Hi guys! I’m starting a new series of issues about AR/usability & social interaction.
What is an augmented reality? How to interact with it as an ordinary user.
Not with glasses or other “future” input tools. Modern devices- smartphones and operating systems that are understandable to us.
In short, a modern graphical interface.
So the universally recognized Wikipedia describes augmented reality:
“Augmented reality (AR) is an interactive experience of a real-world environment where the objects that reside in the real-world are enhanced by computer-generated perceptual information, sometimes across multiple sensory modalities, including visual, auditory, haptic, somatosensory and olfactory.”
User experience is a multi-level task, maybe even a problem. The modern interface has quite a rough approach to the implementation of new solutions. Most often the user takes replaceable elements as an affront.
In the 1990s, substantial work was done by the HCI (Human-Computer Interaction) community around the idea of user-oriented software design.
From this work came the concept of the scenario, commonly used to describe a method of design problem solving by concretization.
Alan Cooper “About Face 3”.
The interaction between man and machine. …
Depending on the content, you must select the appropriate way to build text blocks on the page.
The screen text has a large number of differences from the printed text.
So we can notice that if the text block is too wide then it ceases to be read.
But, as in any rule there are exceptions. In our case, they depend on the size of the peg, font, background and content.
For example, when you are making text on a gray background in full width, you should use the size and the line spacing by several points more.
How can manage augmented reality? When I started to think about this issue, I singled out several options. I want to emphasize that I did not consider options that are not possible to implement or they will not be developed in the coming years.
A voice is not a bad option and probably the most obvious one at this time. But we need to understand that the way of user interaction with UI, directly depends on the application tasks. Responding to in coming call is not the same working with a media content or other tasks for advanced users.
Recently, I often think about how does the interface interacts with the user? If we start to delve into this topic, there is a logical question: if the user directly affects the interface, does the interface affects the user?
For some it may seems like a trivial question, but I think I can interest you.
Is it possible that the storyteller would like one sentence? No, we look at the all picture and the overall picture affects us. When designing each element is part of the system.
The interface affects the user, gives joy when it works, or on the contrary, gets…
UI Kit — set of standards and solutions for the user interface, enabling a modular approach in the prototyping of interaction.
Can be applied to any system, that is built on modules.
The most popular option for us. More often 12 columns with indents. Standard and simple system. Most of the interface market is built on these principles, and many of the below listed systems are created on this basis. Very quickly learn, but this grid creates an internal standardization.
Although most likely this similarity will be see only designers.
I think the design community also noticed this. There are many interfaces with an excellent UI, which completely loses its meaning with out UX.
Can a UX prototype be destroyed by a modern UI?
Why these concepts differs from real-world tasks?
Who are these guys who sell these concepts?
Do the interfaces have artistic discipline?