Designing for Inaccuracy?
Written by Russ on November 26, 2009 – 11:54 pmI know it might come across as crazy, but I think there’s something to be said about designing for inaccuracy. And, of course, someone else has already probably thought of this and there’s a fancy (or simple) name for it. That’s okay; it’s on my mind and I’d like to rattle it out.
The Back Story
The day before Thanksgiving, the family was all loaded-up into the (sigh) minivan and as I started backing out of the driveway, my wife punched the magical button on the GPS that would get the trip routing started.
We both looked at the estimated time of arrival and took deep sighs, knowing that we were in for a long trip with a 20 month old and a 6 year old in the back. This isn’t the type of trip we look forward to as everyone gets restless.
Fast forward a few hours. My wife and I both look at the GPS unit again, and we both kind of sigh out loud. We both started to talk about the same thing at the same time–this damn GPS is accurate.
Accuracy is Good!
Absolutely. However, in my Trailblazer’s GPS, it’s frequently (translation: always) not accurate. So, after driving for a little while, the estimated time of arrival / length of time left to drive shifts enough to feel like we’re “making good time”. In fact, I could argue that every time I (allegedly) (unknowingly) take some liberties with the speed limit, I feel as if I’ve accomplished something when the time shifts to my favor.
Who’s Fault is This?
At first, I wanted to blame Microsoft.
Why not, right? Everyone likes to blame Microsoft.
We’ve all seen that Windows file download / transfer dialog box that starts out telling you that you’ve got 18 years, 4 months and 12 hours remaining that quickly jumps to 45 minutes and then continues to shift as something magical happens to the various connections to your machine.
It’s annoying.
But, if I’m being honest, my Mac does the same damn thing. The various flavors of Linux I’ve used have done it, too.
So, it’s the fault of those who create operating systems?
Or, it’s the fault of those who simply create mathematic formulas. I think.
I’m not sure it matters, really. It’s just that Garmin does one hell of a job in getting it right.
And that’s frustrating.
So What?
Exactly! So what does this have to do with anything?
Part of what’s been interesting to me about this is that I’ve been frustrated at not being able to beat the clock, or beat the game and arrive ahead of schedule. I looked forward to beating the clock and arriving “ahead of time”.
Look, it’s my quirk, but I highly doubt I’m alone here. We all like to win, even the little subtle victories like not stopping for restroom breaks so you can beat someone else’s best time.
Psychologically, each of us wants to win. We want to beat the machine. We want to be better and smarter than “that damn device in the dash”. We want to beat the computer at chess.
It’s how we’re wired. Survival of the fittest? Kick the ass of SkyNet? All the above?
I don’t know, just yet. I’m still pondering this, and I know it’s not new–the “winning” aspect is part of building engaging design. We don’t want to dumb something down so much that it turns away our audience; instead, we want to provide them with enough stuff to figure out and learn along the way that they’re feeling successful and intelligent as they move through. Perhaps this is part of what Stephen Anderson calls “Designing for Seductive Interactions”.
Perhaps it’s slightly different. I don’t know yet, and like I said, I’m sure it’s already out there, so I welcome some direction and feedback here from the smart folks that you are.
Thanks!
Posted in User Experience, User Experience Design | 5 Comments »
