Greg Priest-Dorman wrote: > > If you think about all the things you could be doing with/on your > wearable and then eliminate the tasks that require visual display for > output, what do you have left? This is why I sold off all my gear and went back to focusing on interface designs. For a design project last semester, we (a group of students) analyzed our everyday activities and came up with a wearable designed to assist us with our most common problems, which boiled down to context-sensitive alarms/reminders. It was supposed to be a GUI design project, but, in the end, we couldn't justify a visual interface for fashion, usability, portability and other reasons. Instead, we settled on an aural interface through a bone conduction headphone perched over your temple, similar to this: http://www.gadzooki.com/gadgets/skullphones-earphones-that-dont-go-in-your-ear/ On the device itself would be a momentary rocker switch (on-off-on) for providing both context sensitive input (most event responses are either an acknowledgment, a delay [snooze] or a request for more information) and scrubbing through information playback. This switch could also be elsewhere, of course. The device was posited to function both dumb (essentially a fancy MP3 player preloaded with timers and audio) and connected (e.g. a Bluetooth headset and input device connected to something in your pocket). Sure, a general-purpose, all-singing, all-dancing device makes it easier to discover things you never knew you wanted to be able to do, but you have to start somewhere, and that should probably be with what you can practically use right now. Vitorio _______________________________________________ Wear-Hard mailing listhttp://www.haven.org/mailman/listinfo/wear-hard
From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty
Archive created with babymail