Barry Katz and Michael Shanks in conversation with Jim Yurchenko of IDEO

Topic - human factors design - engineering behavioral relationships - NB it is important to distinguish a behavioral focus on "mechanical" interaction with things.

Irony - an unobvious device can be revolutionary - innovation may come from edges/unexpected connections/unusual metaphors.

The importance of economy - we can build lots of things but not necessarily with economy. Connects with notions value too.

recorded March 2004

Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Part 5 Part 6 Part 7 Part 8 Part 9 Part 10 Part 11 Part 12 Part 13 Part 14 Part 15 Part 16 Part 17 Part 18 Part 19 Part 20 Part 21 Part 22 Part 23 Part 24 Part 25

---

>> some notes on human factors, Don Norman's influential early work

>> and David Pye - furniture designer

issues - function and people-artifact interactions

---

Posted at May 12/2005 03:22 PM:
Zachary Kinloch: Many people mistakenly believe that the mouse was invented by Apple. Others believe that Steve Jobs stole the idea from Xerox, where the mouse was used on an early office PC called the Star. But in truth, the mouse was first conceived of by Doug Engelbart in the early 1960’s, then a scientist at the Stanford Research Institute, in Menlo Park, California.

What were you working on when you came up with the idea for the mouse? Was it a project specifically aimed at developing an input device for computers?

Engelbart: The mouse was just a tiny piece of a much larger project, aimed at augmenting human intellect.

Augmenting human intellect?

Yes. I have always believed that the complexity of the problems facing mankind is growing faster than our ability to solve them. Therefore, finding ways to augment our intellect would seem to be both a necessary and a desirable goal. At the time of the invention of the mouse, I had already been exploring possible ways for people to increase their capability to solve complex problems for more than a dozen years.

Where did the need for a mouse fit in this project?

We envisioned problem-solvers using computer-aided working stations to augment their efforts. They required the ability to interact with information displays using some sort of device to move [a cursor] around the screen. There were several devices then in use, or being considered for use: the light pen, joysticks, etc.

Why didn’t you just use one of those?

We were looking for the best -- the most efficient -- device. We approached NASA in 1966, and said, “let’s test them,” and determine the answer once-and-for-all. With NASA funding, the team developed a set of simple tasks, and timed a group of volunteers in doing those tasks with the various devices. For example, the computer would generate an object in a random position on the screen, and a cursor somewhere else. We timed how long it took the users to move the cursor to the object. It quickly became clear that the mouse out-performed all the others. Devices like the light pen simply took too much time, by repeatedly requiring the user to pick up the pointer, and reach all the way to the screen -- very tiresome.

---

Posted at May 17/2005 11:27 PM:
[Adi]: Tracking the history of the computer mouse, it is amazing to see the new innovations that have come out since. Based on the same input techniques we now have the laser guided mouse, the optical pen, and even instruments for repair and surgery which can drive programs. Interestingly enough the new age of inputs seems to be mental and they are several research programs which have successfully manipulated cursors using thought. I would love to see a research that tracks the various paths software design could have taken had we adopted the keyboard or even the joystick as the input device of preference.