Back to the Outline.

Information Appliances:
the foreseeable convergence of computing and communications
Michael J. Osofsky

Introduction:

Computers, telephones, and televisions are taking on new roles which seem to blur the divisions which make them computers, telephones, and televisions. Today you can use your computer to communicate by email the way that you used to communicate by telephone. On the other hand, you can now use your telephone to access information that would have been traditionally accessed via database calls on a computer terminal.

The same breakdown between the division of computer and television is occurring. A computer is traditionally a computing device, but it is now providing entertainment akin to soap operas. For example, The Spot (http://www.thespot.com) features an on-going dialogue of characters who live together in a single house, but this concept was pioneered by MTV with its The Real World. Television is also breaching into the realm of computing with the advent of WebTV.

Given that the traditional roles of computer, telephone, and television are merging, we look at the likely form of these technologies given the pressures of Human Factors. In other words, how will Human Factors tend to favor one direction of convergence over another? For example, with the convergence of telephone and computer functionality, do Human Factors prefer a telephone that adopts the computing power of a computer, or do Human Factors prefer a computer that takes on the capabilities of a telephone? A likely scenario is that both approaches succeed, but to what extent and in what way? We address these questions of Human Factors about the computer/telephone convergence and computer/television convergence.

Computer/Telephone Convergence:

To begin with, we clarify the traditional distinction between the telephone and the computer. Traditionally, the telephone was used for communication between people. The computer was traditionally used to compute and store data. In recent years we have seen convergence of roles with technology such as IVR (Interactive Voice Response) applications (computing via communication), and email (communications via computing).

The likely scenario is that all of the technologies will survive to some extent, because they are already very popular. Our Human Factors analysis will look at each technology and explain how it causes less strain on users because of the way it addresses human limitations. Under each technology is a list of human factors which this technology seems to address particularly well as compared to alternative methods. These are not complete lists.

IVR: Telephone for computing:

Humans Make Errors - An IVR application has input via voice and numeric keys, because a traditional telephone handset is the input device. The same application on a computer terminal would have many more options which may or may not be relevant. This leaves less opportunity for error.
Humans Tend to Get Distracted- An IVR application typically only present a very small number of choices to a user at one time. Also, the system always tells the user exactly what s/he should do to proceed to the next step. In a computer screen environment, it is not quite as easy to capture the attention of the user to tell him/her what to do.
Humans Are Not Stationary - A traditional computer is bulky-even as a laptop-and is not conducive to frequent on-the-go use. An IVR application, on the other hand is accessible from any telephone. Therefore, IVR does not confine a user to a fixed location.

Email: Computer for communication:

Humans Are Not Stationary - Email provides a mode of communication that allows a user to move about in the same way that voicemail does. This is because messages are stored and viewed at the user's leisure. A traditional telephone (with out voicemail) tied users a leash long enough for the user to hear the device ringing.
Humans Have Trouble Communicating - Email forces writers to think about their communication more than voice telephone calls or voicemail. This allows users to communicate their ideas with more thought and care. The end result is better communication.
Humans Have Limited Memory - Since email can be stored, sorted, and searched, exact details do not need to be memorized. Occasionally an important fact may need to be memorized, but in many cases, the documented nature of email allows us to gloss over details, instead forming an intuitive feeling for them rather than exact knowledge. This tends to work within the capabilities of Human Memory which is limited.

Computer/Television Convergence:

Before proceeding, we clarify the traditional distinction between the computer and the television. Traditionally, the computer was for computing, and the television was for broadcasting. Broadcasting is a blanket term for the entertainment and information that was traditionally provided by the television. It is much less clear with computer/television convergence as it was with computer/telephone convergence whether both the computer-television and the television-computer will be a long-time survivors. In particular it is questionable whether the television-computer (WebTV) will survive. We will attempt to identify successes and failures of each method by looking at how Human Factors are addressed. We made use of an interesting analysis of the WebTV from a design perspective, please refer to it if interested. The site is Alertbox (http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9702a.html)

WWW: Computer for Broadcast

Humans Resist Change - There is a serious lack in multimedia when the WWW is used for broadcasting in the same way that television does. This is largely due to the technical barriers to providing it. Users of the television as well acquainted with moving pictures and live sound, so there is resistance to change when the quality of service is degraded.
Humans Can't Deal With Complexity - In some ways the WWW attempts to solve the problem of too much information by allowing users to search for the information they need. Traditional television cannot filter complexity in this way. However, the current state of the web cannot eliminate this complexity either. Thus we see new developments such as Pointcast which serves content like a TV, but filtered content so there is less complexity.
Users Are All Different - The WWW really scores a plus with accounting for the fact that users are all different. It provides much more variety than television, and again because of services like search and push (e.g. the Pointcast model), users can select from a more diverse array of content.

WebTV: Television for Computing

Humans Are Impatient - Our source compared using WebTV's remote control this way: "My best description of the experience of browsing the Web with cursor keys is that it feels very much like using DOS or one of the old IBM 3270 terminals. Instead of saying "this is where I want to point", the user has to say "OK, to get over here, I first do UP, UP, and then LEFT, LEFT". In other words, instead of being a single action, pointing turns into a sequence of actions that have to be planned and monitored with a much larger degree of cognitive load than when using a mouse." We can say that because users are impatient, this is a bad design.
Vision Problems - Apparently the WebTV made by Sony has a keyboard with many tiny, hard to find keys. This is a definite no-no for markets such as grandparents with poor eyesight.
Humans Need Analogies - One thing the WebTV does pretty well is provide novice users with simple analogies that help to quickly get them up to speed on WebTV concepts. For example, when a site is loading, a message says that the "Publisher is being contacted" rather than explaining steps of the DNS protocol. Our source mentions that this is a good and a bad thing. These analogies are good, because they help the novice user understand the system quickly. However, it is bad, because it introduces new language which serves to separate generations of users (those who started surfing on the PC and those that started with the WebTV). These groups will have difficulty communicating about the web. A critical missing element in the WebTV is URLs. WebTV attempts to abstract URLs. This is good for novice users, but how will I be able to tell my Grandma where to find my cool web page?

Back to the Outline.