Improving Window Switching Interfaces

  • Susanne Tak
  • Andy Cockburn
  • Keith Humm
  • David Ahlström
  • Carl Gutwin
  • Joey Scarr
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5727)

Abstract

Switching between windows on a computer is a frequent activity, but current switching mechanisms make it difficult to find items. We carried out a longitudinal study that recorded actual window switching behaviour. We found that window revisitation is very common, and that people spend most time working with a small set of windows and applications. We identify two design principles from these observations. First, spatial constancy in the layout of items in a switching interface can aid memorability and support revisitation. Second, gradually adjusting the size of application and window zones in a switcher can improve visibility and targeting for frequently-used items. We carried out two studies to confirm the value of these design ideas. The first showed that spatially stable layouts are significantly faster than the commonly-used recency layout. The second showed that gradual adjustments to accommodate new applications and windows do not reduce performance.

Keywords

window switching revisitation patterns spatial constancy 

References

  1. 1.
    Hutchings, D., Smith, G., Meyers, B., Czerwinski, M., Robertson, G.: Display Space Usage and Window Management Operation Comparisons between Single Monitor and Multiple Monitor Users. In: Proc. AVI 2004, pp. 32–39. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Smith, G., Baudisch, P., Robertson, G., Czerwinski, M., Meyers, B., Robbins, D., Horvitz, E., Andrews, D.: GroupBar: The TaskBar Evolved. In: Proc. OzCHI 2003, pp. 34–43 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Henderson, A., Card, S.: Rooms: The use of multiple virtual workspaces to reduce space contention in a window-based graphical user interface. ACM Transactions on Graphics 5(3), 211–243 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Robertson, G., Horvitz, E., Czerwinski, M., Baudisch, P., Hutchings, D., Meyers, B., Robbins, D., Smith, G.: Scalable Fabric: Flexible Task Management. In: Proc. AVI 2004, pp. 85–89. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kumar, M., Paepcke, A., Winograd, T.: EyeExposé: Switching Applications with Your Eyes, Stanford University (2007), http://hci.stanford.edu/cstr/reports/2007-02.pdf
  6. 6.
    Grudin, J.: Partitioning Digital Worlds: Focal and Peripheral Awareness in Multiple Monitor Use. In: Proc. CHI 2001, pp. 458–465. ACM Press, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Oliver, N., Smith, G., Thakkar, C., Surendran, A.: SWISH: Semantic Analysis of Window Titles and Switching History. In: Proc. IUI 2006, pp. 194–201. ACM Press, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaptelinin, V.: UMEA: Translating Interaction Histories into Project Contexts. In: Proc. CHI 2003, pp. 353–360. ACM Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dragunov, A., Dietterich, T., Johnsrude, K., McLaughlin, M., Li, L., Herlocker, J.: TaskTracer: A Desktop Environment to Support Multi-tasking Knowledge Workers. In: Proc. IUI 2005, pp. 75–82. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oliver, N., Czerwinski, M., Smith, G., Roomp, K.: RelAltTab: Assisting users in switching windows. In: Proc. IUI 2006, pp. 385–388. ACM Press, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bernstein, M., Shrager, J., Winograd, T.: Taskposé: Exploring Fluid Boundaries in an Associative Window Visualization. In: Proc. UIST 2008, pp. 231–234. ACM, New York (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shneiderman, B.: Direct Manipulation for Comprehensible, Predictable, and Controllable User Interfaces. In: IUI 1997, pp. 33–39. ACM Press, New York (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tashman, C.: WindowScape: A Task Oriented Window Manager. In: Proc. UIST 2006, pp. 77–80. ACM Press, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kandogan, E., Shneiderman, B.: Elastic Windows: Improved Spatial Layout and Rapid Multiple Window Operations. In: Proc. AVI 1996, pp. 29–38. ACM Press, New York (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gaylin, K.: How are Windows Used? Some Notes on Creating an Empirically-Based Windowing Benchmark Task. In: Proc. CHI 1986, pp. 96–100. ACM Press, New York (1986)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mackinlay, J., Royer, C.: Log-based Longitudinal Study Finds Window Thrashing, Palo Alto Research Center, UIS-2004-06 (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zipf, G.: Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort: An Introduction to Human Ecology. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1949)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Juran, J.: Quality Control Handbook. McGraw-Hill, New York (1951)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cockburn, A., Gutwin, C., Greenberg, S.: A Predictive Model of Menu Performance. In: Proc. CHI 2007, pp. 627–636. ACM Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tauscher, L., Greenberg, S.: How People Revisit Web Pages: Empirical Findings and Implications for the Design of History Systems. IJ. Hum. Comp. Stud., 47(1), 97–138 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hansen, W.: User Engineering Principles for Interactive Systems. In: Barstow, D., Shrobe, H., Sandewall, E. (eds.) Interactive Programming Environments, pp. 288–299. McGraw-Hill, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Czerwinski, M., van Dantzich, M., Robertson, G., Hoffman, H.: The Contribution of Thumbnail Image, Mouse-Over Text and Spatial Location Memory to Web Page Retrieval in 3D. In: Proc. INTERACT 1999, pp. 163–170. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bruls, M., Huizing, K., van Wijk, J.: Squarified Treemaps. In: Proc. Eurographics and IEEE TCVG Symposium on Visualization, pp. 33–42. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2000)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tu, Y., Shen, H.: Visualizing Changes of Hierarchical Data Using Treemaps. IEEE Trans. on Visualization and Computer Graphics 13(6), 1286–1293 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susanne Tak
    • 1
  • Andy Cockburn
    • 1
  • Keith Humm
    • 1
  • David Ahlström
    • 2
  • Carl Gutwin
    • 3
  • Joey Scarr
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science and Software EngineeringUniversity of Canterbury8140New Zealand
  2. 2.Department of Informatics SystemsKlagenfurt UniversityKlagenfurtAustria
  3. 3.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatchewanCanada

Personalised recommendations