Fwd: frustration about bike gears

X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2
From: "Don Norman"
To: "'Erik Brooks'"
Subject:
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 07:56:10 -0700
Organization: Nielsen Norman Group
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
Thread-Index: AcSqIkkV3SH/iEKER/i6MIdOiJ8v7w==
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at lvcm.net

Erik

Thanks for the citation.

Yup, the traditional shifting mechanisms for bicycles poses an unnecessary
mental burden on beginners -- and I wouldn't be surprised if even the most
expert biker at time errs in their use. So rationalizing the system so both
front and rear derailleurs work in the same way makes a great deal of sense.

Of course, the problem is that once a standard has been set, people who have
learned it are disoriented by any change, even if in the long run the
change is
beneficial.

So, your points are absolutely correct.

---
Next thing to work on is the distinction between front and rear gears,
with two
separate controls and the overlapping gear ratios. Wouldn't it be nice to
have
one unified control, as in automobiles, so the bike rider wouldn't have to
think
about whether to shift into a lower front gear or not, but could simply
concentrate upon bike riding, and perhaps on shifting only to maintain a
preferred cadence.

Thanks for the post -- and to my friend who passed it on tome.

Don

Donald A. Norman, Palo Alto, CA 94301
Nielsen Norman Group http://www.nngroup.com
http://www.jnd.org

Prof. Computer Science and Psychology
Northwestern University,


Ski Exuberantly,

Hank

Mammoth Lakes, Calif.

Thank you very much, all, for the great feedback! Nice to feel that I
am not alone in my thinking (as expected, the only arrogant response
came from a biker ). Don's idea of consolidating bike gears into a
unified system makes sense. I don't think it can be done mechanically
though, and electronics would increase the weight and add to the
complexity... but perhaps can be done for recreational bikes.

Just ordered Don't second book.


(Hank Garretson) wrote in message ble.com...
X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2
From: "Don Norman"
To: "'Erik Brooks'"
Subject:
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 07:56:10 -0700
Organization: Nielsen Norman Group
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
Thread-Index: AcSqIkkV3SH/iEKER/i6MIdOiJ8v7w==
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at lvcm.net

Erik

Thanks for the citation.

Yup, the traditional shifting mechanisms for bicycles poses an unnecessary
mental burden on beginners -- and I wouldn't be surprised if even the most
expert biker at time errs in their use. So rationalizing the system so both
front and rear derailleurs work in the same way makes a great deal of sense.

Of course, the problem is that once a standard has been set, people who have
learned it are disoriented by any change, even if in the long run the
change is
beneficial.

So, your points are absolutely correct.

---
Next thing to work on is the distinction between front and rear gears,
with two
separate controls and the overlapping gear ratios. Wouldn't it be nice to
have
one unified control, as in automobiles, so the bike rider wouldn't have to
think
about whether to shift into a lower front gear or not, but could simply
concentrate upon bike riding, and perhaps on shifting only to maintain a
preferred cadence.

Thanks for the post -- and to my friend who passed it on tome.

Don

Donald A. Norman, Palo Alto, CA 94301
Nielsen Norman Group http://www.nngroup.com
http://www.jnd.org

Prof. Computer Science and Psychology
Northwestern University,


Ski Exuberantly,

Hank

Mammoth Lakes, Calif.