Elecraft

Things to Come

Classic

List

Threaded

3 messages Options

Edward A. Dauer

Things to Come

It may be that part of amateur radio equipment¹s future is already here,
and clearly so in avionics (i.e. the electronic display and control
interfaces for navigation, communication, and aircraft performance.) One
major feature is the ³softkey² - a mechanical button with no exclusive
function but rather a function defined by the subsystem the screen is in.
We-all have this already in the P3, for example, which allows labelling
two rows of buttons albeit by a selection process that is tedious and very
slow compared to the better avionics systems. And we have it in
elementary ways in certain of the display functions in the K3 and KX3. I
can imagine a great deal more of it in amateur equipment, with a large
central display surrounded by buttons and on-screen labels changing with
the subsystem. It would be far better and more intuitive for
configuration changes than the menu system we have now. Even in the
relatively simple GA aircraft I¹ve flown I can manage the avionics much
faster than I can operate any amateur transceiver I¹ve seen. Which is a
good thing when you¹re moving at a couple of hundred knots. Compared to
touchscreens, soft keys are more accurate IMHO; but more important, they
keep the residual PB&J confined to small areas and away from the main
display.

Ted, KN1CBR

>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 24
>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 21:31:25 -0700
>From: "Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT" <[hidden email]>
>To: [hidden email]
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] IC-7300 video - things to come
>Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
>There is one overwhelming reason that we'll see touchscreens:
>
>As radios become even more software driven, we'll see more and more new
>features added (like ESSB).
>
>The engineers and developers have to find a way to add those functions
>to existing buttons (push this button 3 times, or go to a menu, or
>something), provide a radio with blank buttons (which makes that new
>radio look unfinished, or a "stripped" version of a more expensive rig).
>
>... or use a technology that allows buttons to be painted on the screen
>-- so the front of the radio can evolve along with the radio itself.
>
>I'm not ready for a rig that requires a separate device/computer to run.
>
>73 -- Lynn
>
>On 3/28/2016 8:22 PM, Rick Robinson wrote:
>> I foresee Bluetooth or newer technology tablets or phone size units that
>> control our radio as an option to control our radios . So touchscreen
>> control seems like more than a fad.
>
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

lstavenhagen

Re: Things to Come

Great post, IMO. One of the takeaways we could have from aviation is the notion of cockpit resource management (CRM), part of which is the idea that technology should reduce the workload of the pilot rather than increase it. Or, if there is an increase, it involves a reduction somewhere else (that is, learning to use, and paying attention to a heading bug to relieve the pilot of turning to a heading manually, etc).

In amateur radio UI's, panadapters and spectrum scopes have a really revolutionary potential in terms of presenting the contents of the band to the user - you have a full visual representation of which signals are where and a real potential in terms of QSY to those signals.

With respect to user interfaces and touch-screen, let me make a couple observations:
- touch-screen on a panadapter is intuitive; it's a natural way human beings have evolved to deal with the environment. We see something in our space and our bodies are tailor-made to reach for them with our hands, fingers etc.
- touch-screen for a menu system is NOT intuitive because a menu system doesn't present quite the same task to the brain and body. Putting it another way, it is my contention that a T-S interface offers no benefit to the user over a mouse or buttons for operating a menu-driven system.

The iOS touch-screen interface I complained about before is a good example. When you're in an application where touch-screen is intuitive for a human being (say scrolling and panning in a web browser) it's heaven. When you're trying to actually operate the device with T-S it's miserable: windows pop up all over the place, rotating cubicle things fly around and the device goes into a catatonic state with no apparent thing on the screen you can touch to recover it. The Big White Button at the bottom of the device is your only resort. Horrible!

To sum my comment up: I think it's easy to overreact with touch-screen technology and try to use it for _everything_: not just the applications where it's great, but also where it doesn't help or even hinders the use of the device (re: the distinction I made above).

So going forward with amateur radio, I think T-S technology should be carefully considered and not done with the Hog Wild method Apple chose for the iOS interface. That's where the IC-7300 goes overboard, for example, as I alluded to in my other post: it overreacts and attempts to use T-S for far too much functionality in the device.

If Elecraft goes down that road, I would hope for a more balanced approach, one that's more suitable for the way humans respond to the environment, when it contains both natural (i.e. spectrum scopes) and unnatural (i.e. menu driven systems) items.

My .02,
LS
W5QD

Edward A. Dauer

Things to Come

In reply to this post by Edward A. Dauer

I was about to reply to a couple of posts on the UI topic when I read
Eric¹s post (below), which makes a point I would underscore.

Since many of us (not surprisingly) share aviation and hence avionics
experience as well as amateur radio, that experience may be useful in
reflecting on the topic of UI for amateur gear. As Eric implies, and as LS
also points out, the question is not either-or. There are some functions
for which soft keys are better than layered menus, and those better than
dedicated buttons and knobs, and those better than or worse than touch
screens. For example, I think that during critical phases of flight I
would not want to replace the tactile feedback of a throttle lever with a
screen-based input; I like having the gear lever feel like a gear lever
when I grab it; and while this one I might be willing to change, I think a
flap control should feel something like a flap. But navigation is
cerebral rather than tactile, and for that an intuitive layer of soft keys
seems just right. On the other hand, if I need to kill the strobes
because I¹ve just entered IMC (clouds, to the earthbound), I¹d like to
stab at a known, dedicated, and unprogrammable button that I¹ve mentally
marked IF YOU CAN¹T SEE, PUSH HERE RIGHT NOW. Point - touch screen isn¹t
better or worse than any of the alternatives. It¹s either better or worse
for some functions than any of the alternatives, but not for others.
Maybe VFO A knobs are like flap controls? My point in raising the
experience of avionics was to say first, that that field seems a bit ahead
of the amateur radio gear field in ergonomic design of similar systems;
and second, that it shows that design choices shouldn¹t be driven by
global preferences. No surprises there, eh?

Ted, KN1CBR

>Message: 27
>Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 17:50:37 -0700
>From: "Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft" <[hidden email]>
>To: [hidden email]
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] IC-7300 video - things to come
>Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
>As a private pilot I fly with a Garmin GTN750 touch-screen GPS NAV/COM in
>a
>Cessna 182. Its powerful and quite intuitive to use, even in turbulence.
>(They
>included ridges along the four screen sides when needed to steady your
>hand.) It
>actually reduces the amount pilot load and time spent looking inside the
>cockpit
>when used properly - Though you can certainly abuse it dangerously if you
>treat
>it like a video game and forget to look outside the cockpit.. I
>wouldn't go
>any other way now. (And I came from a full-on knobs based flight
>environment
>prior to that.)
>
>There are great touch-screen avionics implementations and horrible ones.
>The 750
>is a good one and world's above many others.
>
>I think for future ham radios and similar product designs, what will be
>important is meshing the correct balance between traditional hard knobs
>and
>buttons with unique touch-screen features (display and input). The
>overall goal
>should be to balance the user interface between the touch-screen and
>knobs/buttons for ease of use without unintended confusion while adding
>unique
>touch-screen display and easy to use input features.
>
>As a side note - I use the remotehams.com free remote software with the
>K3/0-Mini and a laptop to remote my home K3S, KPA500 and Rotor.
>Interestingly,
>the little h/p satellite 360 convertible laptop/tablet has a touch
>screen, which
>I use for many functions like rotor control, amp control/status etc, but
>I like
>it combined with the K3/0-Mini's knobs and display for regular intuitive
>use,
>versus using it only for 100% computer based remote control.
>
>73,
>
>Eric
>/elecraft.com/
>