Mental model: Shifting gears

I got my new bike a week ago (and all of a sudden spring is very, very far away). As mentioned in the previous post my old bike is actually very old. That means that shifting gears were done using two levers positioned on the down tube. My new bike (OK - so I took it for a small ride even though I shouldn't - considering the weather) has the shifting mechanism built into the handbrakes which is really cool. The right one shifts on the rear derailleur and the left one handles the front. Just like my old bike.

To get to the user experience point of view: There are two levers on each handbrake, one for shifting down and another for shifting up. You press them inwards to trigger the shift. I had no problems using the one for the rear derailleur; I shifted down and up like I never tried anything else. Piece of cake. But my left handbrake was obviously broken - I couldn't get it to shift up on the big chain ring. Until I tried the other lever (the one shifting to a higher gear on the left).

My "problem" is this: I correlated the shifting mechanism with the gears: Move this lever and you shift to a higher gear; move the other to shift to a lower gear. Basically they work just like the old ones - pull the left one for a lower gear, pull the right one for a higher one.

So why would I all of a sudden be confused by this? My guess is that with the old ones the mechanism was quite obvious - it just pulled the cable for the derailleur. And I knew that pulling the cable for the rear would get me a lower gear, whereas pulling the cable for the front would get me a higher gear. Now the mechanism is all wrapped up and hidden from view and I can't see how the cable is pulled. If this should get real "nerdy" I would say that this is usability heuristic #1: Visibility of system status: The system should always keep users informed about what is going on, through appropriate feedback within reasonable time.

I do believe, though, that they real key here is this: My mental model wasn't matched with how things worked. I'm pretty sure that I'll get the hang of it when spring comes and I can actually take the bike ot for some rides (instead of driving my wife crazy with frustration and the kids with laughter when riding it around in the living room).

Cycle fitting on-line

I've just bougth myself a new bike. The company is German and they only sell via the internet (pretty strange considering how backwards the Germans normally are when we're talking about adapting to new techology; there are still gas stations in Northern Germany where you cannot pay using a credit card!!!).

Anyway - this story is about how you can reduce the fairly complex task of buying a bike to a pleasurable experience in front of your computer (we are NOT talking bikes like the ones you get in the local supermarket).

Try out their Perfect Position System and come back here.

Pretty easy wasn't it? The only thing that isn't optimal, is the box with explaining text in the middle which only goes away when you click "Start". This is so easy. And also necessary. I've been checking out bikes for 6 months now - and I was convinced that I needed to do a lot of "trial runs" to determine which bike would be to my liking. Also, because the last time I bought a bike, sloping top tubes weren't all the rage it is today (you used to determine the right size of bike by standing slightly at ease over the bike. There should be a couple of centimeters of air to the top tube from you crotch).

So all my anxiety of finding the right size was taken away by this tool - I felt rather confident that they wouldn't make serious mistakes (if you're a company that only do business online you'd better do the right thing. Everytime). Therefore I was willing to part with a substancial amout of my savings without even trying the bike out. Just because someone created this little tool (and made it simple to use and pretty to look at!). I don't know if I am representing the average user here, but it is an interesting observation.

And OK - it did help a bit that it looked to be the sweetest deal on the planet at his point in time.

Update: Culture may not be in such grave danger after all

I now finally(!!) finished "The Cult of the Amateur" mentioned in the previous entry (it was quite a hard read and I finished up 5 other books before this one was done). Anyway: I am pleased to announce that while I was rather annoyed by Andrew Keens writing (because his doomsday approach turned me off, and I thought most of his examples (especially the economic ones) were ridiculous), the book turned out to be OK in the end.

After all the hubbub about web 2.0 and no one respecting copy-rights anymore the book turned more sombre and looked at the internet in general and some of the effects of what can happen to our kids. As a parent to a 7 year old who is now enjoying web 2.0 through Club Penguin and a 5 year old who is sleeping in a card board box on the floor in her room next to her perfectly good bed, and who before she goes to bed (card board box), almost always seems to manage to get my PC infected with malicious spyware and stuff, I pay attention when someone warns me how my kids can get in trouble.

After all the gloom Mr. Keen actually lets us know that it may not be so bad after all. There is still hope he claims (and I agree), because even though there will always be criminals and pundits, there are also sensible people (and most of us belong to that category) which will legislate, agree, and veto what is good for our common good.