1. Introduction
York and Pendharkar define ubiquitous computing (ubicomp for short) as a post-desktop model of human-computer interaction in which information processing has been thoroughly integrated into everyday objects and activities. In the course of ordinary activities, someone "using" ubiquitous computing engages many computational devices and systems simultane-ously, and may not necessarily even be aware that they are doing so. This model is usually considered an advancement from the desktop paradigm.
More formally ubiquitous computing is defined as "machines that fit the human environment instead of forcing humans to enter theirs." (York and Pendharkar, 2004).
The cross-referenced book review at hand investigates two different articles related to ubiquitous computing. These articles set a frame of reference for discussion about ubicomp related ideas in Harold Thimbleby’s „Press on: Principles of Interaction Programming.“
The articles chosen for setting the frame of reference are as follows:
• „The Computer for the 21st Century“ by Mark Weiser
• „Yesterday’s Tomorrows: notes on ubiquitous computing’s dominant vision“ by Genevieve Bell and Paul Dourish
Thimbleby states (on the back cover of his book) that interactive systems and devices, from mobile phones to office copiers, do not fulfill their potential for a wide variety of reasons—not all of them technical. He argues that we can design better interactive systems and devices if we draw on sound computer science principles.
Interactive systems encompass much more than our desktops and laptops. Most people don’t really think about the devices they interact with on a daily basis. In most cases people have to „learn their language“ not the other way around. So if there’s an effective (e.g. a standardized) way to design/program interactive systems that fit the human environment, it’s well worth investigating.
2. Frame of reference
2.1 „The Computer for the 21st Century“ by Mark Weiser
Mark Weiser was a researcher at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center and he tried to envision a world where „specialized elements of hardware and software, connected by wires, radio waves and infrared, will be so ubiquitous that no one will notice their presence.“
The wording may seem out of date, but the above prediction was made more than 20 years ago (in 1991 to be precise). A lot of the things Weiser envisioned, did come true at one time or another, but mostly due to evolutionary reasons (e.g. technological developments).
Weiser stated that „the idea of a personal computer itself is misplaced and the vision of laptop machines, dynabooks and knowledge navigators is only a transitional step toward achieving the real potential of information technology.“ The computers themselves have to vanish into the background. Such a disappearance is a fundmental consequence of human psychology (as people get used to new technology). Today’s laptops, tablets and smartphones are more than able to accommodate the ubicomp criteria (e.g. they are able to utilize the hidden information layer), but they do not dissappear into the background.
Weiser argued that even the most powerful notbook computer, with access to a worldwide information network, still focuses attention on a single box. Today’s multimedia machine makes the computer screen into a demanding focus of attention rather than allowing it to fade into the background. Today we can project a touch sensitive keyboard on any solid surface or use our smartphones to read QR codes (which contain additional information), so it's safe to say that there have been a lot of advancments in the area of ubiquitous computing, but the everyday use of such technologies is not very common yet. The desktop paradigm has not been vanquished yet.
He points out two issues of crucial importance: location and scale. Weiser thought that ubiquitous computers must know where they are. If a computer is aware of it’s location, it can adapt to the specific needs of that location. Also, he stated that ubiquitious computers will come in different sizes, each suited to a specific task. Today light sensors adjust the brightness of the screen and movement sensors rotate the smartphone screen if the phone itself is tilted in any direction. Location problems have been solved with user-specific profiles and GPS (and A-GPS) information. It's hard to say if that's what Weiser imagined, but location-specific services have become increasingly popular and devices support those services as well.
All in all, Weiser portrayed a technological fairytale at the time. His article was both idealistic and innovative. He argued that ubiquitous computing is something that will arrive when technology develops over time. That was the dominating notion, but Weiser also stated that even our everyday life holds ubiquitous interactions with our environment (e.g. the process of reading something). Weiser was not very specific about how this ubiquitous computing will be achieved,
his arguments were very technology-driven, he believed that ubiquity will be achieved with "pads" and "tabs". In the end Weiser leaves things open when he states that ubiquitous computers will reside in the human world and pose no barrier to personal interactions. Also, ubiquitous computing will help overcome information overload.
2.2 „Yesterday’s Tomorrows: notes on ubiquitous computing’s dominant vision“ by Genevieve Bell and Paul Dourish
Genevieve Bell and Paul Dourish analyzed and reviewed Mark Weiser's article in 2005. They state that ubiquitous computing as a research area is unusual amongst the technological research arenas. Ubicomp is driven by the possibilites of the future, whereas other research areas in the field of technology are driven by building upon and elaborating a body of past results.
Bell and Dourish agree that Weiser's article was influential since it articulated the research agenda for the topic. Almost 25% of all papers published in the Ubicomp conference between 2001 and 2005, cite Weiser's articles. Bell and Dourish are concerned with "the balance between past, present and future embedded in conventional discourses about ubiquitous computing." Weiser's vision is old and needs to be reviewed and re-evaluated.
Bell and Dourish present two alternative visions of ubiquitous computing (from Singapore and Korea). The authors try to understand the relationship between ubiquitous computing's envisioned future and our everyday present. They want to know what influence does this have on contemporary ubiquitous computing research and what motivates the remarkable persistance and centrality of Weiser's vision.
The authors argue that ubiquitous computing is already here. It's not how we envisioned it to look like though. Current practices are rendered irrelevant since the future is "right around the corner." And that reasoning behind that discourse allows the researchers to dodge responsibility for the present situation. They also argue that "the seamlessly interconnected world of future scenarios is at best a misleading vision."
Bell and Dourish point out that today's technological landscape is radically different from the one where Weiser formed his vision of ubicomp. Yet, the "proximate future" is still what the ubicomp research focuses on. The authors say that it may be because ubicomp is not really about the present, but more about the future that is everchanging by nature. The other way to look at it is that ubicomp is already here and it has taken a different form than we first envisioned. Bell and Dourish state that since we've already entered the 21'st century, we should try to envision the "computer of now."
The authors point out that Singapore is one of the most connected countries in the world. They argue that the life singaporeans live is, in essence, a good example of ubiquitous computing in action - outside the labs and research centres. The importants of the Singapore vision is that it's a collective practice, rather than a set of discrete individual actions. Singaporeans are also very keen on phones and related services. The Korean vision of ubicomp is closely connected with internet and various services related to that inherent connectivity.
William Gibson has said that "The future is already here; it's just not very evenly distributed." Thus, the domain of the ubicomp research should be the present, rather than future.
3. Book review and synthesis
In the beginning of the book (Part 1), Thimbleby illustrates how interactions in the real world work and why they are so complicated.
Thimbleby argues that interactive devices around us can fulfill their objective more efficiently with the help of interaction programming. He states that programmers can be more creative and central when it comes to interaction design. Also, they have the necessary technical skills that designers often times lack.
Thimbleby states that we can design better interactive systems/devices if we use various computer sciences principles (for example state machines and graph theory). He's telling people to find creative solutions for various design problems. That, in this review's context, is a way to increase the ubiquitous features of various interactive devices.
Thimbleby also says that: "Good user interface design isn’t a matter of following a recipe you can get from a cookbook: it’s an attitude, along with a bunch of principles, skills, and provocative ideas …." This means that there's no single generic way to address design issues in the ubiquitous world, although the book at hand may provide an overview of helpful insights and principles.
Part 2 of the book is where Thimbleby approaches the formal part of the interaction programming principles and insights. He even gives code examples to illustrate how to solve a specific design problem. The term interaction programming argues the concept where a designer has to create the interface and the programmer has to make it work.
Part 3 of the book is devoted to interaction design practices and is by far the most important part of the book, since it gives specific guidelines on what to avoid and what to strive for when dealing with interaction design.
The overall tone of the book suggests that there's a lot in terms of usability that can be achieved and improved with programming and sound computer science principles.
The book relates to the previous articles by adding the missing piece. While the two articles were very technology-driven, the book provides a software angle of the ubicomp discourse. It's clear that Weisner was correct about the fact that we do live in the constant state of "exploring the tomorrow", be it the 21st century or a similar metaphor. Technology will keep developing and thus, various ubicomp practices will emerge more often. Bell and Dourish were also correct when they proposed the Singapore vision and the Korean vision of ubicomp. We should also deal with today's issues and in a way, ubicomp has already arrived. And trying to figure out how to create a ubicomp experience (like Thimbleby does with his book), is also one of the difficult tasks that needs to be addressed.
It's safe to say that the ubicomp discourse is like Tallinn, it's never finished. Like Bell and Dourish stated in their article, it's hard to state that "we're here now." The question ofcourse would be "what now?"
4. References
1. J. York, P.C. Pendharkar, "Human–computer interaction issues for mobile computing in a variable work context," Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 60 (2004) 771–797
2. Weiser, M. (1991). The Computer for the 21st Century. Scientific American, 94-104.
3. Bell, G., & Dourish, P. (2006). Yesterday’s tomorrows: notes on ubiquitous computing’s dominant vision. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 11(2), 133-143. doi: 10.1007/s00779-006-0071-x.
4. H. Thimbleby, "Press on: Principles of Interaction Programming", MIT Press (2010)
