Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zazen!uwvax!heurikon!charlie.heurikon.com!graziano
From: graziano@charlie.heurikon.com (John Graziano)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: Audio feedback from GUI's  I can't think of any at the moment.
Keywords: sound windows widgets
Message-ID: <663@heurikon.heurikon.com>
Date: 14 Jun 91 16:18:15 GMT
References: <1991Jun12.171211.2716@cs.umn.edu>
Sender: news@heurikon.heurikon.com
Reply-To: graziano@charlie.heurikon.com (John Graziano)
Organization: Heurikon Corporation, Madison, WI
Lines: 62

In article <1991Jun12.171211.2716@cs.umn.edu> brsmith@cs.umn.edu (Brian R. Smith) writes:
>I've been toying with the idea of adding audio feedback to a graphical
>user interface.  Something subtle, to make it MORE intuitive.
>
>(This stems from watching _Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation_.  I had
>the stunned realization that the computer noises ARE intuitive, even
>to techno-geeks who watch too much TV... :-))
>
>Some of what I've been pondering.

	(summarized)

>  Windows that make a "pop" when they appear, and a "poof" when they
>    vanish.
>
>  Warning/Info dialogs with some kind of (short) attention signal.
>
>  Foreground windows (only) could emit a "busy" buzz when they're tied
>    up with computation.  And maybe a happy "beedoop" when they've
>    finished.
>
>  Scroll bars with a quiet "ratchet" click
>
>  Radio buttons and check boxes with a solid "kerchunk" 
>
> these sounds should be:
>  - Very short.  I'd guess at around a tenth of a second.
>  - Probably synthetic.  (Sampled sounds would have background
>      noise.)
>  - Low key.  Subtle.
>  - Disabled on demand.

They would have to be VERY subtle.  I had the displeasure of using a Macintosh 
that had these kinds of sounds installed - after about five minutes I was ready
to throw it through a window.

The reason it was so irritating is that it was unnecessary.  GUI users already
have to process a lot of information.  It doesn't make sense to force them to
also process a bunch of sounds if those sounds only reiterate what's already 
displayed on the screen.

I think the reason the Star Trek sounds seem so intuitive is that the
computer interface is usually audio only - they have no visual cues to tell
them what the computer is doing.  

(Of course, Trek uses the audio interface not because it is more efficient, but
because it makes for better TV - think how boring all those bridge scenes would 
be if nobody had to call out directions, ie: 
	Picard: "Bring us about to 423.746 by 3.4756 mark 7" 
		as opposed to 
	Picard: (Touches viewscreen, Enterprise moves)
)

If an audio interface worked in this way, providing new information rather
than emphasizing old, I think it would be much more acceptable.  Although, you 
would still need to come up with some examples where audio could provide better 
information than a simple visual display (aside from information which only 
exists in audio form; voice mail, music, etc).  I'm sure there are some, but 
I can't think of any at the moment.


--graz