December 2007

I’ve been meaning to blog this for months. Finally remembered.

My aftermarket car radio has a major, dangerous design flaw: the Power/Source button – yes, it functions as both an on/off and an input source switch – must be PRESSED and HELD for approximately THREE SECONDS in order to turn the unit on or off. (If you press without holding, it switches between radio, CD, and auxiliary input.)

Think about that for a second. A device that is DESIGNED to be used while the user is driving a vehicle requires a THREE SECOND PRESS AND HOLD. In other words, the designers thought that is was perfectly reasonable to have the driver remove their hand from the steering wheel for a three-count. And I should add that there’s no tactile feedback; you must observe the unit’s panel to ensure that the unit has powered on or off.

That is poor-bordering-on-negligent design. Scratch that. It *is* negligent design. Who thought that this was an OK design decision?

I’ll go out to the car over lunch and get the manufacturer and model number, so I can name names.

Blogged with Flock

{ 8 comments }

Just thought I’d point to my latest UXmatters article. My idea for this article is that people get stuck at a certain point of understanding a system, and fail to progress beyond a few areas of a rich application.

? After initially becoming somewhat familiar with a system, people often continue using the same inefficient, time-consuming styles of interaction they first learned. For example, they fail to discover shortcuts and accelerators in the applications they use. Other people learn only a small portion of a product’s capabilities and, as a result, don’t realize the full benefits the product offers. Why? What can operating systems, applications, Web sites, and devices do to better facilitate a person’s progression from novice to expert usage?

It’s an idea I’ve been kicking around for a while. Since I owed UXmatters a column, I thought I’d explore it a bit. I’m still working it out.

{ 2 comments }