
The generation that tech forgot - SimplyUseless
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-32511489
======
scottLobster
Seems that article is more about interfaces for the handicapped than anything
specific to the elderly; probably because being elderly in general doesn't
preclude one from technology. In my experience it's the elderly people who
have no desire to learn something new that are the issue. My GF's dad is in
his 70s and uses his iPhone, iPad and laptop regularly with no issues, because
he embraced technology years ago, uses it every day and is open to learning
how to use it. His wife on the other hand is a little more "set in her ways"
and intentionally avoids technology aside from a few things like Facetime and
Plants vs Zombies, and as such runs into a lot of everyday issues that she
doesn't know how to deal with and just waves them over to him or me or the
nearest Apple Genius.

Technology being "impenetrable" is not a trait only applied to the elderly.
It's initially "impenetrable" to everyone when they first start using it,
whether that be at age 3 or age 80. Learning to use technology well comes with
experience like anything else, and those many elderly people who have attained
some technical proficiency are proof of this. If someone doesn't want to put
forth that effort then they shouldn't feel patronized when the interface
assumes the lowest common denominator.

Now designing for medical issues and handicaps that may or may not come with
age is another issue. I'm all for medical accessibility, but I'd divorce that
issue from "designing for the elderly", on the grounds of over-generalization.
For instance, phones with oversized numbers are also used by legally blind
young people.

~~~
derefr
> For instance, phones with oversized numbers are also used by legally blind
> young people.

Huh; I could understand wanting _physical buttons_ rather than a touchscreen,
but the standard 10-digit keypad is incredibly easy to dial "by feel"—or,
basically, to touch-type on. Why make it bigger? Is it for the _really_ young
legally-blind people who are first learning to use a phone?

I mean, we don't make keyboards for legally blind people with bigger keys, do
we? (There are keyboards with braille guides, but that's somewhat orthogonal.)

~~~
pimlottc
"legally blind" does not necessarily mean completely without sight. It means
your corrected vision is less than 20/200 or your field of view is less than
20. And yes, they do make accessible keyboards with larger, easier to see
keys:

[https://www.bigkeys.com/](https://www.bigkeys.com/)

[http://www.morekeyboard.com/](http://www.morekeyboard.com/)

[http://www.amazon.com/Chester-Creek-
VB2-VisionBoard2-Keyboar...](http://www.amazon.com/Chester-Creek-
VB2-VisionBoard2-Keyboard/dp/B000OCQTWM)

------
eshvk
I do wonder if the answer to this is more diversity in our engineers. Let me
explain:

While I have no doubt that a lot of great companies have awesome engineers,
SF/SV tech is filled with white men in their early twenties. Nothing wrong
with that, but it seems like diversity in age, race and ethnicity is a token
that plays second fiddle to "meritocracy".

The latter really at the end comes down to whether you wear an ironic hoodie,
can solve a graph algorithm problem well and can work long hours through the
night.

Nothing wrong with all of those, I have done those and been a good mimic. But,
the more I think about it, the more I think that it creates an echo chamber
where there is only one true way of designing and building products. The ones
that that clique can use.

Sometimes, I belong to that clique with things like Hipmunk that I love to
use. Sometimes, I am confused as fuck say when it comes to Unix commands. I
wonder how many many many users we are missing out because of our focus on
building and designing things that are focused towards the needs of the few.

~~~
digi_owl
Remind me of a thought i had regarding touch screens.

One reason i think Nokia and Samsung was sticking to resistive screens and
buttons until Apple rolled out their phone, was that resistive screens can be
worked with gloves on.

Apple being located in California, didn't really have the experience of
operating devices in really cold winters.

------
shalmanese
Any attempts to eliminate accidental complexity in products should be lauded
but the people attempting to make these apps quickly run into the fact that
there's still a lot of intrinsic complexity built into the system that can't
be hidden away.

Like a frog in boiling water, anybody who started in tech when it was simple
and then gradually learnt along the way as tech adapted are in a good place
because they've just internalized all of the little tricks and quirks and
magic invocations that are necessary. Anyone who's trying to jump in now has
to accept that it's either going to take a large amount of time and effort to
get acclimated or it's going to be a very hard, sharp shock.

The same would apply the other way around. If young people were teleported
back to the technology of the 50's, they'd be equally frustrated with all of
the quirks of a typewriter or an ice box. But old people would be fine because
they'd already internalized all of that learning.

------
tomelders
With so much effort going into life extension, I feel this is the wrong
perspective on the problem. It's not about making technology more accessible
to the elderly, but more about making the elderly fit for the modern and ever
changing world.

As brutal as it might sound, making technology accessible to the current
"state of the art" in terms of what it means to be old is a long term solution
to a short term problem... I hope.

------
na85
The revelation here is not that the elderly have different UI/UX needs, but
that Touch is not a panacea despite the claims of certain smartphone/tablet
companies.

~~~
derefr
Touch allows you to create any _flat 2D control-plane_ interface you want. If
you're a sound engineer, for example, a touchscreen can replace thousands of
individual custom knobs and sliders. (Touch also, through _projection_ ,
allows you to interact with 3D spaces as long as your interactions are
themselves two-dimensional. Minecraft, CAD programs, etc. fall into this
group.)

On the other hand, we tend to just ignore the possibility of creating apps for
interface modalities that aren't possible with the technology we have. Molding
virtual clay, or putting together virtual lego, with your fingers? How?
There's no plausible "how" right now, so most UX designers just forget about
the possibility and come back to check on the idea in another ten years.

The problem comes from the UX designers who try to force something like
"virtual lego" into a "flat 2D control-plane" shaped box. This sort of
_unnatural_ control interaction is what confuses people who are first exposed
to computers. It's not the fault of the computer; it's the fault of UX
designers whose reach exceeds their grasp.

------
tymekpavel
This article was very scattered.

------
tomc1985
"Forgot" is a little facetious, dontyathink?

