
Reconsidering the Hardware Kindle Interface - mhb
https://medium.com/@craigmod/reconsidering-the-hardware-kindle-interface-3c54088bed9e
======
ruddct
Totally understand where the author is coming from, but the notion that text
should be a 'first class' object to interact with does not match the reality
of how people interact with long form text. _Very_ few people interact with
the text on a page, and 100% of people reading a book very frequently
scroll/paginate [0]. People are used to swiping on content to see more of it,
I don't know that it's as confusing as you might think.

Likewise, it also wouldn't make any sense to have a single tap within a mobile
browser bring up the dictionary definition of the word you tapped on. Does it
save time? Sure, for one power user use case. But it pollutes your otherwise
simple navigation paradigm with stuff popping up all over the place promoting
text interaction. People _hate_ stuff popping up all over the place
unnecessarily. Better to build your navigation paradigm out of the way that
100% of people interact with the content; it's OK to have a few things buried
one layer deeper, power users will find them anyways.

[0] I worked on these products at Amazon.

~~~
cmod
Author here. Thanks for your response. (I've had a few ex-Kindle folks reach
out with either precisely similar or precisely opposite sentiments; I guess
it's a big team.)

I originally had a huge footnote acknowledging that much of this is obvious
and that the Kindle team is full of smart people who have data showing that
maybe these aren't the best optimizations. I'm just describing my expectations
from having used Kindles for ten (??!) years coupled with having worked on
designing digital reading interfaces for a similar amount of time. I'm
certainly an edge case user.

Having seen my mother (edit: and, more pertinently: myself) struggle with her
Kindle, I do think the interaction model is one-degree unnecessarily complex —
all of those hidden spaces.

You could distill my whole piece to: This is a single purpose device that's
been designed like a multi-purpose device.

Page turn buttons + menu button would all but eliminate any interaction
ambiguity. And could be done quite beautifully.

Although I don't have access to any data, I think there might be a subset of
casual users who would prefer the screen to do nothing when touched.

~~~
0xffff2
>Having seen my mother (edit: and, more pertinently: myself) struggle with her
Kindle, I do think the interaction model is one-degree unnecessarily complex

How often do you struggle with the interface once you've learned it? I agree
that the current Kindle interface isn't the most intuitive, but to me that's a
non-issue. I've long since learned how to interact with the Kindle, and now
that that initial learning is complete, the interface does an excellent job
allowing me to do what I want.

~~~
stingrae
The goal of the interface should be to be intuitive. You shouldn't have to
learn an awkward sequence. If there was a page forward and backward button on
each side, I don't think people would have anything to learn

~~~
criddell
Don't people expect to be able to swipe on the screen these days? That seems
more intuitive than indirectly controlling the screen via buttons.

If I were designing the Kindle, I think I would add a button that brings up
the UI and have screen swipes turn the page and screen taps bring up something
that makes sense for whatever was tapped on (like a dictionary or X-ray
feature).

~~~
stingrae
I would be curious to see a user study on how people without training try to
interact with eink screens. re: swipes vs taps.

~~~
criddell
Just with e-ink screens? Do you think the results would differ from users
interacting with the Kindle app on a phone or tablet?

~~~
stingrae
I think people will interact differently with an eink screen compared to a
standard display.

------
jwr
I still miss the hardware page turn buttons that were present on the Kindle 4.
I got the Voyage, which has the kinda-buttonish thingies with vibration
feedback, and these are nowhere as nice and reliable as physical buttons were.

Sadly, it seems I am the minority. Most people prefer no buttons (but ooh look
how beautiful the device is as I take it out of the box the first time). Even
worse, most people seem to prefer tedious manual scrolling over page turns
(slide the text up with your finger, carefully watching as not to scroll too
far, and then try to find your place in the text again).

I think these fads will pass, though, and we will eventually regain our
collective sanity.

~~~
KevanM
I agree, the hardware buttons were perfect and then touch screen ruined the
whole experience for me. They recognised this as a luxury people would pay for
by reintroducing them to the awful looking Oasis.

~~~
majormajor
"Awful looking" is a curious complaint about the Oasis because the unbalanced
look actually makes it a wonderful in-hand experience, IMO. It's my favorite
Kindle to read on in bed - whether lying on my side or on my back - ever
because of that nice big side with those nice buttons.

------
gervase
I see the author's viewpoint, but I'm not sure I agree. When I touch the page
of a book, I'm interacting with the book, not the text; the exception is if
I'm using some kind of writing instrument (pencil, highlighter, etc).

The current model allows you to _mostly_ interact with the Kindle as you would
a book - a light touch anywhere on the visual field (i.e. the page) flips in
that direction. However, you can also leverage the _added_ functionality that
the Kindle provides, which is indeed the text interaction.

However, I mainly use this for looking up unfamiliar words, rather than for
highlighting. I agree that the current system is unsuitable for highly-
interactive reading, such as by jotting notes in the margins, highlighting
passages, circling words, and so on. On the other hand, I suspect that this
type of highly-engaged reading is the exception, not the rule, and that for
most of the Kindle's audience, they would no more "interact" with the text of
their book than they would if it were printed.

If the primary argument is on the "surprising-ness" of the UI, that could be
handled in the same way that Nook did when they first switched to a
touchscreen, by overlaying regions on the screen to teach users where to tap.
Then, once they were familiar with the behavior, they could turn it off. This
is not ideal, as it reduces the legibility of the text, which I'm sure is why
this is probably not the default.

Anyway, an engaging read nonetheless, and I'm certainly ready to be proven
wrong by a new interaction model that works better. This could definitely be a
case of "I want a faster horse" behavior on my part.

~~~
cmod
I think there is a subset of users who interact with text far more than
others. I find I can't read without a pen in hand — if I am not marking up the
text or taking marginal notes then I feel like I'm only receiving a narrow
sliver of what I consider a "full" reading experience. (This is true for
novels as much, if not more, as it is for non-fiction.) My suggestions were to
bring to the Kindle something akin to the experience of reading paper with a
pen in hand.

~~~
kemayo
Not disagreeing with the existence of this subset of the market, but I almost
never see someone reading this way outside of "reading for a class" situations
where note-taking is mandated. Could be a selection bias, and how often does
one _really_ see other people reading and pay attention to it, but...

So it would seem strange to optimize for the active note-taker over the
presumably more prevalent passive reader.

That said, having some sort of active note-taking _mode_ would make a lot of
sense. Satisfy the niche, and let the very occasional use of it be available
for the person who rarely needs to take bursts of notes.

Amazon seems to be experimenting a little with making the screen less active
while reading -- they added the ability to disable the touchscreen and /only/
have the buttons on the Oasis 2[0].

[0]: [http://blog.the-ebook-reader.com/2017/12/14/heres-how-to-
dis...](http://blog.the-ebook-reader.com/2017/12/14/heres-how-to-disable-the-
touchscreen-on-kindle-oasis-2/)

------
CPLX
But what if the whole reason I enjoy a Kindle is because I am exhausted by
interactive media?

I just want to read a book, except not have it be so heavy, have a built in
bookstore, and not need a reading lamp.

The Kindle accomplishes all that quite admirably. More ability to interact
with the text or graphical elements would make the experience significantly
worse.

~~~
icebraining
It's not more, though; the ability is already there. It's just a change in how
you invoke it.

~~~
kemayo
I think it might be fair to say that making touch actions default to
definitions/note-taking/etc would make those features more prominent, which
might make people like the OP feel them intruding on their desired passive
reading experience more.

------
gtsteve
> They nailed it with the slate keyboard edition.

I'm not sure I agree. The keyboard is secondary to the reading experience, you
only need it when you're searching on the online store or making notes.

I've owned a Kindle 2, a Keyboard and an Oasis (first generation) and I feel
the Oasis is the best out of all of them - it's so much more portable.

> Since then it feels like a cascade of misguided optimizations — thinner (and
> yet wider; the Oasis fits into almost no pocket, can’t really be held easily
> in one hand), fake buttons (the weird non-buttons of the old Voyage),
> beautiful leather cases with too-weak magnets that don’t stay attached,
> etcetera.

Being a long-term Oasis user, I totally disagree with this part, unless the
Oasis has changed drastically in its second generation. This has not been my
experience with the Oasis at all.

This feels a bit like the posts that show up after a Facebook redesign to be
honest.

~~~
peteri
I have a second gen Oasis which has a bigger screen (7" vs 6") but still with
two page turn buttons. I like it but then in my case it's replacing a 2nd gen
Kindle with keyboard and no touch screen.

~~~
mantas
How does screen work with the hardware buttons? Any chance to lock screen from
accidental interaction and use buttons exclusively?

~~~
LeoPanthera
The touchscreen can be disabled in the 2nd gen Oasis, but not the first gen.

------
ggg9990
Holy Christ I do not want to “engage with a book’s content” any further than
reading the words on the page. My Kindle already has too many garbage features
(dictionary? I have one in my phone). All I want is a physical home button, a
physical page turn button, and a quality display. My Kindle is a substitute
for a bookshelf, not an iPhone.

~~~
majormajor
Agreed that "incentivize engaging with a book’s content" reads like bizarro
world marketing speak from someone who hasn't read anything longer than a
tweet. Which doesn't seem to be the case from the article itself, but holy
hell it's buzzword-speak at its worst.

But I completely disagree about the dictionary - that's exactly the right
level of functionality I want my reader to have - yet also disagree with the
author about the touchscreen functionality. I've had a Keyboard, a Paperwhite,
and an Oasis, and my only UX complaint is "add the physical page turn buttons
to the Paperwhite too."

I _like_ the two layers of tapping.

~~~
ggg9990
I’ve invoked the dictionary accidentally 10x as often as intentionally.
Probably a combination of having a decent vocabulary and reading material that
is not that challenging.

------
JustSomeNobody
>What is the iOS Kindle interaction model? The iOS Kindle model is the “hidden
spaces” model. That is, all active interface elements are invisible. This
“hidden spaces” model of interaction is supremely user antagonistic. [0]

>There are no affordances to the taps. No edges to the active areas. Nothing
to hint at what might happen. This creates what I call a “brittle” interface —
where one wrong tap sends you careening in an unknown direction, without
knowing why or how you got there.

When I'm using an e-book reader app, I want the entire screen to be taken up
with the text of the book I am reading. I quite like having tap zones to turn
the pages and access a menu when I need it. I'd rather a tap than a swipe,
actually. Unless I'm completely misunderstanding the quote above, I don't find
this to be antagonistic in any way at all.

~~~
kbutler
I think the "antagonistic" is the lack of visual "affordances" \- indications
of what an action will do. Like door handles that give no indication of
whether to "pull" or "push".

I'd say at most that it is not "new user friendly", rather than antagonistic
to all users.

I'm only an occasional Kindle user, but I rarely make a wrong action using the
hardware interface, and when I do, it's an unintentional long tap, and I have
to cancel an unintended highlight.

~~~
comex
In the iOS Kindle app, you _can_ turn pages by tapping on the sides of the
screen, but you can also just touch down anywhere and swipe to the left or
right. It works like any other horizontal pagination on mobile, like the iOS
home screen or photo gallery: as you drag, the view follows your finger,
revealing the previous and next page lined up on either side; when you let go,
if you scrolled more than a short distance to the left or right, the
corresponding adjacent page quickly animates (slides) into full view.

Oddly, swiping is considerably faster than tapping. When you tap, there’s a
brief delay before the screen starts scrolling – which is artificial, not just
lag, because a quick swipe gesture (just brushing your finger against the
screen) starts the same scrolling animation with no delay. Thus I’ve
effectively been trained to always swipe.

As strange as this is, at least I wouldn’t call it antagonistic to new users,
since the most efficient page-turning interaction is also the most intuitive
one: most users will already be familiar with the swipe gesture from the rest
of the OS, and will try to do it even without a visual affordance. (It’s also
physically intuitive, even if the physical object being simulated is very
different from an actual book.)

Of course, you can’t do fluid scrolling animations on an eInk display, so eInk
Kindles lack the swipe gesture, leaving only the relatively-dubious tap
regions criticized in the article. I agree that hardware buttons would be
better there.

On the other hand, on iOS, Kindle is my favorite reading app for the sole
reason that none of the others I’ve tried offer equivalent swiping
functionality. Either they only offer a “page curl” transition style (iBooks),
which looks cool but is more visually distracting, or they support swipe-to-
slide but only as an atomic gesture: you do a complete swipe, and then the
screen scrolls, without it letting you actually drag the page around first.
(That just feels unnatural.)

------
chatmasta
I read my Kindle every night. I like to read lying on my side, and preferably
without holding the kindle at all. Usually I prop it up on an extra pillow in
front of my face or something.

The problem is this makes page turning hard. I would __love __a small
bluetooth page turning device that I can hold in my hand and press to turn the
page. Anyone seen something like this or maybe even reverse engineered the
kindle to make it possible?

EDIT: Looks like someone managed to do it with a jailbroken kindle and a
presentation remote! [http://blog.the-ebook-reader.com/2016/09/30/remote-
control-h...](http://blog.the-ebook-reader.com/2016/09/30/remote-control-hack-
for-kindles-to-turn-pages-and-adjust-light-video/)

------
stcredzero
_" There are no affordances to the taps. No edges to the active areas. Nothing
to hint at what might happen. This creates what I call a “brittle” interface —
where one wrong tap sends you careening in an unknown direction, without
knowing why or how you got there."_

Is it just me, or have smartphone interfaces gotten both more and less brittle
over the years? I've noticed that very mature apps tend to be very non-
brittle, and new apps (or revamps of mature apps) made by newer developers
tend to be very brittle.

For some reason, I've noticed this conditional brittleness particularly with
maps apps. Fancy "3D" features in maps apps exhibit this, as well as badly
timed alternative route features, which present a button, then yank it away
bullfighter style.

------
fenwick67
Nah. The primary functions for reading a book are turning a page. A kindle
isn't a web browser or a tablet, it's meant to be a book. This is why the
primary interactions are turning the page. This is what you do 99% of the
time.

------
reaperducer
Makes a lot of sense to me.

It's like being in a car: Your primary focus should be on the road, and the
controls tactile enough to be used without changing that focus. Touch screens
don't make sense in this context ( _cough_ Tesla _cough_ ).

Ditto, Kindle. Reading should be the primary focus. And after a while you
develop the muscle memory twitch for turning the page. Moving your entire arm
and hand to swipe pulls you out of the moment, and you're focused on the
device and not the content.

It is for this reason that I get all of my Nooks and Kindles at Goodwill.
Fortunately, they are plentiful. With the added bonus of being able to read a
dead guy's library.

------
lykahb
I agree with the authors argument. The physical buttons is why I still haven't
upgraded my Kindle 4. But one interface is unlikely to be the best fit for
everybody.

Older gadgets and programs exposed more settings - either through UI and
access to the system files. Many cheap phones even had themes - something now
impossible without root on the Android phones. The power users could improve
productivity or appearance. It often came at the cost of less polished design
for some settings and higher UI complexity.

My ideal next Kindle would come with hardware buttons and touch screen
controls that have good defaults for the average user and can be configured.

------
pcmoney
Honestly if it just had a real off switch I would forgive just about anything
else.

The number of times my kindle has died because it was displaying an ad forever
because it takes 4seconds to turn off... pretty much makes the long battery
life feature useless.

------
billfruit
I think perhaps the new Voyage has it, but other models don't, but something
that should improve the reading experience: the functionality of reverse
video, white text on black background.

------
isoprophlex
I love my older gen kindle, with flip backwards/forwards buttons and a
menu/4-axis selector. But, one of the backwards buttons is intermittently
failing, and sometimes the menu button hangs.

Maybe these touch-only interfaces are chosen to reduce the number of failure
points?

------
paulcole
This reminds me of like 10 years ago when you couldn't go online for 5 minutes
without seeing another design student offering up an unsolicited redesign of
an airline's boarding passes.

Kind of an interesting exercise but overlooks the important fact that one
person can't change an incredibly complicated system they're not remotely
familiar with.

------
glifchits
I wouldn't have checked this out if I knew it would burn a Medium article
access for me.

------
thomas
Great read, but how to you get to the front page with 3 votes?

~~~
chatmasta
Pretty sure the ranking algorithm includes points / time. In my experience a
story that gets 3+ votes in the first 60 minutes will appear on the front page
with a short half life that extends as it gets more votes.

~~~
devnonymous
Doesn't that penalise long articles (assuming people would vote after
reading)?

~~~
icebraining
It wouldn't if the time was "the last N minutes" rather than "since the post
was created", but unless they changed it in the past years, it does:
[https://github.com/wting/hackernews/blob/master/news.arc#L26...](https://github.com/wting/hackernews/blob/master/news.arc#L262)

------
neilobremski
I send tech books and articles to my Kindle for later reading but these often
include HYPERLINKS that are easily / accidentally tapped when trying to turn
the page. For that reason alone I miss the hardware buttons on the side. Were
they that expensive to add?

