앞의 글에 이어서 "한국 HCI 학회" 모임의 토론게시판에 퍼오는 글. 역시 아래 네모 안의 글은 토론의 발제문이고, 그 아래의 글이 내가 올린 글이다.
토론주제(2): Where is HCI going?
There was talk of ubiquitous computing. With WiFi, 3G, iPhone, etc, ubiquitous computing is really blooming. What comes next?
When did you feel 'good' using a product/service?
Was it when you encountered a nice technological application? (Perhaps, but it surely is not a general phenomenon.) Was it when you found a nice content or function? (Maybe, but it doesn't explain all the other moment of enjoying content-less interaction.) Or, was it when you did some intended task without any difficulty? (C'mon. You know the reality: good interface is not noticeable.)
So where is HCI going. I personally have two possible scenarios.
(1) Going for Technology
Born to differentiate "UI for computing device" from "UI for dumb traditional hardware", HCI somehow settled on the technological side. HCI could keep specializing itself as such and end up as HTI, or Human-Technology Interaction, as once claimed in Finnish HTT. As another effort to make HCI more focused on computing technology rather than studying people, a concept of HCC was emerged as an alternative concept for HCI.
(2) Going for Experience
The second scenario in my mind may be a bit personal. Since the field of "UI" has been focused on 'usability' by definition, its approaches to UX are naturally bound to the assumption that efficient use is good use. It's user-centered, engineering, and serious job for the dedicated people.
However, HCI has more exploratory tradition. Always wondering for the next interesting stuff to do, and saying "Wow this's cool. What can we do with it?" It is NOT user-centered, more inventive than need-based, and there was always dirty little secret among us: it's more about fun and cool experiments rather than making easy-to-use piece of technology.
This untold truth of pursuing cool-ness was actually discussed in CHI several years ago, and there was clearly two sides of opinions. Traditional UI practitioner didn't like it, and framed it as not being enough for academia. Some 'other' people didn't explain it very well but still thought it's the momentum of CHI community, what gathers people in one place, and something they have to support. (After a couple of years, the result from this discussion turned out as a new CHI section called 'Media Showcase' where you don't need to try to be academically perfect.)
If HCI could be brave enough and coming out with its secret desire for the fun side of experience, it could make the next face of HCI. Although it's different from what's been discussed in every joint-conference with UI people, and although it's far different from what its name originally meant, I believe the tradition has been always there waiting to be revealed and embraced.
... I must have come too far away from HCI technologies now. Working in game industry as UX designer and thinking about the product which is solely for an enjoyable experience, I can't help myself thinking about a concept of 'fun experience' as the future of HCI.
There was many discussions about this direction, some even called it as "New HCI" on <Interaction> magazine. Since I have found unexpectedly many cases of different yet complementary approaches to 'generate' fun in an experience product, I believe there will be more tangible and even academic way to facilitate it in the future of HCI... or whatever it's called.
... 옮기면서 보니 이건 뭐 발제 내용하고 상관없는 글일세. ㅡ_ㅡ;;;
어쨋든 여기까지. 앞의 글과 이 글의 공통점이 있다면, 둘 다 내가 글을 올린 후 몇 주가 지나도록 아무 댓글이 없다는 거다. -_- 회사 내에서도 이메일로 토론을 하다보면 내가 끼어듬과 동시에 thread가 끊기는 경우가 많았는데, 역시 너무 고급 영어를 써서 현지인들조차 이해하지 못하는 걸까... 덕택에 thread-breaker라고 취급당하는 듯. -_-a;;; 그러면서도 UI 관련 이슈가 있을 때마다 꾸역꾸역 찾아 물어오는 걸 보면, 나는 참 예의바른 사람들과 일하고 있다는 생각이 든다.
내가 지난 몇달 동안 이 블로그에 글을 올렸더라면, 아마도 신기한 HCI 기술 같은 것보다는 이런 내용을 올리게 되지 않을까... 해서, 그냥 다른 데 올렸던 글이라고 퍼올려서 최소한 블로그 주인장이 살아있다는 증거라도 남기기로 했다.
