ubi ubi ubicomp comp thu mar 8evaluation. issues for personalizing shared pervasive devices by...
TRANSCRIPT
Ubi ubi ubicomp comp
Thu Mar 8 Evaluation
Issues for Personalizing Shared Pervasive Devices by Jonathan Trevor et al
“shared” devices
Same for everyone
“shared” devices
Home TVs Stereos Kitchen appliances
Workplace Copiers Fax Machines Projectors
“shared” devices
World Wide Web?
“shared” devices
Personalization/targeting on the web = “unshared” device?
“shared” devices
Web personalization Friendlier? More efficient? Profitable!
“shared” devices
Domain? Internet
“shared” devices
Other domains?
Authors’ hope
Personalize “shared” devices
Contributions of this paper
Comparative prototypes Novel personalization system proposal Lessons learned
Personalization
Emacs
“teleporting”
iCrafter iRoom
BMW 7 Series
Personalization
http://mybrew.topcities.com
Personal Ubiquitous Systems
Ubicomp vs. “Shared” devices
Personal Ubiquitous Systems
Embedded Design Approach Integrate personalization with an already
existing interface/device
Portable Design Approach Personal interface for mobile devices
Which one? Comparative evaluation time!
Personal Ubiquitous Systems
Embedded Design Approach Integrate personalization with an already
existing interface/device
Portable Design Approach Personal interface for mobile devices
Is that all?
Comparative Evaluation
1. Design with alternative
2. Vary deployment situations
3. Compare and contrast
Personal Interaction Points (PIPs)
System for shared pervasive devices
“smart” access Information cloud
Testing testing
Podium PC
Brainstorming plasma
MFD
Personalization Design
1. Idetifying users
2. Learning and remembering
3. Creating personalized UI
PIPs Architecture
Web-based
PIPs Architecture
Web-based
Embedded vs. Portable
Direct access w/ peripherals
Vs.
“Remote control”
PIPs
A success!
PIPcidents Usability decreases with portability Lazy people prefer to be lazy Availability increases with portability May be untrustworthy Portable = private
PIPs
PIPs
PIPs
Usability and availabilty Varied based on design
Utility and privacy Varied based on design and situation
Back to the future:comparative prototyping
Designing for use
Designing for evaluation
Everyday Encounters with Context-Aware Computing in a Campus Environment
by Louise Barkhuus and Paul Dourish
Ubicomp motivation
Expand computers beyond desktop confines
But it’s dangerous out there!
Ubicomp motivation
Expand ubicomp beyond academic confines
Time for the real world, ubi!
If you don’t know, now you know
Institutional analysis
‘meso-level’ approach
|
V
Ethnomethodology –----------Marxist analysis
Taking it to the real world!
“Given that many ubiquitous computing technologies are developed, deployed, and evaluated in university settings, our particular institutional concern is with student life on a university campus and how these institutional arrangements manifest themselves for students day-to-day.”
Taking it to the real world!
“There are many reasons to expect that campus environments are ideal for the development, deployment, and testing of ubiquitous computing technologies. Clearly, many technologies are developed in university research, and campus environments are therefore convenient.”
Ubicomp “in practice”
Active Campus diet monitor Aware campus
To be used ubiquitously
Active Campus Active class
Support classroom teaching Questions Polls Ratings
Adoption
Why teens?
“When does location manifest itself as a practical problem for students?”