PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

36
EPFL, spring 2012 – week 8 mobile i/o

description

 

Transcript of PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

Page 1: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

EPFL, spring 2012 – week 8!mobile i/o

Page 2: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

overview

➝  types of mobile device ➝  design challenges ➝  in: text entry ➝  in: overcoming finger occlusion ➝  in: movement ➝  out: overviews ➝  out: off-screen visualizations ➝  out: audio & haptic output

✱this lecture is based on Will Seager’s (UCL) lecture of mobile systems

Page 3: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

handhelds: three broad categories

Page 4: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

why touchscreens?

➝  larger screens for video, maps, websites, documents etc

➝  easier to point

Page 5: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

finger vs stylus

advantages of finger… ➝  can’t lose stylus ➝  fast response to alerts e.g.

phone calls ➝  one-handed operation

disadvantages… ➝  low pointing accuracy ➝  finger occlusion ➝  dirty screen

Page 6: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

design challenge: screen space

Page 7: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

design challenge: context

Page 8: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

in: text entry

➝  > 1 billion text messages sent per day ➝  most common type of mobile interaction ➝  companies are looking for improvements to mobile text

entry methods ➝  many methods currently exist

Page 9: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

Text entry research timeline

Mackenzie 2008

Page 10: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

three broad categories

Physical Virtual Keyboards

key-based finger-based stylus-based

Page 11: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

physical vs virtual keyboards

➝  physical keyboards ➝  mobile phone keypad, mobile qwerty (e.g. Blackberry), 5 button

pager, 3-key date stamp, 1 key input etc

➝  virtual keyboards ➝  aka “soft keyboards” or “on-screen keyboards” ➝  similar to clicking buttons in a GUI ➝  used with a stylus or a finger (but also with other input mechanisms

e.g. eye tracking)

➝  design issues ➝  number of keys, key layout, key size, key shape, activation force,

feedback, disambiguation, language modelling, word prediction etc

Page 12: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

number of keys & layout

➝  both physical & virtual keyboards vary in number of keys & layouts

➝  for mobile text input, 26 key qwerty & 9/12 key ABC are by far the most common

➝  other 26-key layout variations include Opti, Dvorak & Fitaly

➝  other 9/12 key variations include 9/12 key qwerty

QWERTY

MOBILE

Page 13: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

number of keys & layout

➝  other layouts have been shown to lead to better performance BUT familiarity a crucial factor

opti outperforms qwerty (faster, fewer errors) after a few hours practice

QWERTY

OPTI

Page 14: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

number of keys continuum

more less ambiguity continuum

Page 15: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

ambiguity

➝  ambiguity occurs if there are fewer keys than symbols in the language => disambiguation is needed to select the intended word from the possibilities.

➝  disambiguation methods include multi-tap and T9

or, is it SUMMER, is it STONES ?

7 PQRS

8 TUV

6 MNO

6 MNO

3 DEF

7 PQRS

?

Page 16: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

virtual keyboards

stylus methods ➝  tapping on virtual

keyboards ➝  handwriting recognition

finger methods ➝  tapping on virtual

keyboards

new method for stylus & finger

➝  sliding stylus/finger across the screen

SWYPE

Page 17: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

virtual keyboards: feedback

➝  performance with virtual keyboards improves with vibro-tactile feedback

➝  visual and audio feedback may also be useful

Page 18: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

➝  finger/thumb occludes ➝  lower precision when

pointing

Page 19: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

offset cursor

Page 20: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

“shift” target selection technique

➝  “shift” – a technique for enabling fine cursor pointing using fingers

Page 21: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

“escape” target selection technique

a)  the user presses his/her thumb near the desired target b)  the gestures in the direction indicated by the target c)  the target is selected, despite several nearby distractors.

Page 22: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

behind touch

Page 23: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

pseudo transparency

Page 24: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

tilting

(Rekimoto uist 96)

Page 25: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

“chameleon”

(Fitzmaurice 1993)

Page 26: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

peephole display

(Yee 2003)

Page 27: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

camera phone based motion sensing

(Whang, Zhai & Canny 2006)

Page 28: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

viewing large documents on small displays

Page 29: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

overviews

(O’Hara et al 1999) (Woobrock et al 2002)

Page 30: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

off-screen visualizations: edge radar

Page 31: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

off-screen visualizations

(Baudisch & Rosenholtz 2003 Gustafson et al 2008)

Page 32: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

audio & haptic output

➝  non speech audio output ➝  bleeps, earcons,

auditory icons

➝  haptics ➝  refers to interaction

via sense of touch and/or motor activity.

Example earcons from (Brewster et al 2008)

Page 33: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

why use audio and/or haptic output?

➝  attention grabbing ➝  saves screen real

estate ➝  can provide

information without requiring visual attention

Page 34: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

earpod

Page 35: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

head-mounted displays

➝  user can look at environment & display at the same time

➝  potentially good for location based and augmented reality servies as potential for clear link between information & the environment

but… ➝  require separate input device

e.g. trackball or else speech only input

Page 36: PxS’12 - week 8 - mobile i/o

summary: some key points

➝  Key design challenges: small screens & context ➝  mobile text entry research ongoing, in particular for

finger-based input via touch screens ➝  movement as input ➝  importance of overviews when browsing documents on

small screens ➝  off-screen visualizations ➝  audio & haptic output is a way to reduce demand on

visual attention