ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[jeffster]

Maybe stuff about the fare payment system needs to be split into a separate thread now

Not a bad idea.

I think the one reality is that you'll always need to show people how to use these systems. If people are having a hard time now, they'll have a hard time in the future (simply because you'll have different people trying it for the first time).

The system in Toronto has changed a lot. I had to do some learning when navigating their system, and in particular, their LRT. My first usage I went maybe 3 stops then got off as I had no way to pay (there were no payment system at the stop, and while their was a kiosk on the LRT itself, it only took coin currency, tokens, Presto or transfers). My second time using the LRT, I was more prepared as I had pre-purchased a bunch of tokens, then some young woman came onto the LRT, equally confused as I was the first time on how to use it - with no change, no token, no transfer and no Presto. I gave her a token, and explained that she needed to also request a transfer from the kiosk.

I also had to re-learn their subway system as well. It used to be you could pay cash fair a most (if not all) stations and get change back, or at least token, but most of it is electronic now. If, for example, going to their 407 Station, one really should purchase a Presto 2-trip pass (or whatever you need). You can get that with your credit card at the station before going down to the subway, and you tap your Presto to be allowed through (which debits the Presto slip).

I have a good grip on how to use the system in Toronto now. But for first time users, these systems, which are all different for some reason, will likely always present a challenge. And to be honest, I found our system a little bit easier to use (when working correctly).

[ac3r]

Am I in the minority in thinking this is not that hard to use? The payment systems might take a few minutes the first time, but it's not much harder than an ATM. And to pay your fare, you tap the card and ideally wait to check the screen to see what it says, just like an Interac machine. Just about every person in the country knows how those work.

The only thing that has ever caught me off guard was while adding funds at the machine. It is most likely my own fault for not clearly reading the message that tells you once you've paid you need to tap your card again to complete the transaction and add the funds. I forgot to do this and of course my funds weren't added, until I went down to the new customer service centre to get it fixed up. So in this case, the card holders show their usefulness.

But everything else? It just takes pushing some buttons and reading what is on the screen. If opening the doors of the train is even confusing to people (I don't know why, because to exit the bus you interact with the door), I blame the user for not having common sense, not the design. And so I can only blame the user for not having patience to read the screens when paying for products or paying a fare.

[danbrotherston]

Am I in the minority in thinking this is not that hard to use? The payment systems might take a few minutes the first time, but it's not much harder than an ATM. And to pay your fare, you tap the card and ideally wait to check the screen to see what it says, just like an Interac machine. Just about every person in the country knows how those work.

The only thing that has ever caught me off guard was while adding funds at the machine. It is most likely my own fault for not clearly reading the message that tells you once you've paid you need to tap your card again to complete the transaction and add the funds. I forgot to do this and of course my funds weren't added, until I went down to the new customer service centre to get it fixed up. So in this case, the card holders show their usefulness.

But everything else? It just takes pushing some buttons and reading what is on the screen. If opening the doors of the train is even confusing to people (I don't know why, because to exit the bus you interact with the door), I blame the user for not having common sense, not the design. And so I can only blame the user for not having patience to read the screens when paying for products or paying a fare.

"It's my own fault"...people think this, it is rarely true.

"I blame the user for not having common sense"... if we're talking about a door, it's the design, if an appreciable number of people are failing to use your door, well, you can't blame people for that, it's a door, it should not be hard to use.  That being said, I don't see all that much trouble with the doors on the train, the button could flash a little brighter perhaps.

As for the fare payment systems, they shouldn't be harder than an ATM, that's actually a more complex system to use.  And nobody is saying it's *hard* to use, just that it is more awkard and more failure prone than it should be. After all, you, someone who's clearly engaged made an error.  You blame yourself, you shouldn't.

[danbrotherston]

Maybe stuff about the fare payment system needs to be split into a separate thread now

Not a bad idea.

I think the one reality is that you'll always need to show people how to use these systems. If people are having a hard time now, they'll have a hard time in the future (simply because you'll have different people trying it for the first time).

The system in Toronto has changed a lot. I had to do some learning when navigating their system, and in particular, their LRT. My first usage I went maybe 3 stops then got off as I had no way to pay (there were no payment system at the stop, and while their was a kiosk on the LRT itself, it only took coin currency, tokens, Presto or transfers). My second time using the LRT, I was more prepared as I had pre-purchased a bunch of tokens, then some young woman came onto the LRT, equally confused as I was the first time on how to use it - with no change, no token, no transfer and no Presto. I gave her a token, and explained that she needed to also request a transfer from the kiosk.

I also had to re-learn their subway system as well. It used to be you could pay cash fair a most (if not all) stations and get change back, or at least token, but most of it is electronic now. If, for example, going to their 407 Station, one really should purchase a Presto 2-trip pass (or whatever you need). You can get that with your credit card at the station before going down to the subway, and you tap your Presto to be allowed through (which debits the Presto slip).

I have a good grip on how to use the system in Toronto now. But for first time users, these systems, which are all different for some reason, will likely always present a challenge. And to be honest, I found our system a little bit easier to use (when working correctly).

You're implying that paying for transit is an inherently complex task. It isn't. This should be simple, and could be simple with good design.

If you're talking about buying RRSPs, then okay, you're talking about a complex task with many variables, but getting on a train shouldn't be difficult.

Almost everything about our user interface is hard, presto really isn't much better in this regard.  It's so frustrating to see people justify bad design with "people should just have common sense" or "it's always complicated"...when we could do so much better.

[ijmorlan]

"It's my own fault"...people think this, it is rarely true.

I’ve actually noticed this from the other side. At UW I created and maintain a system whose user base has gradually grown. While some parts of it are pretty slick, there are many other aspects of it which are excessively confusing, which I know about. I’ve had people write emails pretty much saying, “I must just be really dumb, so I hope you’ll forgive this question, …”. And these are the parts of the system that I already know are problematic! I just had to implement something quickly, so I did, and in many cases I know that I’m going to have to come back and figure out how to make it easier to use later.

There are other areas where I’ve been surprised by what is and is not confusing for people. Sometimes if I haven’t been able to eliminate the confusion I’ve at least implemented an interlock so that confusion will lead to an error message or inability to complete the task, rather than to the wrong option being chosen silently. I’d rather get a question about an error message than for the person to wonder what happened to the request they thought they had made through the system.

Anyway, if a request indicating confusion comes in, my first approach is to treat it as an example of my system imposing itself on somebody whose actual job is teaching and research, not figuring out my system. Sometimes I conclude that a low volume of confusion should be handled by just answering the questions when they come in, but in general I don’t even speculate on the abilities of the client, never mind judging their request on that basis. The goal is for the system to fade into the background. I’ve been fortunate enough to have use of the system be optional for most of its users most of the time. As a result, I really don’t have the option of ignoring feedback.

[jeffster]

Am I in the minority in thinking this is not that hard to use? The payment systems might take a few minutes the first time, but it's not much harder than an ATM. And to pay your fare, you tap the card and ideally wait to check the screen to see what it says, just like an Interac machine. Just about every person in the country knows how those work.

The only thing that has ever caught me off guard was while adding funds at the machine. It is most likely my own fault for not clearly reading the message that tells you once you've paid you need to tap your card again to complete the transaction and add the funds. I forgot to do this and of course my funds weren't added, until I went down to the new customer service centre to get it fixed up. So in this case, the card holders show their usefulness.

But everything else? It just takes pushing some buttons and reading what is on the screen. If opening the doors of the train is even confusing to people (I don't know why, because to exit the bus you interact with the door), I blame the user for not having common sense, not the design. And so I can only blame the user for not having patience to read the screens when paying for products or paying a fare.

Bolded for emphasis. Something simple shouldn't be complicated at all. And from what I hear, even if you're doing everything right, you need to have 3 hands (one to hold your debit/credit card, one to hold your fare card, and one to hold onto your possessions), which is very poor design, and pity the person with any sort of disability with an arm (and I have worked with such) which makes the process impossible.

As for the train and the buttons to open the doors, I think most people are used to having train doors, or indeed any sliding door, open automatically, not manually. And it's not something people are used to, as they're not looking for signage nor buttons when then come up to a sliding door. I went to the CNE this year, and here I was teaching people how to get onto the TTC's LRT, as no one knew, and they have had their trains for a while. 100% of the sliding doors I've encountered have been automatic except these LRT's.

[MidTowner]

From my observations waiting on the platform, I think plenty of riders have discovered the workaround of simply not bothering to try to tap their cards any more. Problem solved!

[MidTowner]

Hey, GRT listened and put the full Ion timetable back up on their web site, alongside the condensed timetable. Best of both worlds.

[ac3r]

Am I in the minority in thinking this is not that hard to use? The payment systems might take a few minutes the first time, but it's not much harder than an ATM. And to pay your fare, you tap the card and ideally wait to check the screen to see what it says, just like an Interac machine. Just about every person in the country knows how those work.

The only thing that has ever caught me off guard was while adding funds at the machine. It is most likely my own fault for not clearly reading the message that tells you once you've paid you need to tap your card again to complete the transaction and add the funds. I forgot to do this and of course my funds weren't added, until I went down to the new customer service centre to get it fixed up. So in this case, the card holders show their usefulness.

But everything else? It just takes pushing some buttons and reading what is on the screen. If opening the doors of the train is even confusing to people (I don't know why, because to exit the bus you interact with the door), I blame the user for not having common sense, not the design. And so I can only blame the user for not having patience to read the screens when paying for products or paying a fare.

Bolded for emphasis. Something simple shouldn't be complicated at all. And from what I hear, even if you're doing everything right, you need to have 3 hands (one to hold your debit/credit card, one to hold your fare card, and one to hold onto your possessions), which is very poor design, and pity the person with any sort of disability with an arm (and I have worked with such) which makes the process impossible.

As for the train and the buttons to open the doors, I think most people are used to having train doors, or indeed any sliding door, open automatically, not manually. And it's not something people are used to, as they're not looking for signage nor buttons when then come up to a sliding door. I went to the CNE this year, and here I was teaching people how to get onto the TTC's LRT, as no one knew, and they have had their trains for a while. 100% of the sliding doors I've encountered have been automatic except these LRT's.

Yeah some places have them, particularly in North America. In Europe, a lot of countries have them operate manually and it isn't a big issue. Of course, this is new to residents here so it's taking some learning, but eventually everyone is going to know except people visiting or who rarely use transit. I suspect the reason we went with manual operation is that with automatic doors, you are losing a lot of the climate control each time they're open. If 4 doors are opening at each stop (or more, when we start running the trains in pairs) then you are letting out a lot of climate controlled air and letting in a lot of humid summer air or frigid winter air. Same with rain, blowing snow or heavy wind. It's something most people want to avoid on their commute to work. By having only the doors people want to open open, the train stays more comfortable and uses less energy.

As for needing three hands, that is true and I remember a discussion earlier in the thread about the machines lacking a card holder. It does put people at a disadvantage. Hopefully they can fix that up on all the payment machines, the same way Presto ones are.

[avernar]

I disagree. If you need to lay the card on the sensor because it has to be close enough to read the NFC's weak signal, and the user holds it up too far away, that's not faulty implementation, it's the user not following instructions. Sometimes the user is just doing things wrong.

Near Field Communication.  Near, not touching.  If you have to get closer than 4cm the power on reader is set too low.

User interfaces are like jokes.  If you have to explain it, it's not a good one.

So our two options are:

1) Get every single person who lives or visits here to mush their card against the reader.
2) Increase the power of the reader excitation coil.

Hmmmm.  Let's pick the easy one and do option 2.  Did that at a parking garage entrance once.  It would read the card 3-4 feet away.  You didn't even have to roll down your window.

[ijmorlan]

User interfaces are like jokes.  If you have to explain it, it's not a good one.

   

Although still only true in interfaces that work best if they are super simple. In many cases, experts can be more productive if they take time to learn an interface that is designed for experts. But I do accept that this discussion is about tap-to-pay machines, so it needs to be obvious to the general public.

Edit: unfortunately too many interfaces are jokes.

Hmmmm.  Let's pick the easy one and do option 2.  Did that at a parking garage entrance once.  It would read the card 3-4 feet away.  You didn't even have to roll down your window.

At some point, it becomes excessive, and is its own, worse, UI problem. I’d rather “sometimes I’m confused as to whether my card has been read” than “sometimes I’m confused why I’ve paid for the fares of half the passengers in the station”. For a parking garage entrance it might be OK, since all it’s doing is opening the door (I assume). For anything that is even remotely ATM like, in that it can cost the card’s owner money, it’s not OK. But if it’s the difference between “card pretty much needs to touch terminal” and “card just needs to be within 10cm of terminal”, your Option 2 is probably best.

[Bytor]

As for the train and the buttons to open the doors, I think most people are used to having train doors, or indeed any sliding door, open automatically, not manually. And it's not something people are used to, as they're not looking for signage nor buttons when then come up to a sliding door. I went to the CNE this year, and here I was teaching people how to get onto the TTC's LRT, as no one knew, and they have had their trains for a while. 100% of the sliding doors I've encountered have been automatic except these LRT's.

Friends who live in or have been to Europe tell me the many trams, especially newer ones, do not have automatic doors and you need to press a button to open them. That wa smy experience as well in Dublin a few weeks ago on their Luas.

[Bytor]

I disagree. If you need to lay the card on the sensor because it has to be close enough to read the NFC's weak signal, and the user holds it up too far away, that's not faulty implementation, it's the user not following instructions. Sometimes the user is just doing things wrong.

Near Field Communication.  Near, not touching.  If you have to get closer than 4cm the power on reader is set too low.

User interfaces are like jokes.  If you have to explain it, it's not a good one.

So our two options are:

1) Get every single person who lives or visits here to mush their card against the reader.
2) Increase the power of the reader excitation coil.

Hmmmm.  Let's pick the easy one and do option 2.  Did that at a parking garage entrance once.  It would read the card 3-4 feet away.  You didn't even have to roll down your window.

Security implications, yikes! That 1-1.5m read you describe boosts the interception distance up to, what 10m instead of the 1m for a typical tap like for a card terminal in a store?

I'd pick the secure option of having users lay their fare card on the sensor, just like how 99% of people lay their car on the screen of a card terminal in a store.

[trainspotter139]

I disagree. If you need to lay the card on the sensor because it has to be close enough to read the NFC's weak signal, and the user holds it up too far away, that's not faulty implementation, it's the user not following instructions. Sometimes the user is just doing things wrong.

Near Field Communication.  Near, not touching.  If you have to get closer than 4cm the power on reader is set too low.

User interfaces are like jokes.  If you have to explain it, it's not a good one.

So our two options are:

1) Get every single person who lives or visits here to mush their card against the reader.
2) Increase the power of the reader excitation coil.

Hmmmm.  Let's pick the easy one and do option 2.  Did that at a parking garage entrance once.  It would read the card 3-4 feet away.  You didn't even have to roll down your window.

Increasing the power to that level would require a license to operate each device from Industry Canada as it would exceed the allowable power without an operating license.

[trainspotter139]

Near Field Communication.  Near, not touching.  If you have to get closer than 4cm the power on reader is set too low.

User interfaces are like jokes.  If you have to explain it, it's not a good one.

So our two options are:

1) Get every single person who lives or visits here to mush their card against the reader.
2) Increase the power of the reader excitation coil.

Hmmmm.  Let's pick the easy one and do option 2.  Did that at a parking garage entrance once.  It would read the card 3-4 feet away.  You didn't even have to roll down your window.

Security implications, yikes! That 1-1.5m read you describe boosts the interception distance up to, what 10m instead of the 1m for a typical tap like for a card terminal in a store?

I'd pick the secure option of having users lay their fare card on the sensor, just like how 99% of people lay their car on the screen of a card terminal in a store.

Not to mention it would power every RF chip card in one's wallet and make the problem worse.