History of HCIHistory of HCI

Panel Predictions: CHI 86Panel Predictions: CHI 86Human Computer Interaction in the Year Human Computer Interaction in the Year

20002000• Bill Buxton: More fluid interaction as with musical instruments; no for

speech• Ben Shneiderman: Direct manipulation; team cooperation mediated

by computer• Thomas Malone: Better support for groups; more emphasis on

motivation• Tom Landauer: New modes of interaction, expansion in tasks

supported, increased bandwidth, virtually free memory and transmission hardware; need for filtering, representation methods, and query methods.

• John Thomas: more focus on motivation, greater number of “implicit” interfaces, wider physical bandwidth & ambient displays

• Bill Curtis: (cop-out): technology transfer is a major stumbling block (so one can’t really predict); Ender’s Game scenario

• John Seeley Brown: More emphasis on collaboration (John didn’t show up)

Web? Oops

Usability Engineering in the Year 2020Usability Engineering in the Year 2020• In Jacob Neilsen, Advances in Human-Computer

Interaction 5 (1995)• Trends: cheaper BW, HW and more ubiquitous

interaction with computers• Both increased centralization and decentralization of

power• Institutions will make more decisions on the basis of

cost/benefit (not just cost)• HCI sub-specialists proliferate based on users, tasks,

technologies, context, system, & method• Two new specialties: Animal-Computer Interaction and

Computer-Computer Interaction (as social interactors).• Progress on multiple methodologies• Ubiquity of human-computer interaction

Web? Fait accomplis

Personal Interaction Methods with Personal Interaction Methods with ComputersComputers

• University of Michigan 1967 teletype/time-sharing (first program)

• University of Michigan 1969 punch cards (Mangled Deck)

• University of Michigan 1971 “race” via phone to find integral with time-sharing; PDP-1 “space war”

• Dissertation subjects run on 2260 displays, 20 lines of EBCDIC text

• Debugging with hexadecimal disk dumps

Personal History (Cont.)Personal History (Cont.)

• Harvard Med School, 1971, PDP-8 paper tape (corrections), 4K memory, 70 millisecond cycle time– Most machine instructions took three cycles; a

few took two cycles; thought about this in programming

• Harvard Med School, 1973, mag tape, 8K memory (Watergate Hearings)

• Handheld HP calculator $475

Bootstrap program entered via toggle switches in octal

PDP-8 Console

Personal History (Cont.)Personal History (Cont.)• IBM Research, 1973, teletype• IBM Research, 1974, CRT green screen• IBM Research, 1974 Query By Example

– Pencil & Paper prototype; algorithm development; translation vs. production;

• IBM Research, 1975, “Wizard of Oz” studies of natural language input for “automatic programming”

• Psychology of Design (1976-1979)– Spectrum of Techniques– (*Designers should do some work on the design of

psychologists)

Personal History (Cont.)Personal History (Cont.)• Corporate Headquarters (1980-1982)

– Job: Trying to get IBM to pay more attention to usability (largely as a result of the report Clayton alluded to)

– Computer Interaction: none. I wrote drafts with typewriter or dictated tapes assistant used 5520 word processor

– Lab Director: “No problem. My secretary loves it.”– Debate: Can you prove the cost effectiveness of color displays?

• Speech Synthesis (1983-1985)– Personal Computer + Dectalk + mainframe

• Motivation (1986)– Used “story” to explain basic SNA

• Carroll & Thomas “Fun” SIGCHI Bull (1988)

Personal HCI continuedPersonal HCI continued• Early 1980’s debate: would an individual ever have need

for a mip and a meg?• Two different “standards” in two parts of IBM combined

UI guidelines• To support or not support? Research debate.• Standards came back to bite me at NYNEX

– Object – Action MUST be used– Expert Systems, Machine Vision, Speech Recognition, Robotics,

HCI, Intelligent Tutoring Systems– 1986 to 1998 used UNIX and SUN Spark stations– Alice introduced for “Ease of Use” lab-wide rebellion

Personal History (cont.)Personal History (cont.)• IBM Research – Stories and Storytelling (1999-

2001)• Dynamic Assembly of Learning Objects (2001-

2003)• Tools for Consultants (2004--)• Technology: Thinkpad; now with 75 Gig hard-

drive; wireless LAN at home and work; tools being developed in SQUEAK (atop smalltalk)

• Methods: Participant observation in the field; examination of artifacts; remote observation and interviews

What has changed?What has changed?• Cheaper, faster, smaller technology• More modes of interaction possible• Greater scope of users• Greater scope of contexts• Greater scope of tasks• Greater knowledge about what works: widgets to

methods• In knowledge work, more multi-tasking & faster expected

turn-around• Move from usability lab to field study or “remote viewing”• Move from “hypothesis testing” to “continuous

improvement”

We don’t hear much anymore about (from We don’t hear much anymore about (from CHI 86):CHI 86):

• Moles• FPL• Document Retrieval Programs• Tiled vs. Overlapping Windows (Tiled better)• Text editing• Transfer of Training• How to format source code• Whether color displays are worth the expense

However, we However, we dodo still hear a lot about: still hear a lot about:

• Input devices• Easy programming languages• Information retrieval• Windows• Office tasks• Aging• Universal Access• Measuring usability• Speech I/O• Formal modeling• Collaboration support• Visualization

As well as….As well as….

• Robotics• 3D• Ambient computing• Mobile computing• Trust• The Web• Games• VR• Patterns

Is HCI history progressive or cyclical ?Is HCI history progressive or cyclical ?

• Progressive: In preparation for this trip, I called to request an upgrade and interacted with AA purely by voice without a hitch; the ASR, the synthesis, and the dialogue structure were all excellent.

Is HCI history progressive or cyclical ?Is HCI history progressive or cyclical ?

• Cyclical: Every friggin’ time we try to get a project funded from a new senior manager, we have to educate them about HCI --- AGAIN! It isn’t just how big the stupid icons should be!! ARGH!