A Calculated Design
January 13, 2016 9:00 AM Subscribe
“They’re probably the most familiar interfaces on the planet: the numeric keypads on our mobile phones and calculators. Yet very few notice that the keypads’ design has remained unchanged for nearly half a century in the face of evolving global design norms and conventions. Even fewer users notice another startling design feature: the phone’s keypad is the inverted version of the calculator’s.”Graphic designer C Y Gopinath explains the science and research behind his decision to change the numeric interface layout of his calculator app, Calcuta, from square to circular.
The history stuff was fun but this is Solution In Search of A Problem Exhibit A.
posted by Sangermaine at 9:06 AM on January 13, 2016 [15 favorites]
posted by Sangermaine at 9:06 AM on January 13, 2016 [15 favorites]
That's a great article, but I really don't like the circular arrangement at all. The author kind of handwaves around Benford's Law, ignores that people use zero, like, constantly, but worst of all there's no size/shape distinction to indicate where the ring of numbers begins and what direction it increments in, so you have to actually look at the numbers, which is kind of the worst case scenario for using a calculator.
posted by phooky at 9:08 AM on January 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by phooky at 9:08 AM on January 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
He's created the Dvorak keyboard of calculators.
posted by NoxAeternum at 9:09 AM on January 13, 2016 [23 favorites]
posted by NoxAeternum at 9:09 AM on January 13, 2016 [23 favorites]
that and it looks like the old rotary phone dial, except also backwards.
posted by k5.user at 9:09 AM on January 13, 2016 [37 favorites]
posted by k5.user at 9:09 AM on January 13, 2016 [37 favorites]
the phone’s keypad is the inverted version of the calculator’s
This is why, when I'm using a desk phone, I keep it on my left and dial with my left hand. Don't want to wreck my ten-key speed.
Though I could see how the circular design here would probably work just fine for a handheld touchscreen calculator, since it looks like most people could just use their thumbs.
posted by asperity at 9:09 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
This is why, when I'm using a desk phone, I keep it on my left and dial with my left hand. Don't want to wreck my ten-key speed.
Though I could see how the circular design here would probably work just fine for a handheld touchscreen calculator, since it looks like most people could just use their thumbs.
posted by asperity at 9:09 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Even fewer users notice another startling design feature
Citation please
posted by Greg_Ace at 9:13 AM on January 13, 2016 [9 favorites]
Citation please
posted by Greg_Ace at 9:13 AM on January 13, 2016 [9 favorites]
"this is Solution In Search of A Problem Exhibit A"
Yeah, he gets called out for this in the comments and says, "In reality, what came first was the desire to challenge the anachronism of a a decades-old numeric keypad layout...So a certain amount of design did precede research."
Frankly, the circular layout would drive me bonkers before I could even get the answer of how much to tip my server.
posted by _Mona_ at 9:15 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Yeah, he gets called out for this in the comments and says, "In reality, what came first was the desire to challenge the anachronism of a a decades-old numeric keypad layout...So a certain amount of design did precede research."
Frankly, the circular layout would drive me bonkers before I could even get the answer of how much to tip my server.
posted by _Mona_ at 9:15 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
This guy doesn't seem to have actually watched an experienced data entry clerk blindly five-fingering a traditional 10 key entry pad with her right hand while sliding her finger down her list of entries with the left. It's like watching Michael Flatley on the desktop.
posted by klarck at 9:18 AM on January 13, 2016 [31 favorites]
posted by klarck at 9:18 AM on January 13, 2016 [31 favorites]
How can he use a circular keypad while simultaneously patting himself on the back?
posted by Splunge at 9:21 AM on January 13, 2016 [10 favorites]
posted by Splunge at 9:21 AM on January 13, 2016 [10 favorites]
that and it looks like the old rotary phone dial, except also backwards.
I think rotary phones are the key to the design - he based it on the winning layout from an ancient Bell Labs study from 1960, when most people would've been familiar with how to operate a rotary telephone. That isn't really the case today.
Maybe it would be useful for smart watches with a circular display, but on a smartphone it is just a huge waste of space.
posted by Vulgar Euphemism at 9:21 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
I think rotary phones are the key to the design - he based it on the winning layout from an ancient Bell Labs study from 1960, when most people would've been familiar with how to operate a rotary telephone. That isn't really the case today.
Maybe it would be useful for smart watches with a circular display, but on a smartphone it is just a huge waste of space.
posted by Vulgar Euphemism at 9:21 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
To save space, why not just get rid of the the numbers 4 and 7. I mean, really, does anyone even use those any more?
posted by gwint at 9:23 AM on January 13, 2016 [15 favorites]
posted by gwint at 9:23 AM on January 13, 2016 [15 favorites]
Needs testing. He's highly modifying result of the Bell trials: he's rotated it, added a bunch of additional controls, a new scheme with history editing and included gestures. Each of those are more than enough to cast doubt on his results. It's great to be inspired, to try something new, but there's little real evidence to suggest that most of his modifications are improvements. Try one thing at a time and test, don't make four jumps at once.
posted by bonehead at 9:25 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by bonehead at 9:25 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
I guess I was the only one expecting something like this.
posted by chavenet at 9:27 AM on January 13, 2016
posted by chavenet at 9:27 AM on January 13, 2016
I'd also like a citation for "Alphabets can be laid out according to their frequency of usage on a QWERTY keyboard, but numbers follow no such patterns."
For a ton of calculator use cases (prices, mostly), I'd expect 1, 5, 9, and 0 to be used a lot more often than other numbers.
posted by bowbeacon at 9:27 AM on January 13, 2016 [6 favorites]
For a ton of calculator use cases (prices, mostly), I'd expect 1, 5, 9, and 0 to be used a lot more often than other numbers.
posted by bowbeacon at 9:27 AM on January 13, 2016 [6 favorites]
From the article: Alphabets can be laid out according to their frequency of usage on a QWERTY keyboard, but numbers follow no such patterns.
Benford's Law, sort of?
posted by mhum at 9:29 AM on January 13, 2016
Benford's Law, sort of?
posted by mhum at 9:29 AM on January 13, 2016
Benford's Law suggests the 'old' Casio design may well have stumbled onto the best (lowest travel) arrangement. edit: ninja'd by mhum.
posted by meinvt at 9:30 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by meinvt at 9:30 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
For instance, the most commonly used digits are 1 (Bedford's Law) and 0 . The Bell design I-C places those at the bottom left and right respectively. Assuming that the operators hand enters from below the keypad, those two most common digits are thus immediately near the fingers, while those less common digits are further away needing a bit more reach.
Given that he's rotated the design for his scheme (so that 1 and 0 are furthest from the natural hand position), it's thus not obvious to me that he's really thought through why that particular arrangement worked well.
(and tripled on preview)
posted by bonehead at 9:30 AM on January 13, 2016
Given that he's rotated the design for his scheme (so that 1 and 0 are furthest from the natural hand position), it's thus not obvious to me that he's really thought through why that particular arrangement worked well.
(and tripled on preview)
posted by bonehead at 9:30 AM on January 13, 2016
I spent an afternoon at my last job carefully disassembling a coworker's phone, swapping the keys to calculator layout, and reassembling it. It took him days to figure out why he couldn't call out.
posted by backseatpilot at 9:33 AM on January 13, 2016 [29 favorites]
posted by backseatpilot at 9:33 AM on January 13, 2016 [29 favorites]
Idiot "designer".... let waste all the screen real estate so that I can have my overthought design numbers in a circle and have the buttons smallers. A calculator is meant to be used (efficiently) it's not there to stroke the ego of a "designer". It because of people like that I can only see the subject of 3-4 emails at a time on my phone. I hate "designers"/
posted by coust at 9:34 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by coust at 9:34 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
This guy doesn't seem to have actually watched an experienced data entry clerk blindly five-fingering a traditional 10 key entry pad with her right hand while sliding her finger down her list of entries with the left.
Exactly. And if he has watched this, he certainly never learned to do it himself. Because if he had (as anybody can with a couple of days of practice), he would never have created a circular keyboard that nobody could possibly do use blindly, or as fast as the standard entry pad.
posted by beagle at 9:35 AM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
Exactly. And if he has watched this, he certainly never learned to do it himself. Because if he had (as anybody can with a couple of days of practice), he would never have created a circular keyboard that nobody could possibly do use blindly, or as fast as the standard entry pad.
posted by beagle at 9:35 AM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
CY sure is threadsitting in those comments FTA and answering every one with a passion for his baby calculator. I hope his feeling don't get hurt when people tell him his baby is ugly.
posted by Annika Cicada at 9:37 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Annika Cicada at 9:37 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
he would never have created a circular keyboard that nobody could possibly do use blindly
The Bell test did show that one circular layout worked, I-C with the 1 and 0 at the bottom of a horseshoe. I can see that working; it's sort of an equal distance reach to each digit.
But not all of the circular layouts are equal. He actually chose something like the Bell IV-C layout, which doesn't seem to share the same efficiency or speed as the better I-C key positions.
posted by bonehead at 9:39 AM on January 13, 2016
The Bell test did show that one circular layout worked, I-C with the 1 and 0 at the bottom of a horseshoe. I can see that working; it's sort of an equal distance reach to each digit.
But not all of the circular layouts are equal. He actually chose something like the Bell IV-C layout, which doesn't seem to share the same efficiency or speed as the better I-C key positions.
posted by bonehead at 9:39 AM on January 13, 2016
I would have expected to see some mention of Fitts' Law - the smaller button sizes seems a definite issue on a touch screen.
I'm always amused by the way I can use a telephone keypad and a calculator to enter numbers perfectly fine despite being the opposite way round, but when I travel to Hong Kong where the ATMs have the keypads opposite to the UK I'm always completely thrown and have to slowly and carefully enter the numbers. Jetlag probably doesn't help either...
posted by kerplunk at 9:40 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm always amused by the way I can use a telephone keypad and a calculator to enter numbers perfectly fine despite being the opposite way round, but when I travel to Hong Kong where the ATMs have the keypads opposite to the UK I'm always completely thrown and have to slowly and carefully enter the numbers. Jetlag probably doesn't help either...
posted by kerplunk at 9:40 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm going to reinvent the wheel, but this time mine will be ROUND!
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 9:43 AM on January 13, 2016 [6 favorites]
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 9:43 AM on January 13, 2016 [6 favorites]
He's also wrong that the tenkey design was invented for the Casio. Mechanical adding machines had been using that layout (or something very close) for decades before Casio came along. It seems like a good fit with Benford's Law, as mentioned upthread.
A more ergonomic key layout for a smartphone might be a fan layout radiating away from one's thumb (which would obviously need to be reversible).
posted by adamrice at 9:44 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
A more ergonomic key layout for a smartphone might be a fan layout radiating away from one's thumb (which would obviously need to be reversible).
posted by adamrice at 9:44 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
True his circular keypad no longer looks like a broken phone; now it looks like a broken clock. Very unintuitive.
What's at the 6:00 position? Oh, 7. Of course.
posted by aubilenon at 9:55 AM on January 13, 2016 [13 favorites]
What's at the 6:00 position? Oh, 7. Of course.
posted by aubilenon at 9:55 AM on January 13, 2016 [13 favorites]
The comments on that are really worth the read. Some very experienced UI hands commenting there.
posted by bonehead at 10:01 AM on January 13, 2016
posted by bonehead at 10:01 AM on January 13, 2016
He's created the Dvorak keyboard of calculators.
All the way down to the apocryphal "the thing you're used to was designed to slow users down" nonsense! Impressive!
posted by tobascodagama at 10:02 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
All the way down to the apocryphal "the thing you're used to was designed to slow users down" nonsense! Impressive!
posted by tobascodagama at 10:02 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
What I think they miss with the comparison to an old rotary phone, is that those phones did not have 10 buttons, they had one dial you moved around to the relevant number.
So a modern interpretation of that would be a single slider control that you move up or across the screen until the right number appears.
posted by Lanark at 10:03 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
So a modern interpretation of that would be a single slider control that you move up or across the screen until the right number appears.
posted by Lanark at 10:03 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
But that would be a bit silly; the dial had to work that way because the phone produced dial pulses as it rotated (the more you rotate, the more dial pulses it produces). Calculators have no such requirement.
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 10:11 AM on January 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 10:11 AM on January 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
Benford's Law accounts for the expression "as neglected as the 9 button on a microwave."
posted by Faint of Butt at 10:15 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Faint of Butt at 10:15 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Benford's Law accounts for the expression "as neglected as the 9 button on a microwave."
Faint of Butt
Back before quick +minute or quick +30sec buttons, I used to microwave a lot of things for 99 seconds. 9-9-Start was just faster than 1-0-0-Start or 2-0-0-Start, and usually good enough.
posted by yeolcoatl at 10:34 AM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
Faint of Butt
Back before quick +minute or quick +30sec buttons, I used to microwave a lot of things for 99 seconds. 9-9-Start was just faster than 1-0-0-Start or 2-0-0-Start, and usually good enough.
posted by yeolcoatl at 10:34 AM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
The only circular menu I've seen that made sense was a 3D modeling program called Maya. At the cursor when ctl or space was pushed a circular menu popped up with vast levels of menu options. Made some sense for that kind of application but not sure if its really popular.
posted by sammyo at 10:41 AM on January 13, 2016
posted by sammyo at 10:41 AM on January 13, 2016
From the article: The design change apparently emerged from research conducted by Dr Alphone Chapanis and his assistant Mary C Lutz in the 1950s.
Well, sure, it'll suck if you let a C Lutz design it.
posted by Mental Wimp at 10:47 AM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
Well, sure, it'll suck if you let a C Lutz design it.
posted by Mental Wimp at 10:47 AM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
What no one knows, not even C Y Gopinath, is that Bell Labs tested out a phone with an interface from Kai's Power Tools, which was quickly discarded after tests resulted in a series of random calls to the Kremlin that nearly started WW III.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 10:50 AM on January 13, 2016 [8 favorites]
posted by a lungful of dragon at 10:50 AM on January 13, 2016 [8 favorites]
If ergonomics is the motivation behind the change, wouldn't it make more sense to use an hourglass shape )( for the keypad instead of a circle? Because if you're holding your phone with both hands, that's the arc your thumbs naturally make.
posted by Strange Interlude at 11:08 AM on January 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by Strange Interlude at 11:08 AM on January 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
A lot of designers really, really underestimate how well people adapt, and terribly overestimate their competence. I mean, it's certainly possible to make a bad interface -- but the margin for error is quite large. The whole spiel about not noticing the difference between touchtone telephone and numeric keypad essentially disputes the rest of the text.
It's like the whole GUI/CLI "dichotomy". Everyone is worrying about manipulating pictures on the screen and "discoverability". While meanwhile in the real world, real people are using Google, IM, twitter hashtags and Siri -- e.g. a command line interface with visual feedback. Sigh...
posted by smidgen at 11:10 AM on January 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
It's like the whole GUI/CLI "dichotomy". Everyone is worrying about manipulating pictures on the screen and "discoverability". While meanwhile in the real world, real people are using Google, IM, twitter hashtags and Siri -- e.g. a command line interface with visual feedback. Sigh...
posted by smidgen at 11:10 AM on January 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
Post-design marketing. I've noticed it a lot in architecture, too, this need to convince you that what was made was really what you wanted.
posted by underflow at 11:13 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by underflow at 11:13 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
He's created the Dvorak keyboard of calculators.
Except Dvorak actually can be objectively shown to function better than Qwerty. I switched 14-odd years ago, and now when I have to type Qwerty, I can do it, but it's uncomfortable and awkward.
posted by disconnect at 11:14 AM on January 13, 2016
Except Dvorak actually can be objectively shown to function better than Qwerty. I switched 14-odd years ago, and now when I have to type Qwerty, I can do it, but it's uncomfortable and awkward.
posted by disconnect at 11:14 AM on January 13, 2016
The problem with the radial calculators is that if you want to press 0 you have to wait so long for the keypad to come back around once you've pressed it.
posted by Talez at 11:25 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Talez at 11:25 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
How about a video player app that requires you to wait for the "tape" to "rewind" before you can exit to do something else? Many studies have shown that this interface is far more intuitive for users than the technological nightmare of random access. That's a free one, designers, you're welcome.
posted by indubitable at 11:41 AM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by indubitable at 11:41 AM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
Wow, he really did his research before coming up with a stupid design everyone hates.
posted by w0mbat at 11:45 AM on January 13, 2016 [8 favorites]
posted by w0mbat at 11:45 AM on January 13, 2016 [8 favorites]
The guy needs to add geometry to his design toolkit. His design is geometrically optimized to make the individual number buttons as tiny and hard to read as possible.
posted by straight at 11:46 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by straight at 11:46 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Nice, but where do the trig function and stack manipulation keys fit? I mean, if he was interested in efficiency at any cost, shoulda gone RPN.
posted by scruss at 11:48 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by scruss at 11:48 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
Back before quick +minute or quick +30sec buttons, I used to microwave a lot of things for 99 seconds. 9-9-Start was just faster than 1-0-0-Start or 2-0-0-Start, and usually good enough.
What would 9-9-start even do? After all, 1-0-0 means "1 minute" not "100 seconds" on every microwave I ever used. If 1-0-0 means 1 minute but 6-1 means 1:01 then my mind is officially blown
posted by RustyBrooks at 11:50 AM on January 13, 2016
What would 9-9-start even do? After all, 1-0-0 means "1 minute" not "100 seconds" on every microwave I ever used. If 1-0-0 means 1 minute but 6-1 means 1:01 then my mind is officially blown
posted by RustyBrooks at 11:50 AM on January 13, 2016
What would 9-9-start even do? After all, 1-0-0 means "1 minute" not "100 seconds" on every microwave I ever used. If 1-0-0 means 1 minute but 6-1 means 1:01 then my mind is officially blown
Sorry to make your head explode, but "99" on a microwave will in fact get you 1 minute and 39 seconds of cooking.
posted by Etrigan at 11:57 AM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
Sorry to make your head explode, but "99" on a microwave will in fact get you 1 minute and 39 seconds of cooking.
posted by Etrigan at 11:57 AM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
In reality, what came first was the desire to challenge the anachronism of a decades-old numeric keypad layout...
It's not anachronism just because it's old!
posted by kiltedtaco at 11:57 AM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
It's not anachronism just because it's old!
posted by kiltedtaco at 11:57 AM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
sammyo: "The only circular menu I've seen that made sense was a 3D modeling program called Maya. At the cursor when ctl or space was pushed a circular menu popped up with vast levels of menu options. Made some sense for that kind of application but not sure if its really popular."
That is called a "pie menu" and was also used in the Sim games, iirc. It enables a mouse-based gestural interface. The buttons can be activated by dragging the mouse cursor over them and the sub-menu would then pop-up right around the mouse. See the Pie Menu wikipedia entry for more.
posted by techSupp0rt at 12:01 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
That is called a "pie menu" and was also used in the Sim games, iirc. It enables a mouse-based gestural interface. The buttons can be activated by dragging the mouse cursor over them and the sub-menu would then pop-up right around the mouse. See the Pie Menu wikipedia entry for more.
posted by techSupp0rt at 12:01 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
What would 9-9-start even do?
99 seconds! So, yes, it's equivalent to 1:39.
9:99 in action!
(This was a followup to Vi Hart's How to Microwave Gracefully, and has been followed by more videos, each reducing the time by one second.)
(I have watched the whole series—and indeed pay 9¢ on Patreon each time a new installment goes up—but I am not recommending that you do so.)
posted by Shmuel510 at 12:05 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
99 seconds! So, yes, it's equivalent to 1:39.
9:99 in action!
(This was a followup to Vi Hart's How to Microwave Gracefully, and has been followed by more videos, each reducing the time by one second.)
(I have watched the whole series—and indeed pay 9¢ on Patreon each time a new installment goes up—but I am not recommending that you do so.)
posted by Shmuel510 at 12:05 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
IMO the rotary design doesn't really matter that much, it's no better or worse than the normal grid. Ideally at some point this guy would default to a circle but have a setting to switch to a grid, for people who fear change or just have strong muscle memory.
But being able to view your history, edit a number, and have the changes propagate forward is very cool.
I'll be watching this with interest if only because a calculator with an actual thoughtful UX would be pretty great. Even if it's a little bit too "designy". I have gotten pretty good with RPN stack-based calculators but there are still some pain points.
posted by vogon_poet at 12:06 PM on January 13, 2016
But being able to view your history, edit a number, and have the changes propagate forward is very cool.
I'll be watching this with interest if only because a calculator with an actual thoughtful UX would be pretty great. Even if it's a little bit too "designy". I have gotten pretty good with RPN stack-based calculators but there are still some pain points.
posted by vogon_poet at 12:06 PM on January 13, 2016
So 99 is 1:39 and 100 is 1:00? And that doesn't bother anyone?
I want my dial microwave timer back
posted by RustyBrooks at 12:08 PM on January 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
I want my dial microwave timer back
posted by RustyBrooks at 12:08 PM on January 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
RustyBrooks: That's quite clever (and how timecode entry works in a Non-Linear Editing system such as Final Cut Pro or Avid, see: Timecode Protocol). Does it rollover 60 seconds as well - does 132 give you 1:12?
posted by techSupp0rt at 12:14 PM on January 13, 2016
posted by techSupp0rt at 12:14 PM on January 13, 2016
No, 132 gives you 1 minute and 32 seconds. The last two digits are parsed as seconds (no matter what they are); the digits before the last two are parsed as minutes.
posted by Shmuel510 at 12:21 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Shmuel510 at 12:21 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
The last two digits are parsed as seconds (no matter what they are)
Well, 99 would like a word with you then?
posted by RustyBrooks at 12:25 PM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Well, 99 would like a word with you then?
posted by RustyBrooks at 12:25 PM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
I got 1:39 problems.
posted by Wolfdog at 12:42 PM on January 13, 2016 [7 favorites]
posted by Wolfdog at 12:42 PM on January 13, 2016 [7 favorites]
For people bothered by a UI of having a seconds place that allows entries up to 99...
...what do you want an entry of :99 to do?
posted by Earthtopus at 12:48 PM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
...what do you want an entry of :99 to do?
posted by Earthtopus at 12:48 PM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
It should put up a message saying
posted by Wolfdog at 12:54 PM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
?REDO FROM STARTposted by Wolfdog at 12:54 PM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
- Immediately lock out all microwave functionality
- Sound an alarm
- Scold the user for being naughty
You will be 30% faster on the microwave keyboard if you type 60 instead of 100. #showerthoughts
posted by five fresh fish at 1:45 PM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by five fresh fish at 1:45 PM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
Is this a joke?
posted by atomicmedia at 2:09 PM on January 13, 2016
posted by atomicmedia at 2:09 PM on January 13, 2016
Think of the time savings if microwaves had hexadecimal input!
posted by Pyry at 2:22 PM on January 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by Pyry at 2:22 PM on January 13, 2016 [5 favorites]
The "add 30 sec" button on the microwave has basically replaced all the others for me. Increments of 30 seconds are usually close enough.
Maybe he could do something similar and get rid of all the numbers except for 5.
posted by dephlogisticated at 2:40 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Maybe he could do something similar and get rid of all the numbers except for 5.
posted by dephlogisticated at 2:40 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Eww. But I remember using an IBM terminal with a reverse numeric pad in the mid-80s. Really....weird.
posted by lhauser at 3:00 PM on January 13, 2016
posted by lhauser at 3:00 PM on January 13, 2016
My parent's old Microwave (a Panasonic Genius from 1985) had 4 time buttons, 10 min, 1 min, 10 sec, 1 sec. It was a good bit faster than entering stuff on a keypad, I think.
Of course this calculator is not very radical at all, because it uses the ridiculously outdated base ten instead of the superior base twelve, as all right-thinking people do.
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 3:04 PM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Of course this calculator is not very radical at all, because it uses the ridiculously outdated base ten instead of the superior base twelve, as all right-thinking people do.
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 3:04 PM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Physical dial interfaces for microwaves always seemed better in every way to me than digital ones. You can input any amount of time with basically a single gesture, and you're moving a real physical object. Compare this to pressing a series of buttons, each time waiting for a beep to tell you you've pressed hard enough. This changeover happened before I was born and I am baffled by it: was there just some digital craze going around?
posted by gold-in-green at 3:29 PM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by gold-in-green at 3:29 PM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
So, a developer with no historical knowledge of ten-key adding machines (apart from, apparently, Wikipedia) or apparent practical experience with using a ten key reinvents the wheel and triumphantly spruiks his result, one that is worse than all the others? Whenever I see this sort of context-less wankery, I believe more and more strongly that STEM graduates need to take more than STEM courses.
posted by barnacles at 3:52 PM on January 13, 2016 [11 favorites]
posted by barnacles at 3:52 PM on January 13, 2016 [11 favorites]
I find it pretty useful to have the easy to-the-second control of timing that comes from digital without having to have great fine motor skill. It's pretty effortless to enter the exact amount of time that I need to heat a cup of water to a specific temperature each morning for coffee.
posted by indubitable at 4:08 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by indubitable at 4:08 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
I'd never thought about it before, but the big zero plus three columns on a numpad really is a great layout. It's a bit too fiddly to do the rapid entry thing on my iPhone screen, but maybe it would work if they took the fourth column with the operators and put it up top so that the numbers are extra wide.
For regular old thumb tapping though, I think my ideal would be the numpad layout slightly drunken on its side, in my thumb's optimum reach. (Also with left handed and right handed versions come on just once please.)
posted by lucidium at 5:04 PM on January 13, 2016
For regular old thumb tapping though, I think my ideal would be the numpad layout slightly drunken on its side, in my thumb's optimum reach. (Also with left handed and right handed versions come on just once please.)
posted by lucidium at 5:04 PM on January 13, 2016
For SCIENCE I entered 99 on my microwave just now. It started at 0:99 and counted down 98 97 96, i.e. it went for 1:39 but did not convert 99 to 1:39. I didn't need more than 99 seconds, so I don't know what, for example, 1:99 would do. I'm scared.
posted by RustyBrooks at 5:57 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by RustyBrooks at 5:57 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Of course this calculator is not very radical at all, because it uses the ridiculously outdated base ten instead of the superior base twelve, as all right-thinking people do.
Monday, stony Monday
Good point.
posted by yeolcoatl at 6:51 PM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Monday, stony Monday
Good point.
posted by yeolcoatl at 6:51 PM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Also, sorry about the whole :99 thing, everybody. I didn't expect that to become a derail.
posted by yeolcoatl at 6:51 PM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by yeolcoatl at 6:51 PM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Whenever I see this sort of context-less wankery, I believe more and more strongly that STEM graduates need to take more than STEM courses.
Eh, I don't think STEM education is this guy's problem. I'm also a software developer and I assure you I'm intimately familiar with the practical benefits of the ten-key layout. Looks like garden-variety hubris with this guy, he apparently decided he could redesign something that he's not an expert user of.
posted by equalpants at 7:26 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Eh, I don't think STEM education is this guy's problem. I'm also a software developer and I assure you I'm intimately familiar with the practical benefits of the ten-key layout. Looks like garden-variety hubris with this guy, he apparently decided he could redesign something that he's not an expert user of.
posted by equalpants at 7:26 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
I dunno, sounds like textbook Engineer's Disease to me. Just that the field he's butting into is UX rather than biology or economics, the usual things engineers love butting into so they can show off their ignorance.
posted by tobascodagama at 7:49 PM on January 13, 2016
posted by tobascodagama at 7:49 PM on January 13, 2016
I dunno, sounds like textbook Engineer's Disease to me. Just that the field he's butting into is UX rather than biology or economics, the usual things engineers love butting into so they can show off their ignorance.
That's not my read at all, and it's not supported by his bio blurb either:
C Y Gopinath is a graphic designer, writer, composer, film-maker and cook.
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 8:07 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
That's not my read at all, and it's not supported by his bio blurb either:
C Y Gopinath is a graphic designer, writer, composer, film-maker and cook.
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 8:07 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
lanark: "So a modern interpretation of that would be a single slider control that you move up or across the screen until the right number appears."
I have a vague memory of a calculator / adding machine program, probably from somewhere around the Win3~OS/2 Warp~BeOS era (or possibly Amiga), that was mouse-based & had the numerals arranged in a sliding arc (from 0-9, or 1-0?) from left to right. To type you rotated your mouse hand to the appropriate position, and clicked to 'type' each digit. It was a bit of a loss since it was dependant on the screen position being constant and the mouse tracking being perfect, but if you nailed it to the screen, had a good mouse, & used the right mouse acceleration/scaling, once muscle memory developed it was surprisingly fast.
Does anyone else remember that?
posted by Pinback at 9:39 PM on January 13, 2016
I have a vague memory of a calculator / adding machine program, probably from somewhere around the Win3~OS/2 Warp~BeOS era (or possibly Amiga), that was mouse-based & had the numerals arranged in a sliding arc (from 0-9, or 1-0?) from left to right. To type you rotated your mouse hand to the appropriate position, and clicked to 'type' each digit. It was a bit of a loss since it was dependant on the screen position being constant and the mouse tracking being perfect, but if you nailed it to the screen, had a good mouse, & used the right mouse acceleration/scaling, once muscle memory developed it was surprisingly fast.
Does anyone else remember that?
posted by Pinback at 9:39 PM on January 13, 2016
Hm, I learned to use the number keypad for an adding machine and later a computer left-handed because it's built that way (for someone in a green eyeshade with a pencil in the right hand working on the (paper) spreadsheet). Always made sense to me. Just felt better, easier to use the fingers for the numbers and the thumb for enter.
Then IBM came along and put the number keys on the wrong side of the keyboard .... fortunately Lexmark and Apple gave me separate numeric keypads I could put where they belonged. On the left side. Next to the CTRL key, which was next to the A key. Like God intended, so WordStar's command key diamond worked right.
All that stuff worked way better using spinal reflexes.
These new machines need you to _think_. That's much slower.
posted by hank at 10:04 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Then IBM came along and put the number keys on the wrong side of the keyboard .... fortunately Lexmark and Apple gave me separate numeric keypads I could put where they belonged. On the left side. Next to the CTRL key, which was next to the A key. Like God intended, so WordStar's command key diamond worked right.
All that stuff worked way better using spinal reflexes.
These new machines need you to _think_. That's much slower.
posted by hank at 10:04 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Even fewer users notice another startling design feature: the phone’s keypad is the inverted version of the calculator’s.
Who hasn't noticed this?
With any number equally likely to be pressed, what would be the most logical and ergonomic arrangement for human fingertips?
But...no...and...um, I think you need a dictionary.
posted by desuetude at 10:10 PM on January 13, 2016
Who hasn't noticed this?
With any number equally likely to be pressed, what would be the most logical and ergonomic arrangement for human fingertips?
But...no...and...um, I think you need a dictionary.
posted by desuetude at 10:10 PM on January 13, 2016
While we are on the microwave derail, always use increments of 10 seconds for your time. Most microwaves use a synchronous motor for the turntable so that it completes one revolution exactly every 10 seconds. If your cooking time is a multiple of 10 seconds, your coffee cup will always wind up again at the front where you originally put it, with the handle pointing the right way.
posted by JackFlash at 11:07 PM on January 13, 2016 [12 favorites]
posted by JackFlash at 11:07 PM on January 13, 2016 [12 favorites]
backseatpilot: "I spent an afternoon at my last job carefully disassembling a coworker's phone, swapping the keys to calculator layout, and reassembling it. It took him days to figure out why he couldn't call out."
In a similar vein, I swapped the "m" and "n" keys on a coworker's keyboard. It drove him crazy. Then he tried it on another coworker who was a blindingly fast touch typist. We never changed it back because she never noticed.
posted by double block and bleed at 5:09 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
In a similar vein, I swapped the "m" and "n" keys on a coworker's keyboard. It drove him crazy. Then he tried it on another coworker who was a blindingly fast touch typist. We never changed it back because she never noticed.
posted by double block and bleed at 5:09 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
(during the course of the next 3 years we all worked together in that office)
posted by double block and bleed at 5:11 AM on January 14, 2016
posted by double block and bleed at 5:11 AM on January 14, 2016
> Most microwaves use a synchronous motor for the turntable so that it completes one revolution exactly every 10 seconds
Hmm; would this still apply in 50 Hz countries?
posted by scruss at 9:21 AM on January 14, 2016
Hmm; would this still apply in 50 Hz countries?
posted by scruss at 9:21 AM on January 14, 2016
Good question.
Presumably microwave ovens designed for 50 Hz could have synchronous motors designed for 50 Hz. This is accomplished by changing the number of poles in the stator, just as they would for a 50 Hz AC analog wall clock using a synchronous motor.
But most turntables are not direct drive. They are connected to the motor by small pulleys and a small drive belt. You could also adjust the rotation speed for 50 Hz by changing the sizes of the pulleys.
posted by JackFlash at 10:35 AM on January 14, 2016
Presumably microwave ovens designed for 50 Hz could have synchronous motors designed for 50 Hz. This is accomplished by changing the number of poles in the stator, just as they would for a 50 Hz AC analog wall clock using a synchronous motor.
But most turntables are not direct drive. They are connected to the motor by small pulleys and a small drive belt. You could also adjust the rotation speed for 50 Hz by changing the sizes of the pulleys.
posted by JackFlash at 10:35 AM on January 14, 2016
I've remarked before on "design" people having their *own* version of Engineer's Disease, but let's be clear - they are not engineers. Don't blame this one on us!
posted by atoxyl at 11:19 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 11:19 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
My office has (new; purchased in the last 3 months or so) microwaves with dials to input the time. I find it annoying because it requires a lot of turns to get up to the 5 or 6 minutes it takes to heat up sad office lunch frozen entrees, and if you turn too fast it's easy to shoot past the 25 seconds it takes to heat up my instant oatmeal in the morning. There's a lot of turning back and forth to hit the right number if you need precision.
posted by misskaz at 12:33 PM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by misskaz at 12:33 PM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
My office microwaves are the same/similar to the runner-up in this Sweethome article/review for best microwave, but it does discuss the downside for some reviewers of the dial input.
posted by misskaz at 12:36 PM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by misskaz at 12:36 PM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
Back to the article, though, there is an amazing response by the author in the comments. Someone brings up the 10-key data entry skillset, and how this design does not lend itself to rapid entry of numbers for anyone trained in 10-key.
The author's response is "The minimal design of this app raises difficult questions when considering its evolution to its next level. Evidence suggests that the arena for scientific and mathematical calculators is pretty saturated and populated with customers who do not place a premium on UX. Data entry, similarly, is a specialized need, and would probably be better with a specialized tool."
What strikes me about this response is the arrogance inherent in saying that scientific, mathematical, or data entry calculators "don't place a premium on UX." WTF? UX is about the User; hence the U. I'm no UX expert, but part of my job is providing input regarding the content and layout of pages on my company's website. In my job description it says I am a website "user advocate". To me, any time you're holding up the banner of UX, your approach should be to balance the needs and habits of the user with the needs/goals of the product or company. To say that the user who doesn't like your app doesn't place a premium on UX doesn't even make sense if you're claiming your design has better UX, because the whole discipline of UX is about finding out what works best for the user.
I think what he really meant was some audiences don't place a premium on design/aesthetics, and that is true. It's certainly ok to make an app that won't work for certain audiences. But to act like it's because they don't care about User eXperience when they are potential Users is really silly.
He's probably just using the term UX because it's trendy but he clearly has no idea what it actually means.
posted by misskaz at 1:15 PM on January 14, 2016 [2 favorites]
The author's response is "The minimal design of this app raises difficult questions when considering its evolution to its next level. Evidence suggests that the arena for scientific and mathematical calculators is pretty saturated and populated with customers who do not place a premium on UX. Data entry, similarly, is a specialized need, and would probably be better with a specialized tool."
What strikes me about this response is the arrogance inherent in saying that scientific, mathematical, or data entry calculators "don't place a premium on UX." WTF? UX is about the User; hence the U. I'm no UX expert, but part of my job is providing input regarding the content and layout of pages on my company's website. In my job description it says I am a website "user advocate". To me, any time you're holding up the banner of UX, your approach should be to balance the needs and habits of the user with the needs/goals of the product or company. To say that the user who doesn't like your app doesn't place a premium on UX doesn't even make sense if you're claiming your design has better UX, because the whole discipline of UX is about finding out what works best for the user.
I think what he really meant was some audiences don't place a premium on design/aesthetics, and that is true. It's certainly ok to make an app that won't work for certain audiences. But to act like it's because they don't care about User eXperience when they are potential Users is really silly.
He's probably just using the term UX because it's trendy but he clearly has no idea what it actually means.
posted by misskaz at 1:15 PM on January 14, 2016 [2 favorites]
kiltedtaco: "In reality, what came first was the desire to challenge the anachronism of a decades-old numeric keypad layout...
It's not anachronism just because it's old!"
::HARUMPH::
Indeed!
posted by Splunge at 4:59 AM on January 15, 2016
It's not anachronism just because it's old!"
::HARUMPH::
Indeed!
posted by Splunge at 4:59 AM on January 15, 2016
The circle pattern seems to require a lot more finger movement than I have to expend.
posted by gregjunior at 9:32 AM on January 15, 2016
posted by gregjunior at 9:32 AM on January 15, 2016
There's no exponent key, or square root, or x root, or sin, cos, tan...this is basically an utterly useless toy for any student beyond junior high school. And if students can't use it, then post-school adults aren't likely to take to it either.
There's a related disease to the Engineer's disease, I call designer's disease. It's where designers get fixated on a cool looking design, and ignore the actual needs of the people who are supposed to use the end result. My old CAD-CAM teacher used the example of a design class she took where one of the designer's came out with an awesome looking luggage cart...and was massively offended when she pointed out that the thing was too wide to be used in travel. She also pointed out that she was the ONLY student in the class who noticed that design flaw.
In a way, this shows why designer's need to be restrained by other departments, including marketing. A good market researcher would point out that the keyboard is a recipe for failure.
posted by happyroach at 1:33 PM on January 15, 2016
There's a related disease to the Engineer's disease, I call designer's disease. It's where designers get fixated on a cool looking design, and ignore the actual needs of the people who are supposed to use the end result. My old CAD-CAM teacher used the example of a design class she took where one of the designer's came out with an awesome looking luggage cart...and was massively offended when she pointed out that the thing was too wide to be used in travel. She also pointed out that she was the ONLY student in the class who noticed that design flaw.
In a way, this shows why designer's need to be restrained by other departments, including marketing. A good market researcher would point out that the keyboard is a recipe for failure.
posted by happyroach at 1:33 PM on January 15, 2016
FWIW, my interpretation of "Engineer's disease" is that it's not strictly limited to engineers any more than Legionnaire's disease is limited to people attending American Legion conferences. Rather, "Engineer's disease" can affect anyone in an expert discipline who thinks their expertise is directly transferable to other disciplines. As far as I know, the term was coined as a jokey explanation for the number of engineers among "Intelligent Design Proponents", but I do think it describes a larger phenomenon (one that, perhaps, deserves a less restrictive name).
posted by tobascodagama at 4:01 PM on January 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by tobascodagama at 4:01 PM on January 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
The Danish telephone companies lagged behind America in introducing pushbutton keypads and so chose the same layout as calculator/computer keyboards.
Perhaps coincidentally the usability expert Jakob Neilson is also from Denmark.
posted by Lanark at 8:18 AM on January 16, 2016
Perhaps coincidentally the usability expert Jakob Neilson is also from Denmark.
posted by Lanark at 8:18 AM on January 16, 2016
« Older Mars Ice House | One last Best of list for 2015 Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
This makes me crazy literally all the time; this decision was clearly made by someone who hates muscle memory.
True his circular keypad no longer looks like a broken phone; now it looks like a broken clock. Very unintuitive.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 9:06 AM on January 13, 2016 [22 favorites]