Ubicomp: Smart Homes #2 Thursday March 22 nd 2007

Broken Expectations in the Digital Home Bly, Rosario, Schilit, Saint-Hilaire, McDonald

overview Researching ease of use of digital home technologies –Trying to understand the overhead or ‘problem-time’ for home network use ‘Broken expectations’ are often the cause of problems Broken expectations are when a user’s mental model of a device inaccurately depicts the functionality or capabilities of the device

The technology is reliable If it ain’t broke, why doesn’t it work? “The only problem is that it will never happen the way the industry imagines it. For one thing the digital home is fiendishlycomplex. The teenager in the family would have to become full-time unpaid tech support…” – Andreas Kluth

Contributions of paper raise the discussion of digital living ease-of-use and seamless interoperability to the level of everyday human activities with complex technology configurations provide a set of illustrative examples of broken expectations present implications for further research in user expectations for the digital home.

Methodologies of study Team member diary studies ethnographic-style home interviews (w/ very tech-savvy participants) Online survey

Interviews Research found people –Using workarounds –Upgrading to accommodate –Unable to integrate some devices –Giving up on tasks

Findings most problems not due to broken or malfunctioning software or hardware many problems were unanticipated

better understandings of broken expectations are needed How are expectations formed? how are a multiple interconnected activities a cause of problems?

Should broken expectations be expected?

Innovation, state-of-the-art vs. Comfort, convention How can we avoid ‘breaking’ expectations?

The evolution of buildings and implications for the design of ubiquitous domestic environments Rodden, Bedford

“We call our work "ubiquitous computing". This is different from PDA's, dynabooks, or information at your fingertips. It is invisible, everywhere computing that does not live on a personal device of any sort, but is in the woodwork everywhere.” - Mark Weiser

instant ubicomp home (just add water) vs. the evolution of buildings, environments

The home as a ubiquitous computing environment new user groups impact of broader cultural values the need to support activities other than work

Goals of study relate the diverse set of activities involved in ubiquitous domestive environments to each other place ubiquitous computing for domestic environments in the broader context of how buildings change outline some new challenges for research into ubiquitous domestic environments

smart home development approaches understanding of the domestic choosing and designing the right devices constructing a ubiquitous environment, infrastructure

understanding of the domestic ethnographic studies longitudinal studies design based methods

choosing and designing the right devices information appliances (internet fridge) interactive household objects (digital picture frames, tech) augmented furniture (DiamondTouch interactive table)

constructing a ubiquitous environment, infrastructure new forms of context sensing (EasyLiving) embedded interactive technologies (smart floor, embedded displays)

Is the smart home its own unique context?

What happens to contexts in a ubiquitous environment?

digital infrastructures Jini, UPnP, Coolbase vs. Speakeasy, Context Toolkit should we be explicitly aware of our ubiquitous systems?

evolutionary nature of the home technology will need to find a place within our homes and our homes will need to chage to accommodate this technology how buildings change: Brand's 6 S's

Tables from paper

Where’s tech now? Where’s ubicomp?

How is change managed and controlled

Relating activities to each other focus has been on the interior (Stuff, Space Plan, Services) understanding the domestic (Stuff, Space Plan) developing digital devices (Stuff, Space Plan) Domestic Environments and Infrastructures (Services)

Challenges homes are never static –how are we effected by the continual change? homes exist in the broader context –TV as focal point coordinated activity of many stakeholders –getting all 6 S's involved

Principles of Smart Home Control Davidoff, Lee, Yiu, Zimmerman, Dey

End-User Programmers vs. Smart home users Control of Devices vs. Control of own lives –people most value their time, their activities, and their relationships

how can we control a smart home? How can we feel as if we control a smart home?

findings from ethnography of dual- income families enrichment activities frame the day even the simple is complex activities resist routinization responsibilities bleed past fixed boundaries breakdowns cause cascade effects "busyness' is a moral good

findings from ethnography of dual- income families (cont.) flexibility as coping strategy detail is acquired when necessary improvise work and home blend lifesyle choices

Suggested design principles 1. Allow for the organic evolution of routines and plans 2. Easily construct new behaviors and modify existing behaviors 3. Understand periodic changes, exceptions and improvisation 4. Design for breakdowns 5. Account for multiple, overlapping and occasionally conflicting goals 6. The home is more than a location 7. Participate in the construction of family identity

Suggested design principles (cont.) adjust for, anticipate, and accommodate people's imperfections and the complexities of their lives –system must be extremely flexible and intelligent 6. makes the 'home' system available where and when needed 7. the home is a costly purchase, important asset, and vastly interconnected social contruct - how man the current home status be maintained and how can peoples lives be further enriched