Went through an interesting paper about ubiquitous computing. “Charting Past, Present and Future research in Ubiquitous Computing” is the paper called. The paper focuses and discusses 3 different themes surrounding the Ubiquitous field. Natural interfaces, context-aware and automated capture/record of experiences.
With natural interfaces traditional way of interaction with ubiquitous systems are being challenged. Challenged in a way that the user can communicate more efficiently and naturally with the system. Natural actions are already present when humans communicate, its just a matter if interpreting those actions and implementing them. Breaking the traditional mouse and keyboard as a means to send input, is that natural communication (handwriting, speech and gestures) is praised for their learn-ability and ease of use. Since it comprehends the natural abilities pf how people communicate, several different groups are being included in the first hand development rather than being developed for after initial success have been reached. Disabled people and similar groups of people that have problems using traditional input devices can benefit from natural interfaces.
The authors argues that speech-related interfaces and the emerging area of perceptual interfaces has been in the works for quite some time and are indirectly driven by research within the field of computer vision and computational perception. “Pen computing” has also seen new resurgence in the portable device since it’s initial release days as PDA. It is now more commonly found in the form of a tablet. The development seems to be driven in a more complex way than before, hardware really isn’t the limiting factor anymore.
The article goes swiftly through natural data types and how it has to become the pinnacle of interactive system development as well as error-prone interaction. Basically, achieving a perfect error recognition is impossible. It is being explained rather brief in order to leave more space to discuss about context and context aware computing. Here context is becoming increasingly complex issue, Context are not just position and identity but a myriad of identifiable “information-areas” within the field of context. The point of driving a more complex context recognition is to enhance the interaction in a more deeper and meaningful way for the user.
Where that leaves us as designer is in a exciting position, where tools and information are readily available. And now more then ever is the technology cheap enough that we think: “why not?”. Still there is some challenges left to solve as presented in the article, but if we put that aside. The power that IoT is presenting is more possibilities than limitations. It is almost that it is tempting and worth to start thinking the other way around when we design. How might we incorporate connectivity into a design idea? How do we create user value around this theme that is inevitable? A lot of exciting technology is being developed in this area and I can only imagine that we will get closer to a more natural way of interacting with devices and software.
Regarding the project 2 work, it’s going slowly. Members being sick on and off has proven it a bit hard to cooperate and in the midst of the corona outbreak makes it even harder to meet up. There is always a balancing act between taking the risk or playing it safe. We are going to try to meet up in the week and produce some good material. So far we have gotten feedback from crit-session 3. Feedback was good although our prototyping progress could have been more developed. The aim is to finalize some loose ends during the coming week and start to “build” in the workshop.
Micro blogg 