12 replaced http://ux.stackexchange.com/ with https://ux.stackexchange.com/
source | link

It's even more important for impaired people. Touchscreen is (usually) flat and only feedback you may have are vibration, sound and light (however there is hopethere is hope). It may be enough or not but it depends on context. Visually impaired people or people with impaired motor-coordination won't be able to use them effectively unless they use a Touch Screen for the Visually Impaired or a refreshable Braille display (see also Ollie Ford's suggested abstract) and you provide an adapted UX (for a better and easier experience). Note that in this case a proper designed system may provide a better experience with a touchscreen than with traditional mechanical controls.

It's even more important for impaired people. Touchscreen is (usually) flat and only feedback you may have are vibration, sound and light (however there is hope). It may be enough or not but it depends on context. Visually impaired people or people with impaired motor-coordination won't be able to use them effectively unless they use a Touch Screen for the Visually Impaired or a refreshable Braille display (see also Ollie Ford's suggested abstract) and you provide an adapted UX (for a better and easier experience). Note that in this case a proper designed system may provide a better experience with a touchscreen than with traditional mechanical controls.

It's even more important for impaired people. Touchscreen is (usually) flat and only feedback you may have are vibration, sound and light (however there is hope). It may be enough or not but it depends on context. Visually impaired people or people with impaired motor-coordination won't be able to use them effectively unless they use a Touch Screen for the Visually Impaired or a refreshable Braille display (see also Ollie Ford's suggested abstract) and you provide an adapted UX (for a better and easier experience). Note that in this case a proper designed system may provide a better experience with a touchscreen than with traditional mechanical controls.

11 added 92 characters in body
source | link

Of course mechanical devices may be properly designed to minimize this kind of errors (in this case they changed descent speed to be always displayed with four digits) but a well done touchscreen UX (when applicable, there are also other factors to consider) may greatly reduce them (for example with well-visible labels, full length numbers and even different gestures).

Of course mechanical devices may be properly designed to minimize this kind of errors (in this case they changed descent speed to be always displayed with four digits) but a well done touchscreen UX (when applicable, there are also other factors to consider) may greatly reduce them.

Of course mechanical devices may be properly designed to minimize this kind of errors (in this case they changed descent speed to be always displayed with four digits) but a well done touchscreen UX (when applicable, there are also other factors to consider) may greatly reduce them (for example with well-visible labels, full length numbers and even different gestures).

10 added 1756 characters in body
source | link

Yes. On the same space you can put more stuff. More controls and feedback (also using colors and styles). Something something you simply can't have with a mechanical knob (unless you add more and more LEDs and small displays). TheyHowever they have one shape whereas mechanical devices may have different shapes and tactile feedback.

Touchscreens also make changes/updates relatively cheap (you can, for example, take advantage of new software features with the same old and cheap hardware).

They give you the ability to use new gestures unavailable on mechanical devices (pinches, rotation, multitap).

They also compact more controls in less space hiding (at first) what you don't need in that exact moment. TheyNote that context is not a prerogative of touchscreen (and screens in general) but it's also give you the abilityapplied to usemechanical devices like knobs (where function changes according to state, selected for example with another switch). However, because screen will (should) greatly change according to state then they will minimize possible new gesturesMode-Error-Slips unavailable on(when a device has different states in which the same controls have different meanings). Norman reports an accident of an Airbus because of this:

The flight control equipment (...) had two modes, one for controlling vertical speed , the other for controlling flight's path angle of descent. In one case, when pilots were attempting to land, the pilots thought that they were controlling the angle of descent whereas they had accidentally selected the mode that controlled speed of descent. The number (-3.3) ... was to steep rate of descent when interpreted as vertical speed (-3,300 feet/minute): -3.3° would be only -800 feet/minute...

Of course mechanical devices may be properly designed to minimize this kind of errors (pinches, rotationin this case they changed descent speed to be always displayed with four digits) but a well done touchscreen UX (when applicable, multitapthere are also other factors to consider) may greatly reduce them.

  • Environment constraints (temperature range, weather, illumination, dust or chemical agents).
  • Usage constraints (with gloves, with wet/humid hands).
  • Usage conditions (in airplane during turbulence, in car where you can't constantly watch the display).
  • UX considerations (immediately accessible features vs more compact navigable organization).
  • UI constraints (it has to be used by visual impaired people or by people with motor-coordination impairment?)
  • Need for constant updates (mechanical devices can't - usually - be easy replaced but a SW UI can - usually - be).
  • Users expectancy (it doesn't matter what's better, sometimes users want something made in the way they know) and preferences: some gamers buy a case with knobs (yes, more than one) to fine control CPU/case fans' speed (!!!).
  • Marketing trends (again it doesn't really matter what's better but what users want because it's trendy).
  • Users ability, time and motivation to learn how to use a device. Touchscreen (but in general any non mechanical-only interface) is good for a progressive disclosure while with a full-of-stuff panel you immediately see almost everything you can do. Actually you can see this both as a benefit (easier to use) or a drawback (lack of affordance).
  • Cost and availability.
  • Safety (sometimes mechanical controls are required because of increased security, users are used to confirm UI actions but to unlock a switch requires an active action).
  • Law (sometimes usage of one device instead of another is simply required by law).

Yes. On the same space you can put more stuff. More controls and feedback (also using colors and styles). Something you simply can't have with a mechanical knob (unless you add more and more LEDs and small displays). They also make changes/updates relatively cheap (you can, for example, take advantage of new software features with the same old and cheap hardware).

They compact more controls in less space hiding (at first) what you don't need in that exact moment. They also give you the ability to use new gestures unavailable on mechanical devices (pinches, rotation, multitap).

  • Environment constraints (temperature range, weather, illumination, dust or chemical agents).
  • Usage constraints (with gloves, with wet/humid hands).
  • Usage conditions (in airplane during turbulence, in car where you can't constantly watch the display).
  • UX considerations (immediately accessible features vs more compact navigable organization).
  • UI constraints (it has to be used by visual impaired people or by people with motor-coordination impairment?)
  • Need for constant updates (mechanical devices can't - usually - be easy replaced but a SW UI can - usually - be).
  • Users expectancy (it doesn't matter what's better, sometimes users want something made in the way they know).
  • Marketing trends (again it doesn't really matter what's better but what users want because it's trendy).
  • Cost and availability.
  • Safety (sometimes mechanical controls are required because of increased security, users are used to confirm UI actions but to unlock a switch requires an active action).
  • Law (sometimes usage of one device instead of another is simply required by law).

Yes. On the same space you can put more stuff. More controls and feedback (also using colors and styles) something you simply can't have with a mechanical knob (unless you add more and more LEDs and small displays). However they have one shape whereas mechanical devices may have different shapes and tactile feedback.

Touchscreens also make changes/updates relatively cheap (you can, for example, take advantage of new software features with the same old and cheap hardware).

They give you the ability to use new gestures unavailable on mechanical devices (pinches, rotation, multitap).

They also compact more controls in less space hiding (at first) what you don't need in that exact moment. Note that context is not a prerogative of touchscreen (and screens in general) but it's also applied to mechanical devices like knobs (where function changes according to state, selected for example with another switch). However, because screen will (should) greatly change according to state then they will minimize possible Mode-Error-Slips (when a device has different states in which the same controls have different meanings). Norman reports an accident of an Airbus because of this:

The flight control equipment (...) had two modes, one for controlling vertical speed , the other for controlling flight's path angle of descent. In one case, when pilots were attempting to land, the pilots thought that they were controlling the angle of descent whereas they had accidentally selected the mode that controlled speed of descent. The number (-3.3) ... was to steep rate of descent when interpreted as vertical speed (-3,300 feet/minute): -3.3° would be only -800 feet/minute...

Of course mechanical devices may be properly designed to minimize this kind of errors (in this case they changed descent speed to be always displayed with four digits) but a well done touchscreen UX (when applicable, there are also other factors to consider) may greatly reduce them.

  • Environment constraints (temperature range, weather, illumination, dust or chemical agents).
  • Usage constraints (with gloves, with wet/humid hands).
  • Usage conditions (in airplane during turbulence, in car where you can't constantly watch the display).
  • UX considerations (immediately accessible features vs more compact navigable organization).
  • UI constraints (it has to be used by visual impaired people or by people with motor-coordination impairment?)
  • Need for constant updates (mechanical devices can't - usually - be easy replaced but a SW UI can - usually - be).
  • Users expectancy (it doesn't matter what's better, sometimes users want something made in the way they know) and preferences: some gamers buy a case with knobs (yes, more than one) to fine control CPU/case fans' speed (!!!).
  • Marketing trends (again it doesn't really matter what's better but what users want because it's trendy).
  • Users ability, time and motivation to learn how to use a device. Touchscreen (but in general any non mechanical-only interface) is good for a progressive disclosure while with a full-of-stuff panel you immediately see almost everything you can do. Actually you can see this both as a benefit (easier to use) or a drawback (lack of affordance).
  • Cost and availability.
  • Safety (sometimes mechanical controls are required because of increased security, users are used to confirm UI actions but to unlock a switch requires an active action).
  • Law (sometimes usage of one device instead of another is simply required by law).
9 added 25 characters in body
source | link
8 added 1464 characters in body
source | link
    Mod Moved Comments To Chat
7 added 656 characters in body
source | link
6 added 346 characters in body
source | link
5 added 346 characters in body
source | link
4 added 201 characters in body
source | link
3 added 424 characters in body
source | link
2 added 248 characters in body
source | link
1
source | link