One of the biggest problems with computers today is that they are literally not for everyone. Though businesses have come to rely on computers to stay competitive, there are still people who dread using computers so much, they would rather find a different job than learn how to work with the machines. A major contributing factor to the aversion people have for computers is having to learn how to understand the many different types of software, hardware, operations, processes, and methods associated with translating human desire into mechanical results.
Hollywood makes good income from creating movies about rogue computers that can overthrow humanity, and the entertainment business has long taken advantage of the stereotypical computer geek hacking his way into defense systems and secret data streams not meant for public consumption. Audiences marvel at the “geniuses?who can break passwords and encrypted codes with a few clicks of the keyboard.
Many people take these goofy portrayals more as fact than they do fiction. Having worked closely with both people who understand technology, and those who do not, I have tried to think through some of the issues that need to be addressed to take technology to the next level. Despite years of progress in the power and function of computing systems, there has been too little attention paid to the way we interact with our machines. The primary factor that still drives people away from engaging with computers is the level of complication associated with accomplishing anything.
Several key barriers exist to interfere with improving simplicity and ease of use for modern computers. One problem is the speed of innovation introduced within the industry. There are so many new ways to reinvent the wheel, it is difficult to keep up with why some new approaches are any better than the methods they are replacing. Often, business leaders are convinced to completely rework entire systems because the people charged with maintaining them have only been trained in operating the latest technologies, rendering legacy systems obsolete. When this situation occurs, it becomes a costly and not always successful operation for companies big and small. With innovations in hardware and software, there is the secondary problem of shifting standards that must be followed to keep in tune with the need for changes and improvements.
When industry professionals have such a difficult time keeping up with technology, it is no small wonder why marginal user groups feel left out altogether in finding answers to how they can accomplish the basic tasks they have in mind. The simple act of replacing one personal computer with a newer model can throw some users into a tailspin. Suddenly, they are responsible for reorienting themselves to the new configuration, learning how to access the programs they are familiar with, and discovering the functions of new applications installed on their machine.
While working with one company who had recently moved some users from one version of operating system to another, I encountered a man who was obviously very frustrated with what he was trying to do. As I passed by his desk, I could see a look on his face that told me he was not happy. He threw up his hands and said to me, “This is not the same! I’m supposed to have my files on here somewhere, but I don’t know how to find them. Can you get somebody over here to tell this thing what I want?? On that occasion, I spent some time helping the man get oriented to his system, and showing him how to locate the files and programs he needed to perform his function. I finally broke free by promising to make myself available if he had more questions later.
The curious thing about this incident was observing how foreign this new system seemed to the man. Even the things he had used all the time on the previous system seemed foreign to him as he fumbled with changing to his new environment. It rapidly dawned on me that the trouble he was having related to a difficulty in translating his desires and thoughts into procedures the computer required to operate. All I did to help him was listen to what he wanted to accomplish, and show him the mechanical steps he needed to perform to get started. Over time, I noticed similar situations of mental disconnect when people had to learn how to translate what they wanted to get done into using the tools available on the computer to accomplish their work.
In recent years, I have applied the lessons I learned from these observations in developing products that help to bridge the gap between the way people think on a human level, and how these desires can be translated to coordinate the mechanical functions needed to accomplish intended results. The technology used to achieve this is called ITL (Individual Translation Layer) technology. There are a number of key factors associated with this new approach which make it appealing to the human side of the computer equation.
ITL methodologies present some interesting facets that have previously been unavailable or unfocused in historical perspective. Primarily, the approach can be applied in a completely fluid manner that does not require changes to current computer industry standards, because the means for establishing this form of communication between user and mechanism is accomplished with logical instructional layering.
The first element of ITL principles broadens the scope for traditional macro approaches to incorporate a command infrastructure that translates natural language mental concepts into computer based control and command functions. Rather than confining these actions to a single operation within a given program, the ITL approach expands this ease of use to system wide operations and task work, and can also extend to information access beyond the individual computer. For the end user incorporating these techniques, there is a decreasing need to translate their thoughts into mechanical procedures, because the machine can be made to understand how to perform tasks based on unaltered human expression of desires, and deliver appropriate mechanical response. Furthermore, this approach allows enough flexibility to “tune?the system to respond to the specific approach and style of any individual who uses it.
To compliment the increased synergy between system level functions and end users, the ITL approach can also be applied on a software programming level. When incorporated into design specifications, ITL focus can result in programs that give end users a broader scope of flexibility in expanding or selecting application features, command sets, and custom configuration to individual uses, without losing control over default programming standards. These programming techniques can also help to create a more flexible interaction between incorporating existing program features into the functionality of new ones.
In short, the ITL approach gives each user the ability tell the computer what they want it to do from their own perspective, and that is more like the way it should be.
Director Software Concepts - BHO Technologists LittleTek Centerhttp://home.earthlink.net/~jdir