Just before Christmas 2007, I made a donation to the One Laptop Per Child through their Give One, Get One program. My donation purchased an XO laptop for a child in a developing country and one for myself (well, for my daughter actually).

The laptop finally arrived a couple of days ago. And while I’d read about the XO laptop’s interface and had seen screen captures of it, all of that information didn’t prepare me for what I saw when I got my hands on the device.

The folks who designed the interface – named SUGAR – really took a chance, and I think that for the most part they succeeded in creating an intuitive interface and a usable computer. It was a a design risk that I think paid off.

It should be stated, and this is something many critics of the XO laptop have either ignored or failed to realize, that the XO laptop isn’t intended for adults. Nor is it meant for people who are familiar with Mac OS, Linux, or Windows. The XO is for children, specifically for children who have never seen and/or never used a computer before. The users of this device are pretty much tabula rasa when it comes to computing. And if you approach the XO laptop with a mind like an empty cup, you can see how intuitive its interface actually is.

A road untravelled

The SUGAR interface deviates considerably from the desktop UIs that we’ve all come to know and love. Or know and hate, depending on the interface. In fact, SUGAR seems to go back to the basic concepts of the GUI — using a pointer to launch application using an icon. But unlike, say, your Windows desktop, the icons aren’t labelled. Nor are they fancy. But, like any good icons, they identify the applications that they launch.

In some ways, SUGAR reminds me of a description of a user interface that Jaron Lanier was trying to develop in the late 80s or early 90s. If you want more details about Lanier’s GUI, find a copy of the book Virtual Reality by Howard Rheingold.

Consistency

One strength of the XO laptop’s interface is consistency. All the applications have the same look and feel. Spartan, but usable. You don’t have a hodgepodge of different interfaces. You probably know what I mean — compare Microsoft Word to Adobe FrameMaker.

You don’t have to worry about clicking the wrong icon, choosing the wrong key combination, or not finding the right item under a particular menu. Everything looks the same and works in the same way.

Activities rather than applications

That said, the concept of an application (or software in general) doesn’t exist with the XO laptop. Everything is built around activities. And the activity metaphor is a natural, intuitive way to approach a task. I can’t think of anyone who thinks “Oh, I want to use a word processor”. Instead, they think “I want to write something”. The word processor loaded with the XO, for example, is called Write. Not some fancy or clever name, just Write. And, in case you’re wondering, it does more than the program with the same name on Windows!

This metaphor is natural for the intended audience for this device. The key here is performing a task (something we all do intuitively) and not using software (a learned behaviour). The intuitive aspect reinforces the task.

But just how intuitive is the XO laptop? As I mentioned ealier in this post, I bought this device for my daughter. She’s eight years old and suffers from autism. While she lives in a house with several computers, she hasn’t had much hands-on experience with them. Well, beyond playing with my wife’s laptop and using an old Mac at her former school. But after using the XO for less than 30 minutes — and being mesmerized by it the entire time — my daughter is now able to launch and use a number of activities without any hesitation.

Maximizing screen real estate

When working with an activity, the activity takes up the full screen. The on-screen controls discreetly fade away until you need them. All you have to do is mouse over certain areas of the interface to make the controls appear, or you can press a dedicated key on the keyboard.

You’re not getting a huge amount of additional screen space from this — maybe a centimetre or a little more. But that’s not the point. You’re not being distracted by a set of GUI elements that you aren’t using at the moment.

Lessons for developers and interface designers

The SUGAR interface on the XO laptop was definitely a design risk. But it’s one, I think, that interface designers can learn from. I’m not saying that all applications — regardless of their platform — should ape the SUGAR interface, but they should be willing to take risks. They should be willing to deviate from the status quo. I mean, how many toolbars, icons, and menus do users really need? And how many do they actually use?

Don’t be afraid to design an application not just for your audience, but the way in which your audience will actually use the application. Consider how people are bound to use an application and build from there. One of the reasons that Aaron and I enjoy using applications developed by 37 Signals — applications like Basecamp, Highrise, Writeboard, and Backpack — is that they’re designed with the user in mind. Those applications enable users to perform certain tasks, without a lot of overhead or features that only a fraction of them will ever use. There is no all-in-one solution.

Related posts:

1. User interfaces: don’t try to be too cute
2. The iPhone and usability
3. Putting the wrecking ball to the UI