Automotive Interface
I was thinking today about interface design and function. A truly good interface takes something powerful and (possibly) complicated, and makes it easy and straight-forward. All this was coming to me while riding in a car.
The main interface of a vehicle is actually quite impressive when you think about it. Sure, all the additional accouterments add plenty of knobs, buttons and screens, but the root purpose of the automobile, moving and steering, are all wrapped up into 4 tools: 1 digital setting and 3 analog controls. These 4 tools let the user maneuver a 3000 pound machine with countless gears, levers, racks, pinions, chips and fluids.
And there’s a good reason a vehicle has been boiled down to gear, go, stop, and turn: user safety. In this interface, complexity introduces danger. But with a well experimented, thought out, and fine-tuned interface, pretty much anyone from the general public can control a contraption far more complicated than they will ever understand. That’s good design.
Of course it’s not perfect. The user isn’t confined to a particular set of confines. The users speed is not dictated by the speed limit, but by the users ability to keep the vehicle to that limit. And there are times when the driver might not need to keep to the road. Certainly this allows for mistakes to be made. Just ask any police officer. But that lack of frame allows for so much additional freedom and possibility.
Adding restraints to any interface an be good, and even necessary. But be careful that what you create is not so narrow that it doesn’t allow you to move around. Don’t add features just to add them. Don’t add options just because you can. Keep things simple, easy, and flexible.
Post and Author Info.
Published January 16, 2006 by:
Commenting is currently off for this post.
So far there are 9 comments.
You know what’s amazing? I had similar thoughts just this morning.
Someone hit my car a couple weeks ago, and I took it in to the shop this morning. It’ll be there for a few days, so I had to get a rental car. Despite a few minor inconsistencies, the “user interface” of a completely different car was nearly identical. Gas, brake, guages, etc. I dunno, it just struck me as really great. Uh, I probably think about this junk too much…
January 16th, 2006
In general I would agree with what you just said about cars, however I can’t stop questioning their ease of use (or, perhaps, requiring a three digit IQ to drive them) every time I see a news story about someone confusing gas and break on an automatic ;) Also, not all cars are made the same … some have an utterly horrible “UI”.
January 16th, 2006
Jared: Well, you know what they say. “Great minds…” and all.
Alex: I’ll agree that some manufacturers make the interface more complicated than it needs to be. Especially when you consider all the additional features that get added on to a vehicle. My point was about the main core of driving. Controlling the engine, the stearing, the brakes, and the transmission.
Volvo woudn’t get very far throwing a few wheels, some racks and pinions, an engine, a throttle cord, and a brake lever at a consumer saying “There’s all the parts, you should be able to figure it out.” It just seems there’s a lot of applications, web and otherwise, out there that have been put together with that little amount of thought for the end-user.
January 17th, 2006
I’m sure I’m not the first here to see them, but many newer cars are centering the dashboard console – speedometer, odometer, gas gauges – in the front cab rather than directly in front of the driver. I was skeptical at first, but after driving my wife’s Saturn ION for a while I realized that it makes perfect sense – you’re constantly looking across the middle of the dash to read signs or check your right side mirror. It’s just a quick stop on the way rather than another destination for your eyes.
I have no idea how it’s affected safety in practice, but it seems more comfortable to me.
January 17th, 2006
I had a similar experience to Jared. Our car was in the shop, a Dodge Stratus, so they gave us a Pontiac Grand Am at the car rental place. Man, I didn’t realize what I was missing.
January 17th, 2006
So, Steve, what would you think if, after I pay of Mom’s van, I trade my Hyundai in for a PT Cruiser. Navy blue with gold trim (i.e., Cornerstone’s colors, of course). What do you think of a PT Cruiser? It seems to me you said you didn’t like them, but I can’t remember. They do look solid, and have room for 4 (easier to take Grandma and Grandpa to the doctor’s office, etc., than in my current car), even if they do have a “period” (i.e., 1940’s) kind of look. Lemme know whatcha think! Dad.
January 18th, 2006
Very few companies are smart enough to do this, keeping things simple and functional generates the most sales. Look at the ipod all mac applications, all those Cannon one touch and it prints cameras, Nokia phones which are just more similer the the opposition.
January 18th, 2006
On a related topic, how about considering road markings, signs, and signals to be a user interface, and one that’s just as dangerous when it becomes too complex?
Wired has a terrific article about a European road engineer who redesigns roads and intersections — even high-traffic ones — so that they need no signs or road markings. The positive results include better traffic handling and fewer accidents.
(link: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.12/traffic.html)
January 22nd, 2006
This is the first article I’ve come across that touches this subject. A bit more depth would be nice.
January 25th, 2006