User study of two user interface variants for F.I.T.
Citation for published version (APA):van Oosterhout, M. C. C. M., van Gelderen, T., & Kemp, J. A. M. H. (1994). User study of two user interface variants for F.I.T. (IPO-Rapport; Vol. 996). Instituut voor Perceptie Onderzoek (IPO).
Document status and date: Published: 25/10/1994 Document Version:
Publisher’s PDF, also known as Version of Record (includes final page, issue and volume numbers) Please check the document version of this publication:
• A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences between the submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website.
• The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review.
• The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers.
Link to publication
General rights
Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain
• You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.
If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license above, please follow below link for the End User Agreement:
www.tue.nl/taverne Take down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at: openaccess@tue.nl
providing details and we will investigate your claim.
Institute for Perception Research PO Box 513, 5600 MB Eindhoven
Rapport no. 996
User study of two user interface variants for F.I.T.
M.C.C. van Oosterhout, T. van Gelderen
and J .A.M. Kemp
HK/hk 94/08 25.10.1994
' .
User study of
two user interface variants
for F.l.T.
FIT-SCSI/PO
Title page
Report on: Date: Written by: IPO version by: In cooperation with: Video edited by:By order of:
AfvOIJK/1994-04-22
-·
User study of two user interface variants. February/April 1994
Mascha van Oosterhout (BCS Hilversum) Tedde van Gelderen (IPO Eindhoven) Hans Kemp (IPO Eindhoven)
Remko Westrik (IPO Eindhoven) Hans Kemp (IPO Eindhoven)
Mascha van Oosterhout (BCS Hilversum) Philips BCS
Together with this report a video tape was compiled (approx. 12 min.), containing additional information about this study. The twosome as a whole make up the full report.
Copies of the video tape can be obtained via:
Mrs. Ir. M. C. C. van Oosterhout Philips BCS P.O. Box 32 1200 JD Hilversum The Netherlands Phone: +31 (0) 35-893151 Fax: +31 (0) 35-891422 1
Mr. Ir. J.A. M. Kemp
Institute for Perception Research/I PO P.O. Box 513
5600 MB Eindhoven
Phone: +31 (0) 40-773817 Fax: +31 (0) 40-773876 E-mail:ftensk@prl.philips.nl
FIT-SCSI/PO
ltfvOIJK/1994-04-22
2
FIT-BCS/IPO
AfvOIJK/1994-04-22
Contents
Title Page 1 Contents3
1 Executive summary 4 2 Introduction 63
The two user interface variants8
4 The method 12
5
Results and conclusions 146 How to proceed? 20
Appendix A: Scenario 1 21
Appendix B: Scenario 2
58
Appendix C: Questionnaire
59
Appendix D: Questionnaire results 61
•
3
FIT·BCSRPO MvO/JK/1994-04-22
1
Executive summary
A quick tests was carried out to compare the user interface ideas developed by Eden with the user interface ideas developed by BCS.
The evaluation focused on: the initial use phase.the waiting room concept and the handling of notes.
In spite of the fact that it has been a quick test, we got a clear indication about the perceived strengths and weaknesses of both user interface variants by the target group.
Designing an interface like this, there always is a need to do a step back-wards during the process, to see how the principle fits in its context, if users indeed react the way we expect them to.
The help of IPO has been very useful. As designer of an user interface you are too much biased. Therefor external expertise to help you get an objec-tive opinion is crucial.
Initial use:
The user interface variant designed by BCS was based on the waiting room metaphor. This UI performed better in relation to initial use.
Performance during initial use of both interfaces was reasonably good.
Waiting room concept:
Waiting room metaphor was pretty clear (certainly after a while). One separate waiting room for each group member caused confusion.
Positioning of both incoming and waiting calls in the waiting room was not always understood.
Note handling:
Note handling was new to all subjects.
Both user interfaces were judged different with regards to note handling. As well in the BCS interface as in the Eden interface, note handling was
judged as not being easy. The interface designed by BCS was preferred because people could directly write on the screen and easy choose the addressee.
4
FIT·BCSRPO
AfvO/JK/1994-04-22
Preference:
The user interface variant designed by BCS, was preferred by a majority of the subjects.
5
FIT-SCSI/PO
/fAvOIJK/1994-04-22
2
Introduction
In December 1993 two user interface variants for the future ISDN telephones were presented on paper:
User interface variant 1 (UI 1) was designed by Philips BCS (Hilversum/Airdrie ).
User interface variant 2 (UI 2) was specified by Eden Group Limited (Cheshire).
These user interface variants were compared in a brief walk through test with 4 users from the target group (secretaries, group workers & executives) and a user interface expert. The participants were presented with scenarios of realistic office work and telephone tasks.
The test is done by BCS in cooperation with the Institute for Perception Research (IPO) in Eindhoven.
All tests were video taped. We made a summary video which gives the highlights and conclusions of each session(± 15 minutes).
This report presents the way we worked, the results, conclusions and recom-mendations for the future.
What do we want to test?
Usability of 2 different user interface variants. *
* *
Which one is the most pleasy to use?
Which aspects of each user interface variant do people feel comfortable with? (strong points of each interface)
What is peoples attitude towards pen input versus finger input with request to a touch screen telephone?
Criteria for evaluation:
* Learnability. retainability
* Ease of use
Recognisable
Predictability (knowing hqw to do one task leads to an understanding of the next)
Consistency (within modes and between different modes)
6
FIT-BC
SI/PO
* Comfort
AfvOIJK/1994-04-22
Doesn't slow an experienced userMinimises context changes for common tasks and provides obvious navigation between contexts.
Shows situation, action confirmation clearly at a glance (status, feedback)
Fits the office/work situation Professional yet inviting to use.
7
FIT-BC
SI/PO
AfvOIJK/1994-04-22
3
The two user interface variants
We looked at the daily office life of the target user group and composed a few scenarios in which several events, like receiving a call while already busy in a call, capture and send a small note, setting up a conference call or call someone by means of a speeddial key occurred.
We used two of the scenarios (see appendix A & B) as an example to work out for each UI variant.
We used the "FIT 1 user interface specification 0.1 by S. Randall (24-11-'93)" from EDEN as a guideline to develop the two scenarios in a way they would have done it. Because of the incompleteness of this specification we had to extrapolate certain functions.
3.1
The UI variant designed by BCS (UI 1)
As you can see on the transparent sheet, the screen is divided into two sec-tions: a top section for finger input and a bottom section for pen input.
The reason why the screen is divided into two different sensitive parts, is because presently a user is used to do basic call handling functions by finger touch.
However to be able to scribble notes, a pen sensitive part is also necessary.
Finger touch:
The top section can be touched with the finger and the pen and is used for call handling.
The users are presented with a representation a reflection of their own tele-phone office including the people they are connected with.
They also see a waiting room in which all incoming and parked calls will be displayed.
The user is even able to see the status of other group members at a glance. The fixed icons around the screen have an explaining text and can be
acti-vated by finger and pen.
8
FIT-SCSI/PO
NlvOIJK/1994-04-22
Pen touch:
The lower section can only be touched with the pen and is mainly used to scribble notes (note pad) and handle them.
Four mechanical context sensitive soft keys are loc~ted on the left side of the screen. Their function appears as text label on the screen.
~~~!~!~
J'1\ :
~
:~~
:~
Keith_: _Jim _:_s~:idn _:_Bruce
~
l
~l~'Q.
~
:
~
:
~ ~
Ton•J : Bert : Robb.-rt Peottor
Park
9
FIT-SCSI/PO
3.2
lfAvOIJK/1994-04-22
The UI variant specified
by
Eden Group Ltd.
(UI 2)
The whole screen is pen sensitive and can't be operated by finger. According to Eden, users might get confused if they can touch some parts of the screen and other parts not. Regular touching of the screen will make the screen surface greasy and the visibility will diminish.
On the left side next to the screen 8 buttons including bi-coloured LEDs are placed. By means of these buttons, calls can be answered, handled and made. The colour of the LED indicates the type of call (external/internal). The status of the LED (on/off/flashing) indjpates the status of the call.
If the button is in use, next to it a field will appear in which the name of the connected person is shown including a small call progress icon which tells the user the status of that person (connected, on hold, ringing etc.). Because of the fact that the user can handle more calls at the same time, more than one button can be in use.
At the bottom border of the screen there are
6
fixed icons without any explai-ning text. By selecting one of them with a pen, related functionality will pop up.E.g. The group status indication will pop up after having touched the fixed group icon. In the field next to the name of the group member a small icon will indicate his status.
The whole screen is used for one type of activity at a time. So call handling, note handling, directory dialling etc. have different screens that have to be popped up. The user has to switch between the different contexts. E.g. when a user needs status information he/she needs to ask for it by touching a fixed function icon.
10
FIT-BC SI/PO Simon Stern Robbert Pl ant · :
~
Keith Dunbar i?•ll ~ Jim Saundersi
Sandra o·Nei 1®
Bruce Tomasi
Tony Macaroni~
Bert Beanstra (7•11 ~ Peter Bloomer i?••I ~ Robbert PJ ant 11ltAvO/JK/1994-04-22
0:05
0:01
PHILIPS
FIT-SCSI/PO
fdvOIJK/1994-04-22
4 The method
Subjects
We did a pilot tests with 2 female subjects.
5 people (3 female, 2 male) participated in the final test. Three subjects were heavy telephone users (secretaries). One subject was a normal user and one subject was a user interface expert (group worker). Except for the UI specialist all subjects were Dutch speaking. The level of education ranged from MBO to University. None of the subjects had previous experience with user interfaces of this kind.
Material
BCS described 5 scenarios out of the daily office life of the user. Both User Interface variants were worked out for two of the scenarios on an Apple Macintosh in Hypercard (See appendix A & 8). These Hypercard stacks printed out on paper were used.
In order to make people feel they are using a telephone, one of the mock-up models made by Weavers for ergonomic tests was used. The printed paper screens were pinned on the mock-up to give a more realistic impression of a working version of the telephone.
A portable S-VHS camcorder was used to record the three sessions that were done at the workplace of the subjects. The camera was placed on a tripod with a separate microphone attached to improve the sound quality of the recording. The sessions at IPO were recorded with the available S-VHS recorders and video cameras.
Procedure
* * *
The study took several days of preparation and 2 days for the tests.
The pilot study consisted of Y2 day at IPO Eindhoven in which two subjects participated: 1 secretary and 1 group worker.
The actual test was divided in two parts: 3 secretaries participated at Philips Research Laboratories Eindhoven (Nat. Lab. 1 day). One
12
FIT-SCSI/PO
AfvOIJK/1994-04-22
group worker and 1 expert participated at IPO Eindhoven ( % day). The procedure of the actual Jest was as follows:
- 5 minutes introduction;
- The purpose of the test was explained
- Questions were asked about subjects previous experience with telephones,
- The duration of the test and general outline of what was going to happen were explained.
- Walk through one worked out scenario (see Appendix A including the screens) for one user interface variant which was pinned on the model.
The subject could go to the next screen by turning over a printed page.
Subjects were asked to think aloud; what do they think at certain moments during the interaction with the system? , what do they expect to happen? etc.
- After having seen the example, we asked the subjects to work out the next scenario (see Appendix B), based on the user interface variant they just saw (15 min.) This time they were asked to tell the moder-ator how they thought it would work. We let them draw, design their own interface on an empty paper screen. We didn't show them our own screen ideas (like the screens in Appendix B)
- After this, the moderator asked the subject to fill in a questionnaire (see Appendix C & D)
- A short break followed.
- After the break the subjects were asked to do the same 3 tasks for the second user interface variant too.
The order of both user interface variants (BCS/Eden) was changed per subject. So, the first subject started with the BCS variant, the next subject with the Eden variant etc.
- At the end a wrap up interview was done by the moderator.
13
FIT-SCSI/PO MvOIJK/1994-04-22
5 Results and Conclusions
5.1 General conclusions
The method turned out to be successful, it provided the information needed. Both user interfaces were presented in English which sometimes caused
problems for the Dutch subjects. Next time, a test like this is done, the user interface needs to be displayed in the native language of the subjects.
Here after several important issues are summarized: I I .
From a users point of view a negative issue 'o' : From a users point of view a neutral issue '©':From a users point of view a positive issue
The following points are valid for both interface variants: Feedback:
© Especially in the start up phase they would use the 'help' information. Some subjects expected more feedback (visual I audible).
Note handling:
o Sending notes by means of the phone, was totally new for each subject.
All subjects used 'Send' to mail a note, they didn't understand they were preparing a special note on which they wanted an immediate reply. So, they didn't understand the 'Inquire note' principle because they could not imagine what would happen.
People always want an exact copy of the message the receiver will get from them.
The word "note" appeared to cause confusion. At a first glance people read "Note delivered" as "Not delivered".
Speed dial:
None of the subjects used the 'speed dial' icon to search for the person
14
FIT-SCSI/PO MvOIJK/1994-04-22
to call. They all just looked up the person in their directory. (Maybe they are not used to speed dial keys)
Conference call:
With both interfaces all subjects failed to release one participant from a conference call.
In appendix D the questionnaire results can be found. The sequence in which the user interface variants were tested, is indicated for each subject. N.B. Connected lines show the results in relation to the BCS variant, dotted
lines show the results in relation to the Eden variant.
15
FIT-BCSllPO
AfvOIJK/1994-04-22
5.2 The UI variant designed by BCS (UI 1 ). ·
Self explaining:© The concept is rather self explaining. It takes users about 30 minutes to get to know the concept and understand the principle.
© The moment people know the concept they perceive it as clear and consistent.
Fixed icons:
© People liked the textual explanation with the fixed icons. Because of that, the meaning of the icons quickly was clear to them. The icons on their own, without the text, were not all self explaining, this was shown in the tests with the Eden interface.
Finger touch v.s. pen touch
© People liked the idea that they could use their finger and the pen.
Especially finger touch is seen as very important. Waiting room concept:
Not all subjects recognized the waiting room and where it is used for at once. Some of them thought there would be one waiting room for every single incoming call.
'Park' was not clear to everyone, especially for other waiting rooms they would use 'Transfer', for their own 'Hold'.
The difference between a new incoming call and a waiting call was not noticed.
Group information:
o People wondered about the fact that they could have information about group members that were absent.
© Subjects liked the way the status of the group is presented. They almost all recognized the icons. Only the "empty chair" wasn't recognized by everyone.
Only one subject didn't like the pictures.
One subject wanted to have a resembling picture (photo) for each group member.
People want to see what is happening in the group at a glance. They don't want to open up group members extra information first.
Soft key labelling:
© After a while the subjects found out when the labelling appears and what they should do to let it appear.
16
FIT-BCS/IPO
NlvOIJK/1994-04-22
Some subjects touched the label instead of the key next to it. (Possibly because the keys were only 'paper keys', just like the display)
Labelling overlaps written notes.
Some English words are interpreted differently by Dutch subjects. The following labels were not clear:
* 'Release': "Release from hold?"
* 'Inquire': People don't know what is meant by it. The only clue they have is: "I expect an answer back immediately"
* 'Attach'
* 'Park': "Cars are parked, not people"
Drag & drop:
© The moment people know how the concept works they want to use it in a faster way. They mentioned: "drag & drop" as an alternative to which they are used to.
Sending notes:
© All subjects liked the idea that they could immediately write a note on the screen. However not every subject dared to write at once.
The fixed icon for messaging is positioned too far away from the actual note screen part.
The 'close box' in the upper right corner of the note pad was not clear. The expert noted that it's strange to have phone functions (the key labels) on the notepad.
Conference call:
© All subjects expected the images of all persons involved in the conference call, to appear in their "office" on the screen.
17
FIT-BCS/IPO
lrfvOIJK/1994-04-22
5.3 The UI variant designed by EDEN. (UI 2)
..
Self explaining:
The concept is not self explaining. It takes users about 40 minutes to get to know the concept. However they still didn't understand the principle at the end of the test.
Fixed icons:
Subjects didn't understand the meaning of the fixed icons at the bottom. They just guessed.
Pen touch
Because of the fact that the device not really worked not all subjects realized that they only could use pen touch here.
People tend to use their finger to point at the screen instead of the stylus.
Call handling principle:
© One subject liked the fact that the principle is based on line keys it resembles the way her present phone works too.
Call progress icons are hardly noticed/used. Being able to touch the call progress icons as well as the key next to them, caused confusion, especially because both actions have a different effect.
The meaning of different colours of LEDs (black & white on the paper screens) is not clear.
Initially people don't know how to put people "on hold".
Some secretaries wanted to let the second call for their boss wait for him in his telephone, than for them in their own telephone.
Group information:
The icons which indicate the status of the group members are too small and not always understood. "You can hardly see them change." Subjects clearly noted that these icons don't give the real status of the group member, because one single icon can't show that the person is engaged and that another call is coming in.
Context switching:
To be able to use different features simultaneously, the user has to deal with too many actions. Especially during the initial phase, the user will not know how to get the correct information.
Sending notes:
© Everyone understood that by tapping "close" the note would disappear.
18
FIT-SCSI/PO
AfvOIJK/1994-04-22
All subjects thought writing/sending notes was too much hassle.
If you want to write a note, you immediately loose the call management overview, which is not practical.
Subjects hardly understood the icons for 'Character recognition', 'Key-board' and 'Eraser'. They didn't like using the keyboard because it was perceived too small even to use it with the stylus.
19
FIT-BC
SI/PO
AfvOIJK/1994-04-22
6 How to proceed?
The user interface variant developed by BCS was preferred. However not all elements were positively received.
Note handling:
From now on we better use the word 'Memo' instead of the word 'Note'. Memo handling via the telephone appeared to be a new topic for all
subjects. That might have been the reason that especially the user dialogue for note handling caused problems.
However to make sure that people within the target group are going to use this key feature we definitely need to improve the user dialogue in such a way that people don't need to think about it, but just use it.
Another issue is 'memo management'. The user interface design team needs to think about how people are going to deal with all the different memo types. Issues like arqhiving, deleting, editing need to be incorporated in the design.
Waiting room concept:
During initial use the waiting room concept caused some difficulties. The difference between a new incoming call which has not been answered yet and a waiting call was not clear. This issue needs some attention because it has a large impact on how well the user can help his customer.
Further development plans:
The user interface team of the FIT project will continue working out the Ul-variant developed by BCS, incorporating the weaknesses and strengths of the present design.
Nevertheless, before going on exploring the concept any further, the team will have to find out which information is supported by the switch.
Tests like this one and even in more detail with e.g. a working prototype, will be necessary during the whole design process. This is the only way to stay in touch with the target group and tune the product to their requirements, wishes, daily work and behaviour.
20
PHILIPS
FIT-BCSRPO
NlvOIJK/1994-04-22
Appendix A
Scenario 1 (texij:
This is what we let the subjects read in advance.
The story starts with you being busy in a call.
At that moment a call comes in for your boss, Keith Dunbar. However he is engaged in a conversation with an important client, so he can't answer the second incoming call by himself.
As you are his personal assistant he expects you to answer that incoming call, in spite of the fact that you are busy in a call yourself.
To be able to answer that call you let your own call wait. Then you answer the incoming call for Keith.
It's Mrs Rubbles who urgently needs some information about a service contract.
During the call, you scribble Mrs Rubbles' message on the screen of your telephone. You send this note to Keith.
In spite of the fact that Keith still is talking to the important client, he sees the note appearing on his screen. He decides what he wants you to do with the call and chooses out of the following options which are displayed on his telephone screen:
- Ask to call back! - Transfer!
- Let wait! - I'll call back later!
He taps on his screen the option: 'Let wait' and you immediately receive his answer back.
At that moment you can let Mrs. Rubbles wait till Keith ends his first call. Mean while you can answer your own waiting call again.
21
FIT-BC
SI/PO
NlvOIJK/1994-04-22
Scenario 1 (UI 1 screens):
Screen 1-1:
Screen 1-1:
' ' ' . . .
You are talking to Mr. Thomas.
You are talking to Mr. Thomas.
Note ed J
<·:-:-:-:·:·
1---'--- .
...
.
'
. . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .... . .. .. .. ... . ... . .. . . .. . . . . . .
22
FIT-BC SI/PO MvOIJK/1994-04-22
Screen 1-2: Mrs.Rubbles calls Keith, who is busy.
···""""" Note ad ·.·.·.·.·.·.·
.
·
.
·. ·.
"
·.
·. u---;1·
. ·
.
·
.
·
.
·
.
·
"
.. ..
.. .. ... . . ..
.
. .
. . ..
. ..
..
. . . . ....
...
.
. . ..
..
.
.
. .. .
. . . ..
.
. " . " . . " " . " " • . . . iliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii;;;;;;;;;;;;iiiiiiiiiii~ •. . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . . . . ..
..
. . . .
. . . •..
.•••• ..
. " . . ••• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
.. .
. . ..
. . . . . . . . ..
.
. . . . . . ..
. ..
..
.. .
. . .
.
. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . . ..
. . . . . ..
. . . ..
. . . ..
. . ..
.
. .
.
. ..
. . . . . 23PHILIPS
'
r ! LFIT-BC SI/PO
lftfvO/JK/1994-04-22
Screen 1-3: You tap Mr.Thomas to park him.
Grou .. .... d ... . .
a
...
.
1---_.:..;...=...;...;;;...Ji;;..;;;...;;;;.._ _ _ _ _ _ _ 11 :- :- :- :-:-:- : Park . . . .. .
.
..
..
.
. .
..
. .
..
. . . .
. ..
.
.
.
..
. . . . ..
.
. . .
. .
.
. . . .
..
. . . . .
...
..
.
. .. . .
.
..
.
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
.
.
. .
.
. . ..
. .. .
. .
. .
. . ..
.. .
.
.
. ..
. . ..
. . .
..
.
.. .
.
.
..
. . . .
.
.
. .. . .
.
. . .. .
.
..
r-.---···
. . .
...
. . . . ..
. .
.
. ..
. .
. . .
.
. . ..
..
.
.
.
. .
.
.
. . ..
. . ..
. ..
..
. .·.·.·...·.. . . .·.·.~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~~~~·.·.·.. .. . ... .. .. ... ·...·.·.. .·.
. . ..
.
. ..
. . . . ..
.. .
..
.
. . . .. . .
. . . . ..
. ..
. . . . ..
.
.
. .
..
. . . .
.
.
. . . .. . . .
. .
. .
..
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. . ..
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
.
. . . . ..
..
.
. ..
. .
.. . .
.. . . .
..
. . ..
. ..
. .
..
. .
. . .
.
. ..
.. .
. .
.
.
. . . 24PHILIPS
FIT·BCS/IPO MvOIJK/1994-04-22
-·
Screen 1-4 You press the 'Park' key, ... ·
.;~_:.:
:=.;:,i:
bj_·=:
:
..
·:::.~1$,i'l·lil
.
.
.
:·:~·::.-.:.J:=:::_::~
.. J.J.=J.,.".• .. l:i.i·! .. i!J·::·.:.
!~.~~~_::1:::··
0i·==•=Sm;~;~.:~:~-=···•.c?.~·,~~-·-.···11•1/Jllllll!l!/ll/lllll
::::<a.t::::::: \,~~ -~~ ... : ::::::::::::::::::::::::::~~~~~:·
Ji!i!J!J!!J!!!
Ketth'Office•
Grou .... ... . ... .Select
Destinetion
. .. .
. .
. . . ..
. . . . . . ..
..
. .
. . ....
.
. . . ..
.
.
.
..
.
.
. . . . ..
. . ....
• " . . ••••••••••.
. . . ~;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;~;;;;;;;;;;;,,I ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
.
. . . . . . . . . " " " ".
..
. " " • . . . . . . ..
.
. . . ..
. .
.
.
. . .. . . .
.
.
. . . . . . . ..
.
. . ..
. . ..
. . .. . .
. .. .
.
. ..
.
..
.
..
.
.. .
. . .
..
.
. . .. .
. .
. . . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. ..
. . . . ..
.
. . .
. . . . . . ..
.
. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . -·
--
---25PHILIPS
L
r .
lFIT-SCSI/PO
/fAvOIJK/1994-04-22
Screen 1-5 You touch your waiting room. The call is parked.
.·.·.·.·.·.·. Note ad · · · ... 11---____;:..:..::.~--C.=-=---ll-:.
> >:-:. >
I
Cel 1 perkedI
...
..
.
. .
..
. . . .. . . .
. .
..
.
. . .. .
.
...
...
.
..
..
. .
.
. . . ..
..
.
.
. .
..
..
. .
. .
.
.
. .
.
. ..
.
. .
.
.
.
.. .
. . .. .
.
.
.
..
.
. .
.
..
. . .
..
.
. .
.
. .
.
. ~...-i •••••• " " ...
.
..
.
".
.
.
. .
. .
.
. . . ..
.
.
.
.
. .
..
.
.
.
. .
.. .
.
.
. .
. t..!;;;iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii;;;i;;iiiiiiii..;J • • • • • • .·.·.·.
...
.·.·.·._-..
...
..
...
.
...
.
...
·.·.
·.
·.·.·
..
.
·
. . ..
.
.
.
. .
.
.
. . . . ..
.
. . .
.
. . ..
.
..
..
. . ..
. .
.
. .
.
.
. .
..
. . .
. ..
.. .
.
.
. .
. . .
. . . .
.. .
.
.
. . .
.
. .
. .
. .
. . .
. . . . . . . . . . .. .
. . . . . . ..
. . . . . .. . . .
.
.
..
.
. .
. . . .
.
. . . .. . .
.
. . .
..
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
..
. . . .
. . .
.
. .
.
.
.
26PHILIPS
FIT·BCSllPO
Screen 1-6
AfvOIJK/1994-04-22
To answer Mrs Rubbles, you touch her.~
-
Grou .. .. .. Note ad "· · · · ·. ·. ·. ·lt---1
...
. . . ..
.
.
..
. ..
. . . . . . . . . ..
.. .
.
. . . . ..
. . . . . ..
.. .
. . . . . . . . . . . ..
..
.
. . . .. . . .
. . . . . ..
. . .. .
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
. . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
.. .
. . .. .
. .
. . . ..
. . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " . . . ." " ..• " . ~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii;;;;,1-: . ... .... . . . . . . . . .. :-..:- :-.:-.:-..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
.. .
. .
. . . . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. .
. .
..
.
. .. .
..
. . .
..
.
.
. ..
.
. ..
.. .
.
..
..
. .
. . . . . . . ..
.. .
.
. . . . ..
. . .
..
..
..
.
. .
.
..
27PHILIPS
FIT-SCSI/PO MvOIJK/1994-04-22
Screen 1-7 You press the 'Answer' key.
. . . d ... ... . tl---;;..;..;;;....;;..;;~--6....;;;_---11
<-:-:.
>
:-..
. ....
. . . ...
. . ..
..
.
.
.
.. .
.
.
. .
. . .
.
.
. ..
. .. . .
.
..
. . . ..
.
. .. . . . . ..
.
.
. . ..
. .
.
. .. .
.
.
. . . ..
.
.
. . .. .
. ..
. .
.
.
. ..
..
. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . .. .
. . . . . ..
..
. . .. .
. .
..
.
.
.
.
.. .
..
.
.. .
.
. .. .
.. .
. . ~---···.
... .
. . .
.
..
.
. . . ..
.
. . .
. . .. .
. . ..
.
.. .
. . ..
. . .. .
:-
.:
-: -: -:
. . . .-:
<
. . . f..\;;;;;iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii;;;;;;iiiiiiiiiO;;;;;;:a ..... . ..••... . . ..
.. .
..
..
..
.. .
.
. . ..
. . ..
. . . . ..
. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . ..
.
..
.
. . . ..
.
. .. . ..
..
.
. .. .
.
. ..
.
. . ..
.
.
. . . ..
. . ..
. .
. . ..
.
. . . . ..
. . . . . ..
.
.
.
. . . . . . .. .
.
..
..
. . . . . ..
. . . . . . . . ..
.
. . . . ..
..
.
.
. ..
.
. . .. .
.
.
..
.
.
.. .
..
.
. ..
. ..
. . . . 28PHILIPS
FIT-BC
SI/PO
Screen 1-8:
NlvOIJK/1994-04-22
Now you are talking to Mrs Rubbles.
-
Grou .....
.
.....
..
. . ..
.
.
. .
.
. . ..
. ..
. .
.
.
.
. . .
.
.
..
.
.
. ..
..
. ..
. . . . . . . ..
. .
. . . . ..
.
.
.
.
.
. . . ..
. . . . ..
.
.
.
. . ..
. . ..
.
.
.
.. .
..
.
. . ..
. . . ..
. . . . . . . . . ..
.
. . . . . . . ..
. . .. . .
.
..
.
.
.
. . . . . . ..
. . ..
. ..
..
..
.
. .. .
.
..
..
. ..
.
. . .
..
.. .
. . . ..
. . ..
.
. . ..
:-
.
: -: -: .
. . .>
.
>
.:
t;.---;;;;;;;;;;i;;;;;;;;;~.
. . . . . . . . ..
..
. . . ..
. . ..
. ..
·... .
.
. .
.
.
. . . . . . . ..
..
.
.
.. .
.
.
. .
.
. . . . . . .. .
.
. . .. .
. .. .
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
. . . . . . . . . . . ..
. .
. . ..
. . .. .
.
. ..
. . ..
..
29PHILIPS
FIT-BC
SI/PO
AfvOIJK/1994-04-22
Screen 1-9: Write a note for Keith on the display.
. . . 0 ·.·.·.·.·.·.· ... ·.·.·.·.·. Note ad .
"
..."
.__
____
....;.:.~~~.;;;;._----_...,:-
:-
:
-:
.:-
:
-:
....
.
.
.
.
.
.. .
..
.
..
.
.
..
.
.
. . . . . . ..
.
. ..
. . . . . ..
.
..
. . .. .
. .
. .
.
..
.
. .
..
.. .
..
.
. .
.
. . . . ..
. . ..
. ..
.
.
. . ..
. .
..
. . ..
..
..
..
.
. ..
..
. . . . . ..
. . .
. .
..
..
.
. . .. .
. .
. . ..
. ..
. ..
.. .
. .--
--···
....
..
.
.
.
.
.
.. .
..
.
.
..
.
.
.. .
. .
. . .. .
..
..
.
. . ..
..
. .
. . . .
. • " ••.•..•... ll;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;~--iiiiiii:.I • .•••.•....•. . . ..
. . ..
. . . ..
. . ..
. . . . . . . ..
. .
.
..
. ..
. ..
.
.
..
. . . ..
. . . . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. ..
. . ..
.
. .
..
..
.. .
.
. ..
. . . . . .. . . .
. ..
.
..
.
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . ..
. . . . ..
. . ..
. . . ..
.
. ..
. .
.
..
. ..
.
. ..
.
.
..
.
. .
. .
..
. . ..
.
. . ..
30PHILIPS
FIT-BCSllPO
Screen 1-10
. . .
.
. ..
.
. . . ..
ltfvOIJK/1994-04-22
Touch the 'notes' icon.
D -.-.·.·.-.·.-Note ad 1---...:...:...;::;...;;..=..-.1;;...:;;..~---< ... .
.
. .. .... ..
. ..
.
. . . . . . . ..
..
. . . ..
.
.
. . ..
.
. . ..
. . ..
..
..
.
. •· . . . ..
..
. . . . . . . • • • • • l:..iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii;;;;;;;;iiiiiiiiiii;;;;;;;;;,1 ...••••• . . .. . .
. . . . ..
. . . . . .. .
.
..
.
. ..
..
..
. . .
..
. ..
. . . . . . . . ..
.
.
.
..
.
. . . . . . . . . ..
.
. . . . . . . ..
. ..
. . . ..
. . . ..
. . . . ..
..
.
.
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . ..
. . . ..
.
. .
.
.
. . -.
.... ..
.. ....
..
.. .... . . .... . . .. .. .... .. .
....
. . . . ...
.. ....
. . ..... .
. . . 31PHILIPS
FIT-BC
SI/PO
NlvOIJK/1994-04-22
Screen 1-11 Indication of different options
..... . . . ..
.
. ..
.
.
.
. . . . . ..
. . . . ..
. .. .
.. .
. ..
. . . . . . . . ..
. ..
. . . . . . ..
. . ..
.
...
....
... .
.
. . . . ..
. .
. . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . . .. . .
..
..
. ..
. . ..
.. . .
. ...
..
....
. . . . . . ..
. .. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. ..
. . . .. .
.
..
.
..
.
.
. . ..
.
. ..
. . ..
. ..
..
. ..
.
.
.
.
.
. .. .
.
.
.
..
.
. ..
. . . . ..
. . . . ..
.
.. .
..
.
. ..
.
. . . . . ..
. . . . . . . . . . .. .
.
.
. . ..
.
.
. . ..
..
.
. .
.
. . . . . ..
.
. . . ..
.
.
. ..
. . . ..
. . ..
. . . . . ----~~---"' 32PHILIPS
FIT-BCS/IPO
NlvOIJK/1994-04-22
Screen 1-12 Press the 'inquire' key.
"""-·--··
.
·-~
m11
Grou D ·.·.·.·.·.·.· . . ... . . . ... . ... .. . . . . ..
.
. . . . . . . . . .. .
.
. ..
.
. .
. ..
.
. .. .
. .. .
. . ..
. . . ..
.
.
..
.
.
. . ..
. ..
.
. . ..
.
. ..
. . . .. .
.
. ..
. . ..
. . ..
.
. . . . . ..
..
. _ .. ·.·.·
.·. ·...
· ... ·.· ...·.·.
·
.
·.·.· ...·
.·.
·
.
..
.
..
.
33PHILIPS
,.FIT-SCSI/PO MvOIJK/1994-04-22
Screen 1-13 Touch Keith to send the note to him.
~
-
Grou :-:. . . . -:-:-:-:-: . . l---=-:...=....::.=...c...;:;...;;;... _ _ _ _ _ Note oda
, .:-
_ ...:-:-:-:-:-:
...... .' . .. .
. . ..
.
.
. .
. . . ..
. . . . ..
. . . .
. . ..
. . . . ..
..
..
. .
.
.
. ..
.
.
.
.. . .
.
..
. .. .
. .
. . ..
.
. . ..
. ..
. . .. .
.
.
.
. . . . ..
.. . .
. .. .
..
. . . ..
. ..
. . ..
.
. . . .. . .
..
. . . . ..
. .
..
.
. .. . .
..
. . ..
. ..
.
. . ..
.
.. . .
.
.
. ..
. . ..
. ..
.. .
. .
.
..
. .
.. . . .
.
.
..
..
.
.. . . .
. .
. . • . . . . • • ll;;;;;;;iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii;;;;;;;;;;;;~~~ ... :- : -:::
. . . .:
:
:
:
:
:
: : ::
:
:
:
: :
.:
: : :
.: :
. ..:::::
.::: ::
. . . .:
::
:: : :::
:
:::::::::: ::: :
. ....:
.: :: ::::::::: :
. . . .:
:: ::
.:::·:·:·
.... 34PHILIPS
FIT-BCSllPO
Screen 1-14
AAvOIJK/1994-04-22
Keith receives the note while he is busy m a call.
~
ml1
Grou :-:-:-:-:-:-: Note ad D :-:-:-:-:-:-: ... tl---__;~-=-=~-=-=---11 ... .I
Note de 1 i v ere dI
.
. . . ..
.
.
.
. .. .
. .. .
.
. . ..
. . . . . . . . . . ..
.
.
.
.
.
. . ..
.. .... . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .... . . ...
. .. .
.
. . ..
. . . . . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .
.
. . ..
. .
..
.
. . . . . ..
. .. .
.
.
. . ..
. .
. . . . • . . • . • . • . l!;;;.;iiiiiiiiiiiimiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii;;;;;;;iiiiiiiiiiii~ ...•...:
:: :::
:
:: :
:
:: :
.:·
:.:.:.
:
·:
.:.:
·
:
·:
·
:
·:·
:·
:
.: ·
:.
:.
:
·:
·:
·
:·
:.
:
·:
·
:·:
.:
. :
·:.:
·
:
.
:
·
:.:.:
.... . . . . ... . .. ..
.... .
.... . ..... . . . . . ....
. . . . . ....
. . . ..
..
..
. . . ..
.. ... . . . .... . . . . 35PHILIPS
L
r l I I L : I LFIT-SCSI/PO MvOIJK/1994-04-22
Screen 1-15
... . . .
. . . . . . . . .
.
..
.. . . . . . .
You are still talking to Mrs. Rubbles.
