilities that have to do with viewing, hearing, typing, and moving a mouse. Some of these things have made it into mainstream use. For instance, the research done to make colors more visible to the colorblind has affected how (professional) people design websites nowadays.
Take for instance what has been done for those people mostly paralyzed or incapable of controlling their extremities. We have technology to track ones eyes. One day, we won't have to use mice to control a cursor or select things. Just look and blink.
Combine this with voice recognition, we'll be able to look at a text form widget, and say the words to fill in, then blink to hit "submit".
One other system that is important is handwriting and OCR. Being able to write in boxes in a paper form and then scan that image in, having the computer read the form, is a breakthrough. It isn't being used much yet, but I think it is going to be used more and more.
I strongly believe that in the future, we'll have to understand computers less and less because they will understand us more and more. The pinnacle of computing is when we will relate to computers the same way people relate to each other. When they understand every nuance, every motion, every word, and even the intonation, then we will have made a computer that no one has to understand to use.
The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.
You mentioned trackpads, but the stuff from fingerworks goes a bit beyond this and supports a gesturing interface. I've used one for about a year and bought several as backups (the thing is incredibly durable) just because I know I'll never be able to live without it again.
I also recall a demo -- sorry, no link -- that used webcam-style cameras to watch eye movements and use that as part of the active window selection process. There was another demo at Intel Developer Forum last year that did something similar, but turned off a notebook's display when you weren't looking at it to save power.
Please bail me out.
Okay, so you have your keyboard interface. This is always undergoing some modification, sometimes radical, most times less so. The standard QWERTY layout vs Dvorak, of course, but then you have your ergonomic vs straight layout argument, as well as chording keyboards, keyboards drawn with light, keyboards that can fold up, keyboards with decent keys (Hello, Model M, I love you!), etc.
:)
You gotcher mouse, trackball, and mutant variations and combinations thereof, including tablets. Add force feedback and stir, where appropriate (slow down the mouse over window controls, etc.). Oh yeah, don't forget the whole wireless vs wired argument, plus security or lack thereof implied therein.
You gotcher touchscreens (icky), and yer voice command, and then, we come at last to voice recognition and haptic interfaces.
The thing is, humans have a limited number of ways to enter information, and depending on the nature of the information, it's going to probably have to come down to keyboards or voice recognition (or handwriting recognition) for _entering_ information.
For _manipulating_ information, you have a lot more choices, but doing so efficiently depends heavily on the nature of the information being manupulated. If you're editing a video, the appropriate efficient interface is probably going to be vastly different from that of editing plain text. And there's always going to be a personal preference entering the equation (e.g. some prefer trackballs over mice, some prefer pen & tablet over either).
I don't want an interface that uses scent or taste, thanks.
There aren't a whole lot that come to mind, and I think that's the problem.
Somebody once said, though I can't remember the book, that a word processor did most of the same things it does now, twenty years ago, except that now we have rounded corners. The illustration is vague, but it serves to point out that there haven't been huge breakthroughs in the way we work, despite incredibly advanced technologies sitting on our doorstep. Whether this is good or bad, make your own call.
I, personally, think there are better solutions to things like top-screen menus, and file management. The number one question I get asked about in various levels of IT support is what damn function is in what damn menu. It's hard for many people to remember which functions belong to which menus, especially because we have so many menus that give no clue to the functions they hold -- e.g., File->Exit is a holdover from the days when you couldn't open more than one document. Similarly, Edit->Preferences is a good guess, except that most people associate Edit with file content, not program-level preferences, especially when there's often another menu under Tools for different options.
There's got to be a better way, said some guy, hopefully soon.
I always find it interesting that if we had taken any modern system back to 1985, the interface features that would be most ooed at would be the eyecandy, but not the productivity of the interface, since that's largely stayed the same. We still use a point and click interface for everything, and we still hold the contents of our programs in a computer-oriented interface, not a human-oriented interface -- the window. Clever solutions exist for rebottling some of these problems, e.g., scroll wheels on mice, different keyboards and input devices, and Expose, but it's still a situation that could be radically different. I'm just not sure how yet.
Many of the technologies we use now are no different than the ones created in the 1970s to solve these problems, but things have changed. An increasing number of novice users, handicapped users, etc., make many of these solutions a little too narrow. E.g., my mother, who is nearly blind and uses a screenreader, has pointed out many problems I would have never thought of as anything but accessibility issues, but they're not -- they're all interface design issues.
Now, I'm not suggesting that we talk to our computers tomorrow and then Hack Teh Gibson with our nintendo powergloves, but many of these interfaces are arcane. I'd like to see more seamless, fluid transition between programs, for example -- I should be able to use the text-editing features of Word when submitting a comment, or I should be able to insert Flash documents into my background art if I own Flash. More modular.
I'm just not sure how to do it yet.
I think with people gathering more data, and data warehousing coming to your house (pics/movies/music/etc). Being able to find your data is the next advance. This is why Microsoft is working on a new file system for longhorn and why Google released a desktop search engine.
:)
As for the GUI, I think its more autocomplete of processes, to reduce manual steps.
The biggest problem I see is forcing interactive moments on a busy user. Nothing is worse in the middle of typing a document and a popup window of some kind, flash in the tool tray until im ready.
And with people multitasking, I dont need a program to tell me its done in the middle of working on something else.
Displaying information while not forcing the user to interact is the next step. We are doing much more than before, multiple programs, multiple tasks, we need to curb the "In your face" attitude of the Gui.
While AI with interactive voice chat would be nice, unless its a virtual lawyer that can answer my questions or a hot stripper, I doubt I'm going to be using voice chat on a operational process.
Voice chat for games is another thing, when your busy, you cant stop to type, talking to the group saves time, and reaction time is quicker.
Of course these are my thoughts and views of current trends. Microsoft research and Cambridge labs are good places to check out. Cambridge ran the research lab that helped oversee VNC and other cool products, under Olivetti and then ATT Labs.
I think there is much more work todo in the modern desktop before we go onto new user input/output methods.
Top hottest things, tabs, info bars, task switching, searching, auto-complete, realtime filtering (spellcheck/etc), history of input, sharing of data with other hard (bluetooth/etc) are IMHO the current impressive new features. And if not new, just easier use or new methods of using the same procedures in a differnt way.
Too bad 2005 isnt going to see many new features, end of year with dual core, new gfx cards, the hardware to take advantage will launch 2006 for new features. But at least with SLI and faster CPUs, this year will be good for gaming until we get there.
Such as these. We have some here in the lab at school that I had a chance to play with, really interesting. Applications include training surgeons, 3D modelling, and no doubt many others.
Companies like SGI spend a lot of time and money working on visualization systems that allow for multiple people to be immersed in a synthetic 3D world. SGI's Reality Center wall room systems are quite impressive.
Aside from the listing in the original article there are a few more
Several posts have listed voice recognition and speech synthesis. This is great for the blind, disabled, or those of us with carpel tunnel and eye strain. Combined with translation software it can provide a great advantage to communications, and even has military applications. Google "Phraselator". Troops use it to translate a limited number of phrases into Arabic or whatever. Definitely a field where better software and more computing power could make a difference.
Gesture is another input interface where you don't need to be tied to a keyboard. The Sony Eye Toy is a crude version of this. Advances in machine vision are needed to move this foreword. Existing "VR glove" versions are unlikely to break into the main stream.
Biofeedback is an interesting case. The idea of manipulating a device just by "thinking" does have its appeal. The military has looked into this partially because a fighter jet already has too many buttons and switches.
Sound positioning is another one the military looked at for similar reasons. Games can already use surround sound to let you know that the monster is behind you.
3D displays have been worked on for a long time. Most still require goggles or have to be viewed from a specific angle. Electronics manufacturers develop systems for gamers and other consumers, universities want to model complex molecules in 3D.
Another immersive environment is being surrounded by screens. Look for articles on the CAVE virtual environment.
A heads up display (HUD) overlays computer data on the real world. The main down sides are that it tends to obstruct view and the wearable versions make you look like a dork.
The first is the haptic glove line from Immersion Corp. At my old office we had a Sensable Phantom, which was somewhat neat in a "that's completely useless" sort of way, but this one really excites me. If the market for these grew and the price came down, I think it would be a great breakthrough for games and other simulations in particular. Imagine playing Black & White with one of these!
The second is an entire new field, combining bioinformatics and computing closer than ever. Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) is a burgeoning field, with a lot of research being done at universities such as Duke. I'm sure you've all heard of things such as the rhesus monkey controlling a robot arm via neurosensors embedded in its brain, for instance. There are also less intrusive methods available utilising EEG, such as the headbands from IBVA, cheesy as they may be. Obviously, though, these latter technologies don't have the same potential quality as their intrusive counterports.
And a third I thought of while writing this is Nintendo. Really. Their DS system has a lot of innovative features, what with its built in touchpad and microphone, and lack of mouse and keyboard, which means "traditional" methods are out of the question. Who knows what they're planning with their Revolution system? If it's something in the same vein, I think it will be a great boon for HCI. Of course, some of these could turn out to be flukes, but simply having someone with the exposure and resources of Nintendo (and their third parties) so actively involved in experimental input methods is very exciting.
My Daddy came up with a good idea recently. Using one of those CyberGlove-type things, one could enter information into a computer using deaf-dumb sign language using a trained AI program. He says it would probably be faster than keyboard input. I'm working on it for my 5th Form science project..
garble
There's tax dollars well-spent asking Slashdot.