Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Learning a new UI

Expand Messages
  • Tobias Mayer
    A few months ago I read a posting on this list which expressed something to the effect of (and I paraphrase as I cannot find the reference): good UI design is
    Message 1 of 17 , Dec 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      A few months ago I read a posting on this list which expressed something to the effect of (and I paraphrase as I cannot find the reference):  good UI design is not necessarily instantly intuitive. Users need to be taught a new UI; the trick is to teach them only once.  On second and subsequent uses the UI should be intuitive.
       
      Does anyone remember that thread, or perhaps have any comment to make on that concept now?  Much obliged.
       
      Tobias
       
    • Jon Meads
      A good quote I once heard was that The only thing that is intuitive is a mother s nipple, everything else is learned. When someone talks about an intuitive
      Message 2 of 17 , Dec 3, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        A good quote I once heard was that "The only thing that is intuitive is a mother's nipple, everything else is learned."  When someone talks about an intuitive UI, they are talking about a UI that matches the user's previous expereinces so well that it is easily and quickly recognizable in terms of affordance and navigation. And, understanding what they would be means understanding the users very well -- which means taking the time to identify who the users are and study them.
         
        Cheers,
        jon


        From: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com [mailto:agile-usability@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tobias Mayer
        Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 7:36 AM
        To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [agile-usability] Learning a new UI

        A few months ago I read a posting on this list which expressed something to the effect of (and I paraphrase as I cannot find the reference):  good UI design is not necessarily instantly intuitive. Users need to be taught a new UI; the trick is to teach them only once.  On second and subsequent uses the UI should be intuitive.
         
        Does anyone remember that thread, or perhaps have any comment to make on that concept now?  Much obliged.
         
        Tobias
         
      • Tobias Mayer
        ... But if you base your designs on this alone, is there not a danger that you may just perpetuating existing second-rate design? Just because we all know
        Message 3 of 17 , Dec 3, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          > a UI that matches the user's previous expereinces so well that it is easily and quickly recognizable...
           
          But if you base your designs on this alone, is there not a danger that you may just perpetuating existing second-rate design?  Just because we all know something, and do it, doesn't mean there may not be a better way, wouldn't you agree?
           
          Perhaps I can rephrase my question as:
          To what extent should we "educate" users in terms of new UI design, and to what extent should we resort to common practice (regardless of its effectiveness)?
           
          And then, if we need to educate, should that be via a user manual (who reads them?) built-in, context-sensitive (e.g. popup) help, or some other method?
           
          Tobias


          Jon Meads <jon.meads@...> wrote:
          A good quote I once heard was that "The only thing that is intuitive is a mother's nipple, everything else is learned."  When someone talks about an intuitive UI, they are talking about a UI that matches the user's previous expereinces so well that it is easily and quickly recognizable in terms of affordance and navigation. And, understanding what they would be means understanding the users very well -- which means taking the time to identify who the users are and study them.
           
          Cheers,
          jon


          From: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com [mailto:agile-usability@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tobias Mayer
          Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 7:36 AM
          To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [agile-usability] Learning a new UI

          A few months ago I read a posting on this list which expressed something to the effect of (and I paraphrase as I cannot find the reference):  good UI design is not necessarily instantly intuitive. Users need to be taught a new UI; the trick is to teach them only once.  On second and subsequent uses the UI should be intuitive.
           
          Does anyone remember that thread, or perhaps have any comment to make on that concept now?  Much obliged.
           
          Tobias
           

        • Dave Churchville
          Comments inline... ... is easily and quickly recognizable... ... that you may just perpetuating existing second-rate design? Just because we all know
          Message 4 of 17 , Dec 3, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Comments inline...

            --- In agile-usability@yahoogroups.com, Tobias Mayer <tobyanon@y...>
            wrote:
            >
            > > a UI that matches the user's previous expereinces so well that it
            is easily and quickly recognizable...
            >
            > But if you base your designs on this alone, is there not a danger
            that you may just perpetuating existing second-rate design? Just
            because we all know something, and do it, doesn't mean there may not
            be a better way, wouldn't you agree?


            Yes, this is true, of course, but it's really of question of what
            problem you're trying to solve. Do you want your users to be able to
            *learn* the software quickly, or just to be able to use the software
            after a sufficient period?

            For example, it might be great to have a UI that when you drag an item
            into a folder, it creates a copy of that item. But Windows
            conventions have taught most users that dragging to a folder is a
            "Move" command. It doesn't make you wrong, and it might actually be
            the best approach, but you still shouldn't do it if you're concerned
            about learnability.

            Even worse, you have an uphill battle convincing anyone that your
            approach is "better", because people need to use multiple pieces of
            software, and so would prefer them to all work as similarly as
            possible, right or wrong. That's what makes them happy, not each
            product doing it in a "better" way.

            > Perhaps I can rephrase my question as:
            > To what extent should we "educate" users in terms of new UI
            design, and to what extent should we resort to common practice
            (regardless of its effectiveness)?
            >
            > And then, if we need to educate, should that be via a user manual
            (who reads them?) built-in, context-sensitive (e.g. popup) help, or
            some other method?

            Just make it work like they expect, no amount of help can compensate
            for violating that principle. Of course, that's easier said than done ;)

            As with all things, your mileage may vary.

            --Dave

            -----------------------------------
            Dave Churchville
            http://www.extremeplanner.com
            Agile Project Management Made Easy
          • Jon Meads
            There are a number of issues in deciding how to design a UI. Dave is correct -- sometimes it makes sense to try and stick with current user knowledge/behavior
            Message 5 of 17 , Dec 3, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              There are a number of issues in deciding how to design a UI. Dave is correct
              -- sometimes it makes sense to try and stick with current user
              knowledge/behavior and sometimes it makes sense to require a change. Usually
              it comes down to a cost/benefit ratio. There are costs in making changes and
              costs in staying as is. This is one reason why usability engineers often
              look towards having usability objectives and goals specified as part of the
              project charter.

              Cheers,
              jon

              -----Original Message-----
              From: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
              [mailto:agile-usability@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dave Churchville
              Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 10:42 AM
              To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [agile-usability] Re: Learning a new UI

              Comments inline...

              --- In agile-usability@yahoogroups.com, Tobias Mayer <tobyanon@y...>
              wrote:
              >
              > > a UI that matches the user's previous expereinces so well that it
              is easily and quickly recognizable...
              >
              > But if you base your designs on this alone, is there not a danger
              that you may just perpetuating existing second-rate design? Just because we
              all know something, and do it, doesn't mean there may not be a better way,
              wouldn't you agree?


              Yes, this is true, of course, but it's really of question of what problem
              you're trying to solve. Do you want your users to be able to
              *learn* the software quickly, or just to be able to use the software after a
              sufficient period?

              For example, it might be great to have a UI that when you drag an item into
              a folder, it creates a copy of that item. But Windows conventions have
              taught most users that dragging to a folder is a "Move" command. It doesn't
              make you wrong, and it might actually be the best approach, but you still
              shouldn't do it if you're concerned about learnability.

              Even worse, you have an uphill battle convincing anyone that your approach
              is "better", because people need to use multiple pieces of software, and so
              would prefer them to all work as similarly as possible, right or wrong.
              That's what makes them happy, not each product doing it in a "better" way.

              > Perhaps I can rephrase my question as:
              > To what extent should we "educate" users in terms of new UI
              design, and to what extent should we resort to common practice (regardless
              of its effectiveness)?
              >
              > And then, if we need to educate, should that be via a user manual
              (who reads them?) built-in, context-sensitive (e.g. popup) help, or some
              other method?

              Just make it work like they expect, no amount of help can compensate for
              violating that principle. Of course, that's easier said than done ;)

              As with all things, your mileage may vary.

              --Dave

              -----------------------------------
              Dave Churchville
              http://www.extremeplanner.com
              Agile Project Management Made Easy







              Yahoo! Groups Links
            • Larry Constantine
              ... A few months ago I read a posting on this list which expressed something to the effect of (and I paraphrase as I cannot find the reference): good UI
              Message 6 of 17 , Dec 3, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Tobias wrote:

                -----
                A few months ago I read a posting on this list which expressed something to
                the effect of (and I paraphrase as I cannot find the reference): good UI
                design is not necessarily instantly intuitive. Users need to be taught a new
                UI; the trick is to teach them only once. On second and subsequent uses the
                UI should be intuitive.

                Does anyone remember that thread, or perhaps have any comment to make on
                that concept now? Much obliged.
                -----

                Don't know the thread but what it is referring to is known as instructive
                interaction. So-called single-trial learning can be exploited to make novel
                UI designs self-teaching so user mastery is effectively immediate. The
                details of the anticipatory-learning model and the techniques of instructive
                interaction were explained in a 2002 paper in User Experience, 1(3). Send me
                an email off-list and I’ll forward a .PDF copy.

                The elevator-speech condensation is that the user must recognize novel
                elements as such, actively engage in anticipating (guessing) behavior, and
                immediately try out and confirm the anticipation. The result is stable
                persistent learning without further practice.

                --Larry Constantine, IDSA

                ________________________________________
                From: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                [mailto:agile-usability@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tobias Mayer
                Sent: Saturday, 03 December 2005 10:36 AM
                To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [agile-usability] Learning a new UI

                A few months ago I read a posting on this list which expressed something to
                the effect of (and I paraphrase as I cannot find the reference):  good UI
                design is not necessarily instantly intuitive. Users need to be taught a new
                UI; the trick is to teach them only once.  On second and subsequent uses the
                UI should be intuitive.
                 
                Does anyone remember that thread, or perhaps have any comment to make on
                that concept now?  Much obliged.
                 
                Tobias
                 

                SPONSORED LINKS
                Usability testing
                Usability
                Agile software development
                Agile development



                ________________________________________
                YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

                •  Visit your group "agile-usability" on the web.
                 
                •  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                 agile-usability-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                 
                •  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

                ________________________________________
              • Randy MacDonald
                ... This, I believe, was the rationale for the Dvorak keyboard, which probably means the issues aren t that simple. ... BSc(Math) UNBF 83 Sapere Aude |
                Message 7 of 17 , Dec 4, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  > But if you base your designs on this alone, is there not a danger that
                  you may just
                  > perpetuating existing second-rate design?  Just because
                  we all know something,
                  > and do it, doesn't mean there may not be a better way, wouldn't
                  you agree?
                   
                  This, I believe, was the rationale for the Dvorak keyboard, which probably means the issues aren't that simple.
                  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                  |\/| Randy A MacDonald             | you can't pay for it,
                  |/\| ramacd@...            |       even if you want to.
                  BSc(Math) UNBF'83 Sapere Aude      | APL: If you can say it, it's done..
                  Natural Born APL'er                | Demo website: http://142.166.105.166/
                  ----------------------------------------------------(INTP)----{ gnat }--
                • Jim Kauffman
                  ... Several years ago I helped design a computerized version of a nation-wide academic test. We were tasked to deliberately design a UI that was unlike Windows
                  Message 8 of 17 , Dec 4, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > -----Original Message-----
                    > From: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                    > [mailto:agile-usability@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Larry
                    > Constantine
                    > Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 4:00 PM
                    > To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                    > Subject: RE: [agile-usability] Learning a new UI
                    >
                    > The elevator-speech condensation is that the user must
                    > recognize novel elements as such, actively engage in
                    > anticipating (guessing) behavior, and immediately try out and
                    > confirm the anticipation. The result is stable persistent
                    > learning without further practice.

                    Several years ago I helped design a computerized version of a nation-wide
                    academic test. We were tasked to deliberately design a UI that was unlike
                    Windows or the Mac UI, to avoid giving an advantage to participants who were
                    computer-proficient. The test began with a sample session with an integrated
                    tutorial, which gave extra assistance to users who were struggling to complete
                    the sample tasks. The tutorial was mastery-based, so users could not go on to
                    the test itself until they had demonstrated an acceptable mastery of the UI.


                    Jim K.
                  • shel kimen
                    ... Mac UI That s fascinating. What happened with the test? Did you ever get any post-test feedback? ./s
                    Message 9 of 17 , Dec 4, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment

                      >>We were tasked to deliberately design a UI that was unlike Windows or the Mac UI

                       

                      That’s fascinating. What happened with the test? Did you ever get any post-test feedback?

                       

                      ./s

                    • Larry Constantine
                      ... were ... integrated ... complete ... to ... UI. Intriguing technique. It reminds me of an issue in testing novel designs. A team I have been working with
                      Message 10 of 17 , Dec 4, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Jim wrote:

                        > Several years ago I helped design a computerized version of a nation-wide
                        > academic test. We were tasked to deliberately design a UI that was unlike
                        > Windows or the Mac UI, to avoid giving an advantage to participants who
                        were
                        > computer-proficient. The test began with a sample session with an
                        integrated
                        > tutorial, which gave extra assistance to users who were struggling to
                        complete
                        > the sample tasks. The tutorial was mastery-based, so users could not go on
                        to
                        > the test itself until they had demonstrated an acceptable mastery of the
                        UI.

                        Intriguing technique. It reminds me of an issue in testing novel designs. A
                        team I have been working with devised some very novel and potentially highly
                        efficient new interaction techniques for a production environment. No claim
                        to intuitability is being made; the primary design driver is user efficiency
                        and reliable interaction. The only way to reasonably test such features for
                        usability is to pre-train users with the basic technique (keeping track of
                        how much it takes to gain a certain proficiency) before testing in context.

                        --Larry Constantine, IDSA
                        > -----Original Message-----
                        > From: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                        [mailto:agile-usability@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                        > Of Jim Kauffman
                        > Sent: Sunday, 04 December 2005 9:11 AM
                        > To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                        > Subject: RE: [agile-usability] Learning a new UI
                        >
                        > > -----Original Message-----
                        > > From: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                        > > [mailto:agile-usability@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Larry
                        > > Constantine
                        > > Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 4:00 PM
                        > > To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                        > > Subject: RE: [agile-usability] Learning a new UI
                        > >
                        > > The elevator-speech condensation is that the user must
                        > > recognize novel elements as such, actively engage in
                        > > anticipating (guessing) behavior, and immediately try out and
                        > > confirm the anticipation. The result is stable persistent
                        > > learning without further practice.
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Jim K.
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                      • Larry Constantine
                        Randy wrote: ... may just ... something, ... This, I believe, was the rationale for the Dvorak keyboard, which probably means the issues aren t that simple.
                        Message 11 of 17 , Dec 4, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Randy wrote:
                          =====
                          > But if you base your designs on this alone, is there not a danger that you
                          may just
                          > perpetuating existing second-rate design? Just because we all know
                          something,
                          > and do it, doesn't mean there may not be a better way, wouldn't you agree?

                          This, I believe, was the rationale for the Dvorak keyboard, which probably
                          means the issues aren't that simple.
                          =====

                          Yes, well the Dvorak keyboard story so often cited is instructive in this
                          regard. The Dvorak keyboard layout is indeed more efficient in the hands of
                          a fully-trained user, but for most accomplished QWERTY typists, the very
                          modest gain is not worth the massive hours of retraining to get back up to
                          where they were. (As a 35 wpm hunt-and-peck typist in my 30s, I decided to
                          learn touch typing. It took nearly 6 months for me to get up to the same
                          speed without peeking.) Dvorak users also report difficulty when confronted
                          with a QWERTY layout, which is far more common.

                          The lesson is that we must always look at the big-picture systems
                          implications, not just raw efficiency or instantaneous intuitability. My
                          view as a designer is that non-standard designs need to be a LOT better AND
                          easily learned to justify departing from well established convention,
                          particularly where users have invested heavily in learning the old way.

                          --Larry Constantine, IDSA
                        • Jim Kauffman
                          No, we weren t given any feedback, but the high school students who tried the UI rated it easy to learn and use . One out of ten participants had some trouble
                          Message 12 of 17 , Dec 4, 2005
                          • 0 Attachment
                            No, we weren't given any feedback, but the high school students who tried the UI rated it "easy to learn and use". One out of ten participants had some trouble with it, but she had never used a computer or played a video game. Unfortunately, her verdict was "it's easy to use--I'm just stupid."
                             
                            Jim K.


                            From: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com [mailto:agile-usability@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of shel kimen
                            Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 9:34 AM
                            To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                            Subject: RE: [agile-usability] Learning a new UI

                            >>We were tasked to deliberately design a UI that was unlike Windows or the Mac UI

                             

                            That’s fascinating. What happened with the test? Did you ever get any post-test feedback?

                             

                          • shel kimen
                            ... Ouch. I mean, really. Makes me so sad. Anyway, thanks for the story. ./s
                            Message 13 of 17 , Dec 4, 2005
                            • 0 Attachment

                              >>Unfortunately, her verdict was "it's easy to use--I'm just stupid."

                               

                              Ouch. I mean, really. Makes me so sad. Anyway, thanks for the story. ./s

                               

                               

                            • Jeff Patton
                              ... that you ... know ... you agree? ... probably ... in this ... hands of ... very ... back up to ... This seems similar in direction to an article in UX
                              Message 14 of 17 , Dec 7, 2005
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In agile-usability@yahoogroups.com, "Larry Constantine"
                                <lconstantine@f...> wrote:
                                >
                                > Randy wrote:
                                > =====
                                > > But if you base your designs on this alone, is there not a danger
                                that you
                                > may just
                                > > perpetuating existing second-rate design? Just because we all
                                know
                                > something,
                                > > and do it, doesn't mean there may not be a better way, wouldn't
                                you agree?
                                >
                                > This, I believe, was the rationale for the Dvorak keyboard, which
                                probably
                                > means the issues aren't that simple.
                                > =====
                                >
                                > Yes, well the Dvorak keyboard story so often cited is instructive
                                in this
                                > regard. The Dvorak keyboard layout is indeed more efficient in the
                                hands of
                                > a fully-trained user, but for most accomplished QWERTY typists, the
                                very
                                > modest gain is not worth the massive hours of retraining to get
                                back up to
                                > where they were.....

                                This seems similar in direction to an article in UX magazine [volume
                                4, issue 4] I just received. The article was on "how financial
                                markets value user experience" and explained a simple model for
                                change adoption. Change liklihood = f(crisis vs. perceived pain of
                                adoption).

                                It's not /exactly/ the same thing - but it seems a simple idea to
                                keep in mind when proposing any new and better way of doing anything:
                                The person using the new thing will likely evaluate the
                                cost/annoyance of learning a new thing [pain of adoption] against the
                                cost/annoyance of using something familiar [crisis]. If the current
                                crisis is high, you can expect users will be more willing to learn.
                                With the QUERTY vs. DVORAK thing, the current "crisis" just isn't
                                compelling enough to justify change.

                                Back to Tobias' original question/comment: "good UI design is not
                                necessarily instantly intuitive. Users need to be taught a new UI;
                                the trick is to teach them only once. On second and subsequent uses
                                the UI should be intuitive."

                                The one absolute truth about good UI is that there are no absolute
                                truths aboug good UI.

                                We all know that it always depends. Is the user in a position
                                they /can/ get taught/be trained? Will there /be/ a second use?
                                [especially if they're frustrated with the first] How long between
                                the first use and the second use? What's the expected frequency of
                                use?

                                I think it's true to say that good UI design does not need to be
                                inuitive - rather it needs to fit its context of use. Software used
                                frequently by users in a context where effeciency matters may not
                                need to be intuitive - at least that isn't the most important
                                factor.

                                The second part of the comment went towards memorability - how easy
                                is it to remember how to use the system after using it once or
                                twice. Again - depends on context of use. We'd hope the software
                                would support the task well enough that even if the UI wasn't
                                intutive that the effectiveness of support for the task made it
                                memorable. But, suppose it wasn't. Suppose it took lots of practice
                                and instruction to use well, to remember how to use. Say as much
                                practice as a musical instrument or 3D modeling software... that
                                wouldn't be so bad.

                                Coming full circle, it's a function of the pain the user is in
                                without the software and the pain of learning the new stuff. Any
                                statements about intuitability, learnability, or memorability need to
                                be considered in that context. Dogmatically saying all software
                                needs to be intuitable isn't necessarily user-centric.

                                Thanks,

                                -Jeff
                              • Jared M. Spool
                                Sorry I m chiming in late on this. It s been a long week and I m just catching up on messages now. ... Actually, a sucking on mother s nipple is innate , not
                                Message 15 of 17 , Dec 9, 2005
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Sorry I'm chiming in late on this. It's been a long week and I'm just
                                  catching up on messages now.

                                  At 11:43 AM 12/3/2005, Jon Meads wrote:
                                  >A good quote I once heard was that "The only thing that is intuitive is a
                                  >mother's nipple, everything else is learned."

                                  Actually, a sucking on mother's nipple is "innate", not "intuitive."

                                  >When someone talks about an intuitive UI, they are talking about a UI that
                                  >matches the user's previous expereinces so well that it is easily and
                                  >quickly recognizable in terms of affordance and navigation. And,
                                  >understanding what they would be means understanding the users very well
                                  >-- which means taking the time to identify who the users are and study them.

                                  I wrote an article about this. You can find it here:
                                  http://www.uie.com/articles/design_intuitive/

                                  Hope this helps,

                                  Jared


                                  Jared M. Spool, Founding Principal, User Interface Engineering
                                  4 Lookout Lane, Unit 4d, Middleton, MA 01949
                                  978 777-9123 jspool@... http://www.uie.com
                                  Blog: http://www.uie.com/brainsparks
                                • Jared M. Spool
                                  ... Hee. Wrote about this too: http://www.uie.com/articles/embraceable_change/ Jared Jared M. Spool, Founding Principal, User Interface Engineering 4 Lookout
                                  Message 16 of 17 , Dec 9, 2005
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    At 02:41 PM 12/3/2005, Jon Meads wrote:
                                    >There are costs in making changes and
                                    >costs in staying as is. This is one reason why usability engineers often
                                    >look towards having usability objectives and goals specified as part of the
                                    >project charter.

                                    Hee. Wrote about this too: http://www.uie.com/articles/embraceable_change/

                                    Jared


                                    Jared M. Spool, Founding Principal, User Interface Engineering
                                    4 Lookout Lane, Unit 4d, Middleton, MA 01949
                                    978 777-9123 jspool@... http://www.uie.com
                                    Blog: http://www.uie.com/brainsparks
                                  • Jade Ohlhauser
                                    I enjoyed that one, thanks Jared Jade Ohlhauser Product Manager RPM Software www.rpmsoftware.com 403-265-6727 x704
                                    Message 17 of 17 , Dec 12, 2005
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      I enjoyed that one, thanks Jared
                                       
                                      Jade Ohlhauser
                                      Product Manager
                                      RPM Software                                 
                                      www.rpmsoftware.com 403-265-6727 x704
                                       


                                      From: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com [mailto:agile-usability@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jared M. Spool
                                      Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 10:21 PM
                                      To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                                      Cc: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
                                      Subject: RE: [agile-usability] Learning a new UI

                                      Sorry I'm chiming in late on this. It's been a long week and I'm just
                                      catching up on messages now.

                                      At 11:43 AM 12/3/2005, Jon Meads wrote:
                                      >A good quote I once heard was that "The only thing that is
                                      intuitive is a
                                      >mother's nipple, everything else is
                                      learned."

                                      Actually, a sucking on mother's nipple is "innate", not "intuitive."

                                      >When someone talks about an intuitive UI, they are
                                      talking about a UI that
                                      >matches the user's previous expereinces so well
                                      that it is easily and
                                      >quickly recognizable in terms of affordance and
                                      navigation. And,
                                      >understanding what they would be means understanding
                                      the users very well
                                      >-- which means taking the time to identify who the
                                      users are and study them.

                                      I wrote an article about this. You can find it here:
                                      http://www.uie.com/articles/design_intuitive/

                                      Hope this helps,

                                      Jared


                                      Jared M. Spool, Founding Principal, User Interface Engineering
                                      4 Lookout Lane, Unit 4d, Middleton, MA 01949
                                      978 777-9123   jspool@...  http://www.uie.com
                                      Blog: http://www.uie.com/brainsparks


                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.