Comments on: The Uncanny Peak of Wrong Metaphors http://www.tinkerx.com/2007/05/20/the-uncanny-peak-of-wrong-metaphors/ A deluxe heap of broken images. Thu, 22 Dec 2011 23:16:48 -0500 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Andy http://www.tinkerx.com/2007/05/20/the-uncanny-peak-of-wrong-metaphors/#comment-16448 Andy Wed, 23 May 2007 01:09:30 +0000 http://www.tinkerx.com/index.php/2007/05/20/the-uncanny-peak-of-wrong-metaphors/#comment-16448 Thanks, Bill. I appreciate that. I do agree that there are ways to look for better "form fits function" situations in any kind of design, including UI. What I worry about is focusing on various ontological constructs rather than the specific challenges on which they are built. If anyone knows what that means, please tell me. WilliamChen: Thanks for the comments; that's more code-talk than I know, but it sounds like you and I are on the same page. Thanks, Bill. I appreciate that. I do agree that there are ways to look for better “form fits function” situations in any kind of design, including UI. What I worry about is focusing on various ontological constructs rather than the specific challenges on which they are built.

If anyone knows what that means, please tell me.

WilliamChen: Thanks for the comments; that’s more code-talk than I know, but it sounds like you and I are on the same page.

]]> By: WilliamChen http://www.tinkerx.com/2007/05/20/the-uncanny-peak-of-wrong-metaphors/#comment-16233 WilliamChen Mon, 21 May 2007 08:11:53 +0000 http://www.tinkerx.com/index.php/2007/05/20/the-uncanny-peak-of-wrong-metaphors/#comment-16233 Hey, I don’t agree with his Uncanny Valley anology either. This is a completely wrong anology to user interface designing. But my reason is different from yours. Why do we feel odd to an almost-but-not-quite-human robot? Because we know beforehand this object is a robot, not a human, although it is very much like a human. Therefore, no matter how closely it looks like a human, you will feel more and more uneasy with it. This is a sychological phenomenon. I believe if somebody leads a real human in front of you and tell you he is a robot, you will also feel more and more uneasy with this guy. No matter how much he looks like a normal human and he in fact IS a human. For the same reason, if a swing application is running using Windows Look And Feel using java 6, and if you tell the end users that the application is developed with C++ on MFC, or simply don’t tell him anything about your technology, he is surely not aware it is swing application. Most of the end users don’t know what is Swing application and what is SWT application. They simply uses these application. Only java developers are aware of this distinction. Even with java developers, if you dont’ tell him it is a Swing application, he is probably not aware the so-called “Uncanny Valley” in it. In another direction, aren’t native widegts emulated? Of course they are drawn in C/C++ or ASM. But they are not “native” as you think. In a word, human beings are very likely to be influenced by the beforehand message, no matter it is in fact probably inaccurate. (I am not a native English speaker, so forgive me for my writing.) Hey, I don’t agree with his Uncanny Valley anology either. This is a completely wrong anology to user interface designing. But my reason is different from yours.
Why do we feel odd to an almost-but-not-quite-human robot? Because we know beforehand this object is a robot, not a human, although it is very much like a human. Therefore, no matter how closely it looks like a human, you will feel more and more uneasy with it. This is a sychological phenomenon. I believe if somebody leads a real human in front of you and tell you he is a robot, you will also feel more and more uneasy with this guy. No matter how much he looks like a normal human and he in fact IS a human.
For the same reason, if a swing application is running using Windows Look And Feel using java 6, and if you tell the end users that the application is developed with C++ on MFC, or simply don’t tell him anything about your technology, he is surely not aware it is swing application.
Most of the end users don’t know what is Swing application and what is SWT application. They simply uses these application. Only java developers are aware of this distinction. Even with java developers, if you dont’ tell him it is a Swing application, he is probably not aware the so-called “Uncanny Valley” in it.
In another direction, aren’t native widegts emulated? Of course they are drawn in C/C++ or ASM. But they are not “native” as you think.
In a word, human beings are very likely to be influenced by the beforehand message, no matter it is in fact probably inaccurate.
(I am not a native English speaker, so forgive me for my writing.)

]]> By: Bill Higgins http://www.tinkerx.com/2007/05/20/the-uncanny-peak-of-wrong-metaphors/#comment-16181 Bill Higgins Sun, 20 May 2007 20:54:22 +0000 http://www.tinkerx.com/index.php/2007/05/20/the-uncanny-peak-of-wrong-metaphors/#comment-16181 I appreciate your good humor. In fact, I think some of your criticisms are quite valid. But they're also too involved to respond to on a Sunday. Expect something later this week, but the short version is "you make good points". I appreciate your good humor. In fact, I think some of your criticisms are quite valid. But they’re also too involved to respond to on a Sunday. Expect something later this week, but the short version is “you make good points”.

]]> By: Andy http://www.tinkerx.com/2007/05/20/the-uncanny-peak-of-wrong-metaphors/#comment-16174 Andy Sun, 20 May 2007 20:35:26 +0000 http://www.tinkerx.com/index.php/2007/05/20/the-uncanny-peak-of-wrong-metaphors/#comment-16174 Well, in that case, never mind, and I totally agree with you. ;) Well, in that case, never mind, and I totally agree with you. ;)

]]> By: Bill Higgins http://www.tinkerx.com/2007/05/20/the-uncanny-peak-of-wrong-metaphors/#comment-16151 Bill Higgins Sun, 20 May 2007 15:39:48 +0000 http://www.tinkerx.com/index.php/2007/05/20/the-uncanny-peak-of-wrong-metaphors/#comment-16151 It was actually an analogy :-) It was actually an analogy :-)

]]>