C-3PO and R2-D2 Are Not Different UX Philosophies

When discussing the future of robotic and artificial intelligent technology, C-3PO and R2-D2 are often used as an attempt to illustrate the choice between designing humanoid robots and non-humanoid robots.  However, these comparisons are often superficial and overlook the fact that C-3PO's humanoid design and R2-D2's non-humanoid design is very much tied to their function rather then arbitrary design decisions.

C-3PO exists as a translator or liaison between people, droids and maybe equipment of difference species and makes.  For example, he translated what Jabba the Hut said to Luke in Return of the Jedi and often translates R2-D2's beeps.  His knowledge of six million forms of communication means he is much better at this then a person could be in the same position and having a humanoid form ensures that there is no sacrifice in usability by using a droid.  If C-3PO looked like R2-D2 then the conversations would be more awkward as the addition of a droid would be much more obvious.

R2-D2 exists as a replacement for a humanoid engineer and thus he is essentially an intelligent toolbox. His design and unique non-humanoid features reflect and support this role including the ability to conduct maintenance with a variety of built in tools and the ability to do his job while rolling around on the hull of ship in space.  A versatile droid such as R2-D2 would be difficult to create if he looked like C-3PO.  In addition to the practical issues of putting R2-D2's features on a humanoid form consider the confusion that would happen in a frantic battle where crew members are getting blowing into space and a medical droid sees a humanoid form clinging to the side of a ship.

The reason that C-3PO looks humanoid while R2-D2 looks like a rolling toolbox is not arbitrary or due to superficial reasons such as friendliness. Their respective forms are required to provide the best user experience and ensure that they are each fulfilling their unique purpose.

Idea: How Smart Kitchens Should Work

Why would someone want to configure their blender for Wi-Fi?  Or upgrade the firmware of their toaster over? Or replace their perfectly working microwave because their refrigerator does not support it anymore? It is unlikely that someone would want to do these things but this seems to be  the direction where smart kitchen appliances are heading with the Internet of Things. 

For the "Internet of Things" many of these "things" are just low powered computers put in a device and then connected to the user's home network.  This means that they have the same basic needs as a computer, tablet, smartphone, etc. in that they need to be:

• Authenticated so they have a secure connection
• Able to protect themselves against malicious traffic
• Patched when flaws or vulnerabilities are discovered
• Upgraded to support new features

These are very important tasks but they are not something users like to think about and probably not something they want to do with their blender, toaster oven, microwave, etc..  Despite all the benefits of smart appliances one does not want to wait for their smoothie to blend because of an installing patch or have that new game on their tablet decide that their baked potato should be very, very well done. To solve this problem I suggest the creating a smart kitchen instead.

Rather then having each appliance on the home network individually, have only a dedicated computer in the kitchen on that network.  This computer could then treat the other appliances like a private network and would be the only interface between them and devices on the other network.  It alone would need to be configured and would also have a firewall just like a regular computer in addition to managing all the patching to ensure that the kitchen operates smoothly. 

A critical benefit is also that the computer can be the primary point of interaction.  Therefore, when cooking a roast when the user opens up the their recipe the oven would preheat, the timers would automatically be set and anything else they need would be configured and ready to go.  Also as it is a standard computer it would be possible to install new kitchen applications to increase functionality as well as browsing the Internet, using email, etc. when additional information is needed.

The main hurtle is that standards need to be established to ensure compatibility among vendors but I imagine that would be easier convincing people to enter a WPA2 password on their blender, toaster oven, microwave, etc..

Texting Smartphone Assistants Works Better

Have you ever walked into a dark room and said "Computer: Lights" to yourself? One of the most iconic parts of Star Trek, as well as other sci-fi, is the characters verbally issuing commands to their computer/robot/android then listening to their response.  However, on the bridge of the Enterprise the viewer rarely saw the crew talking with the computer but rather busily typing commands into their stations.  This is easy to understand as it would be hard for the captain to command the ship or talk to someone through the view screen if he was surrounded by people talking to the computer, much like the experience one would have on a train if everyone around them was asking questions to their smartphones.

This was a problem that quickly developed with cell phones as people becoming annoyed when someone in earshot was talking on their phone.  It has become its own category of bad behavior and has caused cell phone use to be discouraged or banned in certain situations.  In addition, multiple people attempting to talk on the phone together is also disruptive, either to the other callers and to the conversation in general. To solve this people turning to a more private, silent form of communication that still involves words: text messaging.

In addition to the ability to conduct private conversations in public, communicating with written text allows for greater accuracy and a record of what was said.  If someone want to know an address it is much better to be able to repeatedly refer to the original text message then to hear it once or maybe refer to something that had to be transcribed from what the recipient thinks they heard.  This is especially true if there is background noise or they are in a crowd, something that is common when using a smartphone.

Despite the fact that the assistants are responding to commands that can be easily written, many insist or promote the user having to speak the command.  In a restaurant why does someone have to choose between speaking "Add an appointment tomorrow at two PM" and possibly disturbing the other customers or manually entering the appointment?  They should be able to text the assistant the same command, much like they would with a human assistant and have the task completed with any responses texted back.

While it may not be as iconic or fun as saying "Computer: What is my location?", the ability to text "What is my location" to a smartphone assistant is far more useful since it integrates much better into the user's daily life.

The Future of eCommerce

Today shopping on the Internet is essentially the same as shopping with a catalog in that you are simply seeing lists of items with descriptions.  As you shop you add items you want to a "shopping cart" that is essentially just a product list and when you are ready to place the order you fill in your contact and billing information on a form.  While doing this on a website is much more easier and accurate  than using older methods of ordering, such as the telephone, I think that new technologies have the potential to make this a much better experience. Specifically, virtual reality devices like the Microsoft HoloLens could radically change  the online shopping experience and perhaps even bring relief to failing "brick and mortar" stores.

Imagine this scenario: a person wants go shopping online at a technology store that also exists as a brick and mortar chain.  Rather then head to a web browser, they launch their favorite shopping application that works with their virtual reality headset.  They put on the headset and they are standing in front of a virtual simulation of the physical location where they normally go.  After walking through the door a cart is automatically provided and they start their shopping trip by walking around the store.

When they get to a product they are considering, they reach for it and a virtual version of the box appears floating in front of the its peers on the shelf.  After grabbing the floating product, they start examining it, flipping it over to reading the back. They decide to buy this item so they place the product in their cart.  They repeat this with another product but after deciding not to buy it they place the box near the shelf where it was floating and let go.

As they finish their shopping trip and are ready to complete the purchase of their items, they head for the checkout counter.  When they arrive the cart disappears, its contents tallied, and the customer is    prompted for their billing information. After providing it, as well as a shipping address, they receive a receipt and shipping information so they know when their order will be delivered.  They then walk through the exit door and back to the virtual street or virtual mall.

On another visit, as the inventory on the virtual shelves is the same as that stores physical shelves, they remember they really need ink and it looks like the store going to run out again as they were out of luck last time they needed ink.  They are also enthusiastic to look at the new monitors more closely so they decide to take the time to head down to the physical location.  While they have only visited it a handful of times, their hundreds of visits online mean they know the location of every product with their eyes closed.

Is this possible today? There are already technologies available to do the sensing and virtual reality display in addition to screen based first person virtual reality that is as old as first person games.  Moreover, there could be different ways of presenting the virtual store that is familiar to the layout but more efficient then a full simulation, such as an interactive map.  Technology is causing the physical world and the virtual world to move closer and stores will need to respond to ensure customers have the best shopping experience.

Usability: Red/Green Elevator Up/Down Lights Do Not Make Sense

The traffic light is so common is our society that when red and green are paired it is usually so red means stop and green means go or start.  For example, the new SkyTrain cars use green for the stops that the train will stop at to let passengers get on and off before it continues and it uses red to denote the terminus stop where everyone should leave the train.

I noticed that elevators, another transportation device, also uses the red/green scheme but has confusedly redefined the meaning to a point that it might be better if they were both the same colour.  They denote up with a green arrow and down with a red one despite neither direction having to do with starting or stopping.  Depending on the purpose the building the elevator is in, at best one could think of it as going out and then later stopping your outing when you return.  However, in that case, the colours should be reversed.

A more logical and accessible colouring would be blue for up and green/grey for down. That way the passenger could at a quick glance see it they going toward the sky and or going toward the grassy/concrete ground.