Upload
alida
View
43
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
GroupBar: The TaskBar Evolved. Greg Smith, Patrick Baudisch, George Robertson, Mary Czerwinski, Brian Meyers, Daniel Robbins, and Donna Andrews Microsoft Research. Key Problem: Task Switching. Bannon et al. (1983) – information workers often switch between concurrent tasks - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
GroupBar: The TaskBar Evolved
Greg Smith, Patrick Baudisch, George Robertson, Mary Czerwinski, Brian Meyers, Daniel Robbins, and Donna Andrews
Microsoft Research
Microsoft Research 2 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Key Problem: Task Switching
Bannon et al. (1983) – information workers often switch between concurrent tasks
Rooms (Card & Henderson, 1987)Working sets of windows
Large displays & multimon lead to more open windows (4 > 12 > 16)
Interruptions lead to more task switching
Microsoft Research 3 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Windows TaskBar Problems
TaskBar does not support task switchingMany operations required to make a switch
TaskBar does not scale wellGrouping by application rather than task
Hypothesis:Movement, switching, & layout primitives at
multi-window level can save time and effort
Microsoft Research 4 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Related Work Virtual Desktop Managers
Smalltalk Project ViewsRoomsX-WindowsBeOS workspacesLinux – KDE desktops, etc.Win32 ISV products: XDesk, GoScreen, Flash
Desktops, DesksAtWill, etc.(not yet built into Windows)
Rooms Overview (1987)
Microsoft Research 5 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Related Work
3D (Task Gallery)Zooming (Pad++)
Time-Machine Computing Tiled (Elastic Windows)
Microsoft Research 6 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
GroupBar Design Points
Familiar – build on Windows TaskBar Non-modal – not separate desktops Lightweight UI – low-effort group creation
and management Leverage spatial memory: allow users to
place tiles and groups for quicker recall
Microsoft Research 7 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Demo
Microsoft Research 8 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
GroupBar Basics
Bar on any desktop edge Resizable, auto-hide,
always-on-top options Multiple bars One tile for each window
Microsoft Research 9 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Arranging Tiles
Drag tiles within bar to reorder
Drag tiles between bars for greater spatial separation
Microsoft Research 10 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Grouping Tiles (Main Theme)
Drag tile onto another tile to create group
Drag tile in/out to add/remove from group
Drag one of the last two tiles out to destroy group
Microsoft Research 11 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Dragging Subtleties Move caret is straight
Insertion caret is curved toward group target
Target position decoupled from caret symbol
to aid in target acquisitiontile center tile center
left caretinsert caret
right caret1 3/1 3/ 1 3/1 3/ 1 3/1 3/
carets
Microsoft Research 12 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Group Appearance
Groups indicated bySubtle tile shape change
Colored background frame
Green group button
Microsoft Research 13 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Group Operations
Group button now offers a control surface
Click once to restore all Click once to minimize all Right-click for additional
group operations
Microsoft Research 14 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Additional Group Operations
Analogous to Window operations
Layout templatesDepend on display
configurationMight depend on
actual windows (not implemented)
Window Menu
Group Menu
Microsoft Research 15 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
TaskBarCollapse by appMultiple rows of tiles,
buttons to ‘page’
Overflow Strategies GroupBar
Collapse by groupMultiple bars
GroupBar: collapsed group
Windows: paging buttons
Microsoft Research 16 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Longitudinal User Study
5 participants
7-10 day study on their own work
Goal: initial understanding if users will use
grouping for real work
Microsoft Research 17 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Results
Users did use groupingAverage 2.5 groups of 2 windows
Satisfaction ratings generally favorableUseful to drag to groupUseful to close all windows in group at onceUseful to remember layoutMakes multiple monitors more useful
Microsoft Research 18 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Results (cont.)
Negative satisfaction ratings for:More than one GroupBar at a timeNon-group windows minimize on group switch
2 of 5 participants continued using GroupBar after study
Microsoft Research 19 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Comparative User Study
Comparing TaskBar and GroupBar
18 participants
3 tasks consisting of 2-3 documents eachPlanned interruptions forced 5 task switches
Triple monitor setup (3840 x 1024)
Microsoft Research 20 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Results Borderline significant
task time advantage11.7 min vs 13.25 min
Satisfaction ratings
significantly favor GB
GB unanimously preferred
Microsoft Research 21 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Future Work
Iterative design improvements
Further studies for different display
configurations and user tasks
Layout templates based on window use
Automatic grouping based on window use
Persistence
Microsoft Research 22 of 22 OZCHI 2003: New Directions in Interaction
Conclusions: Met Design Goals
GroupBar provides basic task managementEasy to group windows with drag and dropSingle click task switching
Tasks shown with subtle extension to familiar Windows TaskBar
Demonstrated ease of use, learnability, and user acceptance