It's amazing that for all the stylistic changes, computers still retain the functional identity of 1970s technology. PCs merely shrink the package. Besides cosmetic changes to the shell and some easing of the user-computer interface burden, still computers are a challenge and their power most always underutilized. What would change that?

Here are some ideas from the excellent Fourth Wave report on wearable computers, by John Latta, with a long discussion of a presentation by industrial designer Bill Buxton. (The full report features other designers in addition to Buxton, and actual projects.)

WEARABLE COMPUTERS 2004
by John Latta

2004 8th IEEE International Symposium on Wearable Computers (ISWC)
November 1-2, 2004, Arlington, VA

This conference was held back-to-back with the International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality - ISMAR 04. This has ong been at the leading edge of where many feel computing will go - creating new environments that one can wear, see and otherwise experience. Much of this dates back to the early efforts in VR in the late 1980‚s and early 1990‚s. Those days have passed but the lure and potential of the technology has not. This conference, in spite of being small, about 200, has an international scope. It is equally divided between North America, Asia and Europe.

Certainly the notion of wearable computers is not new but, having watched this technology evolve over the last 15 years, there is a sense of gradual maturity. The displays are smaller, computers are being shown that are the size of a belt buckle and many of the attendees wear a HMD throughout the conference. Certainly the interest of the military in wearable computers is a powerful forcing function, at least in the US. But what strikes us is the depth of what is considered a wearable computer and how these are being applied. We are at the beginning of a shift from computing as we know it today and wearable computers is just one component of that shift.

BILL BUXTON, "TIME TO RETHINK THE COMPUTER INTERFACE"

Bill Baxton, well known industrial designer, yanked the audience around mentally with his notions of the user interface in the era of ubiquitous computing. His keynote address was thought provoking. It reinforced a theme heard many times before ˆ the epicenter of personal computing is shifting from the PC.

Bill was at Xerox PARC and other research organizations. He is now on his own at Buxton Design.

Bill's keynote talk was, "Whereable Computing." He made the following key points:

• We are about to change the role of IO, in the human context, with computing. In the past the output, including the GUI, dominated while future user inputs will actually exceed the output from the computer. [Continued]

A key to this shift is Proximal Sensing. Two examples were given to illustrate the point: automatic door opening at hotel and auto flush urinals. The value to individuals comes when the device is able to detect proximity.

• Steelcase, one of the largest manufacturers of office furniture, estimates that in 5 to 6 years it will be less expensive, on a per sq. ft., basis, to put up displays in offices than white boards. (Interesting. It would be useful to know more about how this assessment was reached given the trends that we have seen in displays and long range display costs.)

• The notion of wearable technology goes well beyond wearing computers. An example was given of the Sony wrist device seen at multiple trade shows. This was cited as a device that would allow one to be recognized and secure.

• The GUI is not where the growth is. It is about the relationship between devices and humans. This is where proximity is important. The social context and relationships are very important.

• An interesting chart was used to show the investment in display technology. It was claimed that most of the investment in display technology is in the range of 10% to 20%, but the future growth will be in both smaller and larger displays.

The trend to larger public displays was shown as an illustration of increasing presence of displays. In the context of "the society of appliances," the social context of these displays is much different if they are seen in a "solo" context -- that is, in isolation, or in concert.

Specifically, if one can use the Sony wrist device to allow one to interact with the fixed display, this changes the relationship between the two devices and the wearer of the device. In this context, this is a social relationship.

• One of the advantages of carrying a personal device is that it can protect one's privacy. Again, knowing the social context and what an individual will permit protects privacy.

The notion of the social context was taken even farther. Bill cited a statement made by the famous architect, Louis I. Kahn: "Thoughts exchanged by one and another are not the same in one room as another." The point being that social relationships are based on location. Bill used examples with the audience to show how this can happen.

• Bill's next level of discrimination was the movement of a UI from foreground to background. Examples were cited of the foreground nature of the HH interface with video conferencing and the same in the HC context with the GUI. Bill's point is that we need to pay more attention to the transition between foreground and background interactions. He illustrated this with an example of "Postcards" -- work done at Xerox PARC.

Postcards presented on one‚s monitor short snap shots of individuals in their offices. This happened every one to five minutes and provided background awarenessˆlike presence. What was found is that by using postcards, spontaneous meetings occurred between two or more persons. These electronic meetings typically lasted only a short time: three to five minutes. Such meetings were claimed to avoid longer scheduled meetings. Thus, the ability for an individual to go between background to foreground changed the timing and value of the social interaction.

• As another example, one's interaction in a business setting was shown with "Hydra" -- also a Xerox PARC project. This provided 3 portals on a desk, each one being a video conference component. One could conduct a private meeting simply by approaching a Hydra portal. He was again using this to show how the social context with the HC interaction enabled new levels of interaction.

• Bill used the automobile to drive the point of the car as a metaphor for the relationship of technology to individuals. He asked the question, "Who is more important in the placement of technology which impacts individuals in the space they create: Chris Bangle, Head of Design at BMW or Frank Gehry, the famous architect?

In response, he stated Chris Bangle. Frank Gehry has no impact on what computing devices are put into the buildings he creates but Chris Bangle very much shapes your computing experience in the BMW. He deals with many companies seeking to put devices in the BMW. What happens is what he either dictates or permits.

In the car, the software which is present is quite different than what is typically taught in schools. This software is both distributed and real time. Bill also stated that electronics represents 30% of the cost of cars. Today, the second largest cost component in the BOM of a car is the wiring harness, behind the engine in cost.

• Lastly Bill addressed the issue of complexity. His point is that when we take highly specialized devices which are strong in solving a problem, a few can master these devices fully to realize the strength they provide. This includes PC or even remote controls for CE. When we try aggregating multiple such devices into one large powerful solution, no one can master them. One needs to look at how a "net benefit" can be implemented to have technology master the complexity. The car example was again used where the car turns down the volume on the audio system when the phone rings. This is a simple example, but one use to illustrate how technology can be made to lessen the burdens it creates.

• To show how technology can be applied to a common problem, he showed an LED projector by Symbol Technologies. This was an illustration of how a display could be made which has multiple applications where the display itself is too small to see. The example given on the podium was interesting.

Bill pushed the envelope of thinking to show how we should rethink complexity, UI, and the future of computers by increasing thought about WHERE AND NOT WHAT.