Why it is important to keep interface design simple?

 iPod interface

  http://forums.techarena.in/portable-devices/1033417.htm

Windows interface

http://www.crystalxp.net/news/en218-litestep-windows-download-review.html

The design of everyday technology has to be simple. When we look at our mobile phones or iPods, we want to be able to quickly navigate through their menus and features. Time is something that we don't like to waste. Therefore the user interface (UI) has to be simple.

Familiarity is something that we all like. Companies like Apple and Windows have an image that is known worldwide. Their desktop designs can easily be distinguished from each other and they're easy to use. Even though they regularly update, people still know how to use them. If they completely changed the way their products functioned people would be confused and would see the companies in a different light and may discontinue to use the product. Another example that can be used is the ATM machine. If the interface changed people would be confused and not understand how to use it. Therefore, it has to stay the same.

The desire of immediacy is one that is prominent in today's world. If you have created an interface that is complicated to use, people won't spend their time trying to figure it out. Even though products come with an instruction manual it's unlikely that someone will want to spend their time studying it so that they can get familiar with their new gadget. Consumers like to be able to use their iPod or computer quickly without any fuss.

Overall, simplicity is the heart of an effective interface.

Newsgames: Do they take the seriousness out of the news?

 Image courtesy of newsgames.gatech.edu

Newsgames "can persuade, inform, and titillate; make information interactive; recreate a historical event; put news content into a puzzle; teach journalism; and build a community." (Bogost, Ferrari, Schweizer, 2010)

The progression of advancements in technology has allowed an audience to consume media in many different ways. For example, the gaming community online has grown considerably in the last few years with the introduction of games such as World of Warcraft (WoW). This has inspired games to be created with news stories as their theme.

By playing a game based on a news event, the user interacts with the issue. It could provoke them to find out more about the issue or it could do the opposite and take all seriousness out of the real situation. For someone who's just stumbled across the game it can be a good starting point for them to access a news story. After all, curiosity is something that strikes us all and we always want to know more. However, if you already understand the concept of the story then the game can become simply just a game as you interact and get involved in the game without thinking.

Many of the games that I have found have been biased. For example, there are many games circulating the internet opposing George Bush. These games allow people to express their views via the creator. This is somewhat safer than actually hitting George Bush with a shoe yourself (as one of the games allows you to do!)

So, are these games a good way of getting news across to various audiences? Yes and no.

Much of the gaming community is comprised of young people- often teenagers. Therefore, they'll be the ones much more likely to stumble upon these games. These games can then become viral as they're shared via social networking sites such as facebook. Furthermore, these games can then go on to reach an older audience if, for example, the gamer's parents are aware of the games that they're playing. So, these games can then reach a variety of people.

Will New Media mean that one day everything will be digital?

The digtalisation of media is something that has been happening for many years. However, with the progression of computer technology it is now occurring more rapidly than it had done in the past. An example that can be used to illustrate this is the advancements in music players. This timeline shows the gaps in new technology reducing as the 20^th century was nearing the 21^st.

Is New Media killing off things such as the newspaper and radio?

We are surrounded now by hypermedia; “Computer applications that present multiple media (text, graphics, animation, video) using hypertextual organization.” (Bolter and Grusin, 1999). This makes discovering the news an even more interactive process. We can have articles at our fingertips that include videos of events that have happened.

Radio has evolved as well with the introduction of digital radio. This means that we can now access it from anywhere via the internet. This is a complete change to when people used to actually have to own a radio to listen.

The internet has become the main force behind many things. We can practically find anything we want or need within a few key strokes. Practically every form of media has been merged onto the internet. People don’t need to own lots of different machines and equipment to access different forms of media.

Are the advancements in technology pulling us into a "Big Brother" society?

According to the BBC “There are up to 4.2m CCTV cameras in Britain - about one for every 14 people.”  Is this a necessary amount to have or are we heading for a world that George Orwell portrays in his book '1984'? 

The progression of technology over the 20^th and 21^st century has allowed people to be observant of other people’s actions in an increasingly detailed way. We can now find out what people are doing every minute of the day through the likes of twitter and facebook.

 

The main force behind these advancements has been the military. Wars have prompted them to make new technology to try and find out where the other side is. For example they’ve created many different ways to survey people. The introduction of radar in 1940 and satellites in 1957 has today become detailed ways to identify where people are. A ship can tell if there’s a submarine near and an air base can tell if enemy planes are approaching. However, is the military using these advancements for a country's defence or do they have other agendas? With technology that is so accurate at pinpointing where someone is, is it really just used for spotting the enemy?

But, it’s not just the military and hierarchy who can watch people. The introduction of social networking sites has allowed normal people to track each other. Facebook is an example that can be used because it has the options to include details about your address and phone numbers along with various other things. Furthermore, the recent launch of facebook places has meant that users can pinpoint their own location.

By being a part of a social networking site we are becoming a part of the ‘Public Sphere,' a term coined by Habermas.  This means that we're all interacting with each other and become a part of a place where anyone can talk to anyone. This is more commonly known as hyperspace. 

Facebook, myspace and other sites are a great way of keeping in touch with our friends and family but are we really sure that we’re safe on these sites? When we put up all our information do we really know who’s looking at it?

The real question is, at the end of the day- are we submitting ourselves into a 'Big Brother' society by letting anyone and everyone access our information on the internet? With the amount of surveillance and technology that is now at our fingertips, it is almost certain that we can be tracked wherever we are.