Usability can save lives
Boxes and Arrows: The story behind Usability.gov
"One minute, a researcher seeking grant information is pulling up an NCI [National Cancer Institute] website for details on what grants are available and where to apply. The next minute, an ordinary citizen is frantically searching NCI websites for any information -- any clues about a type of cancer for which the doctor is testing them. Every day, NCI disseminates life and death information. Usability.gov ensures that users and their web behaviors are kept in mind when designing sites."
See also: my previous comments on the NCI guidelines.
On a related note, I'm very proud of some volunteer work I was involved with a while back for a Minnesota based cancer charity: The Children's Cancer Research Fund. It's a phenomenal charity, and if you're looking for a good charity that really makes a difference in people's lives, you'll have a hard time finding any better. (The site's been redesigned since I worked on it in 1997.)
I remember the heart-wrenching day when I learned I had to remove the photo of a beautiful, smiling little girl from the home page -- she had lost her battle with cancer. I'll never forget her face and the darling smile she wore under a flowered hat that I'm sure covered a bald head.
About a year later, I was proud as I could be that the large corporation I worked for donated the use of its corporate jet to take another little girl home from Minnesota. She too was losing her battle with the disease and needed to fly home to be with her family in the end. It was in the middle of an airline strike, and the doctors were afraid she wouldn't get a commercial flight home in time. CCRF gave us a call to see if there was any way we could help. A call was placed to our CEO, and within minutes we had the go-ahead to do whatever we could to help, with no questions as to the cost.
There was no follow-up story in the paper, no community relations release. It was just a large corporate giant silently committing an act of kindness because they could, and because it was the right thing to do. It's a side of corporations that never gets its due -- all too often we see corporations portrayed as cold, heartless, greedy monoliths. What I saw that day was genuine caring, giving and a willingness to help the community and individuals -- with nothing wanted in return.
The Boxes and Arrows article just reminded me of those days working with CCRF. It pointed out that the NCI's Usability.gov site can help researchers and doctors save more lives. The site can help cancer victims find life-saving information. Sometimes, usability can mean the difference between life and death.
April 02, 2002
April 01, 2002
Google tweaks search results
Either I've scooped everyone on this or I just can't find any documentation of this as a prior Google feature. Google now includes a "Description" field in a search result listing for any page that has a listing in the Open Directory. See this example. It's a nice addition as it provides the user a nice short description of a page. The way they do this also makes sense since there's an editorial process for those descriptions in the Open Directory whereas description meta tags are often used to mislead search engines.
Learning from hypertext's history
Lessons learned:
The web wasn't the first hypertext system created; many systems came before it: Intermedia, Hypergate, Hypercard, and Storyspace are just a few. In the early days of hypertext experimentation, developers came up with many different ways to represent links. A short historical sidebar to a HypertextNow article outlines some of the different link representations that were explored. After a comparison of different methods at the Hypertext '87 conference (a full 15 years ago), the consensus was that links should be hidden until users elected to show them. Why? Because the other methods had various issues: they gave links too much emphasis, they wasted screen space, or they looked strange and confusing.
Then Mosaic came along and ignored everything that had been learned -- it showed links as underlined blue text. "A link, even the most minor footnote, sticks out from its surrounding text almost as if it were blinking."
Lessons learned:
- Seek out existing research and best practices. Learn from the mistakes of others.
- Really think about where you insert links into your text, they can really be disruptive.
- See what else we can learn from early hypertext systems.
- Two Basic Hypertext Presentation Models: note the various link styles and contextual navigation.
- Short History of Hypertext: Starting in 1945!
- Features Missing in 1995 Web Browsers: All are still missing today. Some of these like fat links, are fascinating.
- Navigation Features in Netscape 1.1: Sadly, we haven't added much to this list since 1995.
The technology behind Google's great results
"Page and Brin developed groundbreaking technology for converting poop to pixels, the tiny dots that make up a monitor's display. The clean white background of Google's home page is powered by this renewable process"
"Page and Brin developed groundbreaking technology for converting poop to pixels, the tiny dots that make up a monitor's display. The clean white background of Google's home page is powered by this renewable process"
A better printable page
NUblog you how to prepare online content for offline reading, covering some good tips in the process.
NUblog you how to prepare online content for offline reading, covering some good tips in the process.
March 27, 2002
Hobbits on Soapboxes
After watching the Oscars a few nights ago, I thought folks might get a kick out of this post from the archives. Compare Jakob Nielsen to a hobbit and Peter Merholz to an elf...you be the judge. Personally I think it's evidence of another government cover-up.
After watching the Oscars a few nights ago, I thought folks might get a kick out of this post from the archives. Compare Jakob Nielsen to a hobbit and Peter Merholz to an elf...you be the judge. Personally I think it's evidence of another government cover-up.
Modeling the user, the business model and the interface
Came across this diagram via Google...it's that whole "picture says a thousand words" kinda thing...or something. I'm guessing Jeffrey Veen is the master modeler. Reminds me a lot of my dot com days.
(see also articles by Jeffrey.)
Came across this diagram via Google...it's that whole "picture says a thousand words" kinda thing...or something. I'm guessing Jeffrey Veen is the master modeler. Reminds me a lot of my dot com days.
(see also articles by Jeffrey.)
March 26, 2002
People and Hierarchies
SAP Design Guild covers hierarchies in depth. Part one of their series has an especially good reminder on considerations to bear in mind when designing anything with a hierarchy -- like a typical site map.
"people have problems with abstract hierarchies. They cannot create a suitable mental model for them because the system seems artificial, and often they do not understand what the categories mean. Deeply nested hierarchies cause even more problems because people get disorientated. People already get confused in mazes, where they only have to remember a larger number of binary left or right decisions. It is even easier to get lost in complex application structures, hypertexts, Websites, or the Web as a whole, if there are no "anchor points" where they can regain their orientation. People need to know where they are, why they are there, where they came from, and where they can go."
[via InfoDesign]
SAP Design Guild covers hierarchies in depth. Part one of their series has an especially good reminder on considerations to bear in mind when designing anything with a hierarchy -- like a typical site map.
"people have problems with abstract hierarchies. They cannot create a suitable mental model for them because the system seems artificial, and often they do not understand what the categories mean. Deeply nested hierarchies cause even more problems because people get disorientated. People already get confused in mazes, where they only have to remember a larger number of binary left or right decisions. It is even easier to get lost in complex application structures, hypertexts, Websites, or the Web as a whole, if there are no "anchor points" where they can regain their orientation. People need to know where they are, why they are there, where they came from, and where they can go."
[via InfoDesign]
Breadcrumbs > Breadcrumbs > Breadcrumbs
Keith Instone, previously thought to be hiding out in a cave in Afghanistan due to his silence, surfaces once again to provide the usual "Instone Insight". Keith recently made a few of the goodies from his poster at IA Summit 2002 available. He does a good job of cataloging different types of breadcrumbs, what they're used for, and examples of each. Here are the 3 types he covers:
(Keith Instone is the owner and mastermind behind the highly useful Usable Web.)
Keith Instone, previously thought to be hiding out in a cave in Afghanistan due to his silence, surfaces once again to provide the usual "Instone Insight". Keith recently made a few of the goodies from his poster at IA Summit 2002 available. He does a good job of cataloging different types of breadcrumbs, what they're used for, and examples of each. Here are the 3 types he covers:
- Location Breadcrumbs: show the position of the page in the site hierarchy. Tell the user "where" they are in the site.
- Path Breadcrumbs: show the path the user has taken within the site to get to the current page. Help the user navigation "back" the way the came.
- Attribute Breadcrumbs: provide meta-information and navigation to related areas/products. Also used in search results to help explain what type of thing a particular result represents.
(Keith Instone is the owner and mastermind behind the highly useful Usable Web.)
March 24, 2002
Eating your own dog food doesn't work if you're a cow
AOL finally realized that corporate use of email is different than personal or small business use of email. All I can say is "Duh!" Here's what happens when you disregard your users' unique needs and go chasing after false cost savings:
Bad corporate mandates trap users in a bad situation:
Not all corporate mandates are bad. Homogenity and standards within a company can save money and create a healthy environment for good user support, reuse of code, and less training and re-training. BUT you have to pick the right product based on the business and user needs. AOL obviously didn't do that:
"management got months of complaints from both senior and junior executives in the divisions involved, who said the e-mail system, initially designed for consumers, wasn’t appropriate for business use. Among the problems cited: The e-mail software frequently crashed, staffers weren’t able to send messages with large attachments, they were often kicked offline without warning, and if they tried to send messages to large groups of users they were labeled as spammers and locked out of the system. Sometimes, e-mails were just plain lost in the AOL etherworld and never found. And if there was an out-of-office reply function, most people couldn’t find it."
AOL was clearly focused on cutting software licensing costs by using their own product. In doing so they also figured they'd quit helping out their competitors like Microsoft by not buying their software. While they were at it they should've just switched all their business users over to AOL dial-up accounts using a 56K modem. Of course, with no better, more usable option, AOL employees searched for ways around the horrible product that some myopic decision makers cursed them with:
"The e-mail problems have led many staffers to resume pre-Internet habits. Employees say they are faxing and using Federal Express more than before. They also are picking up the phone or wandering down the corridors in search of human contact. “If all goes well, we’ll never have to use e-mail and we’ll have to start talking to each other again,” says one magazine writer."
Businesses that allow decisions to be driven solely by false cost savings at the expense of business productivity and user needs will only drive costs up. One can only guess what this has cost AOL. Think about that in terms of real dollars, personal careers, inside political implications, employee turnover, and end user pain. Now instead of moving to one good unified solution, they'll have multiple products in use. One bad corporate mandate can spoil the appetite for any future mandates and the possibility of any corporate standard.
While it may be a good idea to eat your own dog food sometimes, you shouldn't make your business and thousands of employees suffer when your product won't work for them. If you represent a large herd of cows, making them eat your dog food is just plain stupid. If your product's target market is dogs, then just make it the best dog food you can. If AOL wanted to compete with Microsoft Outlook for the corporate email market, then they should have improved their product to compete in that space. Once they had a competitive product, then and only then should they have considered deploying it across their whole company.
AOL finally realized that corporate use of email is different than personal or small business use of email. All I can say is "Duh!" Here's what happens when you disregard your users' unique needs and go chasing after false cost savings:
Bad corporate mandates trap users in a bad situation:
Not all corporate mandates are bad. Homogenity and standards within a company can save money and create a healthy environment for good user support, reuse of code, and less training and re-training. BUT you have to pick the right product based on the business and user needs. AOL obviously didn't do that:
"management got months of complaints from both senior and junior executives in the divisions involved, who said the e-mail system, initially designed for consumers, wasn’t appropriate for business use. Among the problems cited: The e-mail software frequently crashed, staffers weren’t able to send messages with large attachments, they were often kicked offline without warning, and if they tried to send messages to large groups of users they were labeled as spammers and locked out of the system. Sometimes, e-mails were just plain lost in the AOL etherworld and never found. And if there was an out-of-office reply function, most people couldn’t find it."
AOL was clearly focused on cutting software licensing costs by using their own product. In doing so they also figured they'd quit helping out their competitors like Microsoft by not buying their software. While they were at it they should've just switched all their business users over to AOL dial-up accounts using a 56K modem. Of course, with no better, more usable option, AOL employees searched for ways around the horrible product that some myopic decision makers cursed them with:
"The e-mail problems have led many staffers to resume pre-Internet habits. Employees say they are faxing and using Federal Express more than before. They also are picking up the phone or wandering down the corridors in search of human contact. “If all goes well, we’ll never have to use e-mail and we’ll have to start talking to each other again,” says one magazine writer."
Businesses that allow decisions to be driven solely by false cost savings at the expense of business productivity and user needs will only drive costs up. One can only guess what this has cost AOL. Think about that in terms of real dollars, personal careers, inside political implications, employee turnover, and end user pain. Now instead of moving to one good unified solution, they'll have multiple products in use. One bad corporate mandate can spoil the appetite for any future mandates and the possibility of any corporate standard.
While it may be a good idea to eat your own dog food sometimes, you shouldn't make your business and thousands of employees suffer when your product won't work for them. If you represent a large herd of cows, making them eat your dog food is just plain stupid. If your product's target market is dogs, then just make it the best dog food you can. If AOL wanted to compete with Microsoft Outlook for the corporate email market, then they should have improved their product to compete in that space. Once they had a competitive product, then and only then should they have considered deploying it across their whole company.
March 23, 2002
Attendee-Centered Conference Design
Megnut discusses how the design of a conference can greatly impact the user/attendee experience of the event.
"I was considering holding questions until the end of my presentation because I didn't want to get off-track or lose my place in my presentation. I was placing my needs as a speaker before the needs of my audience. He recommended I take questions throughout, since I'd be able to gauge my presentation based on the audience's feedback. If I waited until the end, he warned, it would be too late to adjust. That one simple suggestion led to the best presentation I've ever given, and a very engaging discussion throughout my session."
Meg's article got me thinking. As much as I enjoyed CHI last year and am looking forward to it again next month, the CHI "attendee experience" could be improved quite a bit. 1) Special Interest Groups (SIGs), some of the most interesting conference events, aren't even listed on the conference schedule. SIGs also were given rooms that were way too small last year -- if you didn't get there at least 5 minutes early, you were out of luck. Dozens of people were often seen lined up at room entrances after the room was filled. In contrast, I attended a few paper presentations booked in huge auditoriums that were nearly empty. My take as a practioner was that many attendees wanted to share war stories and lessons learned (in a SIG) rather than hear some grad student talk about some HCI minutae (in their paper presentation). 2) Planning what conference events to attend is an adventure since there's no good visual outline of what events are happening when. The closest thing you get is a "conference at a glance" page that effectively tells you most types of things like "tech sessions" happen all day long -- "tech sessions" include panels, discussions, papers, plenaries, short talks, and posters. There's no view that tells you what your half-dozen options are from 10-11am on any given day.
I recall many people commenting on the poor usability of the CHI 2001 web site, and while the CHI 2002 site was designed by Diamond Bullet, I'm sure the work was likely donated and therefore didn't include any type of usability evaluation. Ironic, isn't it?
Megnut discusses how the design of a conference can greatly impact the user/attendee experience of the event.
"I was considering holding questions until the end of my presentation because I didn't want to get off-track or lose my place in my presentation. I was placing my needs as a speaker before the needs of my audience. He recommended I take questions throughout, since I'd be able to gauge my presentation based on the audience's feedback. If I waited until the end, he warned, it would be too late to adjust. That one simple suggestion led to the best presentation I've ever given, and a very engaging discussion throughout my session."
Meg's article got me thinking. As much as I enjoyed CHI last year and am looking forward to it again next month, the CHI "attendee experience" could be improved quite a bit. 1) Special Interest Groups (SIGs), some of the most interesting conference events, aren't even listed on the conference schedule. SIGs also were given rooms that were way too small last year -- if you didn't get there at least 5 minutes early, you were out of luck. Dozens of people were often seen lined up at room entrances after the room was filled. In contrast, I attended a few paper presentations booked in huge auditoriums that were nearly empty. My take as a practioner was that many attendees wanted to share war stories and lessons learned (in a SIG) rather than hear some grad student talk about some HCI minutae (in their paper presentation). 2) Planning what conference events to attend is an adventure since there's no good visual outline of what events are happening when. The closest thing you get is a "conference at a glance" page that effectively tells you most types of things like "tech sessions" happen all day long -- "tech sessions" include panels, discussions, papers, plenaries, short talks, and posters. There's no view that tells you what your half-dozen options are from 10-11am on any given day.
I recall many people commenting on the poor usability of the CHI 2001 web site, and while the CHI 2002 site was designed by Diamond Bullet, I'm sure the work was likely donated and therefore didn't include any type of usability evaluation. Ironic, isn't it?
March 22, 2002
Light Keyboard
I have to wonder about the usability of "a full-size fully functional virtual keyboard that can be projected and touched on any surface."
I have to wonder about the usability of "a full-size fully functional virtual keyboard that can be projected and touched on any surface."
Funny Stupidity
A hacker who is representing himself in court has claimed that the person charged must not be him because the government complaint listed his name in all capital letters. He also demanded to know whom the prosecution represented and when informed that they represented the United States, "He complained that I had not brought my client with me," the prosecutor said.
Of course none of his antics help his court case any...here's an article covering the story further.
[via Corante]
A hacker who is representing himself in court has claimed that the person charged must not be him because the government complaint listed his name in all capital letters. He also demanded to know whom the prosecution represented and when informed that they represented the United States, "He complained that I had not brought my client with me," the prosecutor said.
Of course none of his antics help his court case any...here's an article covering the story further.
[via Corante]
All my secrets exposed
Kudos to Peter Merholz for talking about how a potential client questioned his firm's professionalism. His story sparked a bit of discussion about client-vendor relationships and the Request for Proposal (RFP) process used by many companies. I think anyone involved in a vendor selection process (on either side) will get something from this discussion.
[Also picked up by SvN...]
Kudos to Peter Merholz for talking about how a potential client questioned his firm's professionalism. His story sparked a bit of discussion about client-vendor relationships and the Request for Proposal (RFP) process used by many companies. I think anyone involved in a vendor selection process (on either side) will get something from this discussion.
[Also picked up by SvN...]
Links save users 42 steps
A report on the NISO/NFAIS Linking Workshop held February 24, 2002 has some very ineresting discussion about linking. A couple of interesting points:
- When linking to a document sometimes the same one URL doesn't work well for all users. Links that are "user aware" would ideally link users to the most appropriate version/copy of a document based on who they are.
- Having the right link can save users a lot of time and effort -- typically saving them about 42 steps to access the same information versus getting there without a direct link.
...Of course we already knew that "links are good" and act like shortcuts. I've just never seen their effectiveness quantified.
A report on the NISO/NFAIS Linking Workshop held February 24, 2002 has some very ineresting discussion about linking. A couple of interesting points:
- When linking to a document sometimes the same one URL doesn't work well for all users. Links that are "user aware" would ideally link users to the most appropriate version/copy of a document based on who they are.
- Having the right link can save users a lot of time and effort -- typically saving them about 42 steps to access the same information versus getting there without a direct link.
...Of course we already knew that "links are good" and act like shortcuts. I've just never seen their effectiveness quantified.
Thesaurus Construction Set
The National Information Standards Organization (NISO) has a comprehensive document covering the ANSI standard for creating, displaying and maintaining a Thesaurus.
[via Andrew at HeyOtwell...]
The National Information Standards Organization (NISO) has a comprehensive document covering the ANSI standard for creating, displaying and maintaining a Thesaurus.
[via Andrew at HeyOtwell...]
March 19, 2002
This week's boxes
Boxes and Arrows just published two new articles. One covering how to define Information Architecture, and another that's a review of the Nielsen Norman Group report "Intranet Design Annual: The Ten Best Intranets of 2001". I recently read the NNG report, and I pretty much agree with Jeff Lash's review -- it's a decent report in that it provides snapshots of some interesting intranet sites. One slight misnomer is the report's name implies it covers "intranets", but it really covers "intranet sites" or sites on intranets...in my world there's a huge difference. At my company, we have (only) one intranet with literally hundreds of sites on it.
I'm scheduled to give a review of the NNG report and a couple of other recent research reports at an upcoming UPA-MN meeting. Jeff Lash probably just made my work a lot easier.
Boxes and Arrows just published two new articles. One covering how to define Information Architecture, and another that's a review of the Nielsen Norman Group report "Intranet Design Annual: The Ten Best Intranets of 2001". I recently read the NNG report, and I pretty much agree with Jeff Lash's review -- it's a decent report in that it provides snapshots of some interesting intranet sites. One slight misnomer is the report's name implies it covers "intranets", but it really covers "intranet sites" or sites on intranets...in my world there's a huge difference. At my company, we have (only) one intranet with literally hundreds of sites on it.
I'm scheduled to give a review of the NNG report and a couple of other recent research reports at an upcoming UPA-MN meeting. Jeff Lash probably just made my work a lot easier.
Adaptive Path Tour 2002
Guru's on parade...coming to one of five cities near you this year. If their tour is as good as their past presentations look, it should be worthwhile. Now if I could just become a professional Usability/IA "groupie" and attend all these conferences and other events like CHI, IA Summit, SXSW, and UPA, year round, I'd really be having some fun! But alas, like Christina said, sometimes you just have to go create something. I think that's to keep some kind of brain equilibrium established. After you fill your brain with a bunch of Usability/IA wisdom from the gurus, eventually you need some kind of outlet or your brain will implode. Why would it implode rather than explode? Because Jared says good content sucks.
Apologies to JJG for once again using the dreaded Usability/IA phrase! :)
Guru's on parade...coming to one of five cities near you this year. If their tour is as good as their past presentations look, it should be worthwhile. Now if I could just become a professional Usability/IA "groupie" and attend all these conferences and other events like CHI, IA Summit, SXSW, and UPA, year round, I'd really be having some fun! But alas, like Christina said, sometimes you just have to go create something. I think that's to keep some kind of brain equilibrium established. After you fill your brain with a bunch of Usability/IA wisdom from the gurus, eventually you need some kind of outlet or your brain will implode. Why would it implode rather than explode? Because Jared says good content sucks.
Apologies to JJG for once again using the dreaded Usability/IA phrase! :)
March 17, 2002
NYC Mayor Bloomberg advocates UCD
Developers of technology products need to listen to user concerns and requirements from the beginning, and the user relationship should continue after a product is delivered, he said. "The best days are yet to come for your industry, but only if we are customer- and client-sensitive and we put ourselves in a situation of understanding what people need, and have the openness to go and see after we do things whether we were right or not."
He cited an example from his own experience in the business world to show why it's important to consider the customer from the start. He recalled an occasion in which a receptionist was charged with making name badges for all visiting customers. Because the fields in the program she was using were so small and required so much unnecessary information, the line of customers waiting for badges was often intolerably long. So Bloomberg went to the IT department, found the programmer who had developed the software, and forced that programmer to work the reception desk for two days. Needless to say, the software usability was quickly improved, Bloomberg said. But it was a situation that could have been avoided if the programmer had thought about the product from the user's perspective before designing it.
It's great to see someone of this notoriety advocating a user-centric perspective. My only critique is that it's not just "thinking about it from a user's perspective" that would have helped. A few unanswered questions remain: Did the programmer ever receive training on how to design user interfaces? Did the company have UI guidelines in place? Was the project given proper budget for doing it right the first time? User Centered Design goes much further than just "thinking like a customer" -- good design involves a design process, not just a thought process.
Full article: InformationWeek - NYC Mayor Bloomberg Talks Up Customer-Centricity
(Update: The "Great Google" turned up Jakob Nielsen's comments on this article as well. Note Jakob's page doesn't offer "permalinks", so you have to scroll to March 15, 2002...Jakob, needs to convert to blog software for better functionality for his spotlighted links page.)
Other similar statements from Bloomberg:
"I've learned that change is always evolutionary and is virtually never revolutionary. There are no simple solutions to complex problems. ... everyone says that they're going to revolutionize the world with a little piece of software. The press writes about such things because they're interesting. And the public would like to believe that you can get something for nothing -- but that's just not the case. ... Our customers don't care about what their suppliers sell, they only care about what we have that can help them. Our focus has always been to explain how we can improve their lives -- make them more efficient, more pleasurable -- as opposed to selling what we produce."
From Fast Company - Smart Steps (March 2001)
Developers of technology products need to listen to user concerns and requirements from the beginning, and the user relationship should continue after a product is delivered, he said. "The best days are yet to come for your industry, but only if we are customer- and client-sensitive and we put ourselves in a situation of understanding what people need, and have the openness to go and see after we do things whether we were right or not."
He cited an example from his own experience in the business world to show why it's important to consider the customer from the start. He recalled an occasion in which a receptionist was charged with making name badges for all visiting customers. Because the fields in the program she was using were so small and required so much unnecessary information, the line of customers waiting for badges was often intolerably long. So Bloomberg went to the IT department, found the programmer who had developed the software, and forced that programmer to work the reception desk for two days. Needless to say, the software usability was quickly improved, Bloomberg said. But it was a situation that could have been avoided if the programmer had thought about the product from the user's perspective before designing it.
It's great to see someone of this notoriety advocating a user-centric perspective. My only critique is that it's not just "thinking about it from a user's perspective" that would have helped. A few unanswered questions remain: Did the programmer ever receive training on how to design user interfaces? Did the company have UI guidelines in place? Was the project given proper budget for doing it right the first time? User Centered Design goes much further than just "thinking like a customer" -- good design involves a design process, not just a thought process.
Full article: InformationWeek - NYC Mayor Bloomberg Talks Up Customer-Centricity
(Update: The "Great Google" turned up Jakob Nielsen's comments on this article as well. Note Jakob's page doesn't offer "permalinks", so you have to scroll to March 15, 2002...Jakob, needs to convert to blog software for better functionality for his spotlighted links page.)
Other similar statements from Bloomberg:
"I've learned that change is always evolutionary and is virtually never revolutionary. There are no simple solutions to complex problems. ... everyone says that they're going to revolutionize the world with a little piece of software. The press writes about such things because they're interesting. And the public would like to believe that you can get something for nothing -- but that's just not the case. ... Our customers don't care about what their suppliers sell, they only care about what we have that can help them. Our focus has always been to explain how we can improve their lives -- make them more efficient, more pleasurable -- as opposed to selling what we produce."
From Fast Company - Smart Steps (March 2001)
Profound it ain't...
Great quote I heard from someone in the pop group "B2K" on TV yesterday. This "artist" was referring to their recently released album and said:
"Anyone can listen to it. There's no profound lyrics or anything on it."
...I think he meant to say "profane", but I'll trust his actual statement is more accurate. I got a big laugh out of it!
Great quote I heard from someone in the pop group "B2K" on TV yesterday. This "artist" was referring to their recently released album and said:
"Anyone can listen to it. There's no profound lyrics or anything on it."
...I think he meant to say "profane", but I'll trust his actual statement is more accurate. I got a big laugh out of it!
March 13, 2002
Yahoo! Mail: Simplicity holds up over time Jesse James Garrett has done an excellent review/analysis of Yahoo! Mail for Boxes & Arrows. What’s so excellent about it? Well, it’s short, to the point, and provides a great example of using his visual vocabulary to document the flow of an application. He also doesn’t belabor explaning the whole visual vocab thing. He gives it to you and provides just enough “for additional info” links for newcomers to dig deeper. It’s a good example of Boxes & Arrows’ editorial aim of delivering content beyond the IA basics you get on other sites.
March 12, 2002
Boxes and Arrows Hit the Bull’s Eye
Boxes and Arrows is a new online magazine aimed at the “community of practice” that includes information architecture, information design, interaction design, and interface design. I can’t overstate how excited I am about this new site. Boxes and Arrows (B&A) is the most exciting thing to happen in the IA community for a long time. The content is top-notch, covering topics that you won’t see in other places, or covering them with a different approach.
All of the articles I’ve read in the first issue are excellent, but here are some that I think really stand out:
Boxes and Arrows is a new online magazine aimed at the “community of practice” that includes information architecture, information design, interaction design, and interface design. I can’t overstate how excited I am about this new site. Boxes and Arrows (B&A) is the most exciting thing to happen in the IA community for a long time. The content is top-notch, covering topics that you won’t see in other places, or covering them with a different approach.
All of the articles I’ve read in the first issue are excellent, but here are some that I think really stand out:
- Jess McMullin’s article “Getting into government consulting” – If I’m going to pay all these taxes at least the money should go to making better experiences for us taxpayers. Jess offers good advice, and I’m sure from talking with him in the past that it’s based on his experience as a consultant for government bodies in Canada.
- Nathan Shedroff offers an insightful essay on the titles we like to throw around and our motivations to do so. It's called The making of a discipline: the making of a title. His points hit home, and made me think about my title du jour: User Experience Architect. I'm sure this will rekindle some old topics on the SIGIA list...
- Got usability? Talking with Jakob Nielsen – Chad Thornton delivers the first truly innovative interview with Jakob that I’ve seen in about three years. He asks a lot of new questions, and from the perspective of those of us who already buy into usability as a goal. I think it shows a more moderate Jakob than what you get elsewhere. He’s talking to the choir here, so no need to preach.
Six months after September 11th
Watching the History Channel's program on the World Trade Center (pre-attack) it struck me how buildings and architecture reflect our various cultures. We build things that represent the thinking, technology and society of the day. You have to wonder when, as a society, we'll ever again feel up to building a huge skyscraper.
From the archive: You matter more than you'll ever know: about Paul Battaglia and what the story of his death represents.
Watching the History Channel's program on the World Trade Center (pre-attack) it struck me how buildings and architecture reflect our various cultures. We build things that represent the thinking, technology and society of the day. You have to wonder when, as a society, we'll ever again feel up to building a huge skyscraper.
From the archive: You matter more than you'll ever know: about Paul Battaglia and what the story of his death represents.
March 11, 2002
Please take a number(ed beeper)
It often seems some of the best ideas are simple ones. Six Flags amusement parks recently announced they'd be offering visitors the option of paying $10 a day for a fancy pager that allows them to reserve a place in line for rides. When it's their time to ride it pages them.
"Instead of having to wait in long lines, park visitors can pay extra for the luxury of registering at a special kiosk for each ride. The devices will then notify them when they can return and get on the ride without having to wait"
"In Atlanta, guests "loved it" despite the fees, because the devices allowed them to eat meals, visit shops, watch entertainment shows and more without having to wait for hours at many rides...And the company likes them because if customers aren't in ride lines, they are often spending money in other parts of the park.
Popular restaurants that don't take reservations have been using pagers for quite some time to notify people waiting that their table is ready. Six Flags is just applying the same concept in a different business. Of course if customers aren't waiting in line like cattle, they can be shopping in a gift shop, getting a drink at the bar, or doing something else more enjoyable -- hopefully generating some revenue. It's the old concept of service order numbers used at so many grocery store deli counters over the years, but with more mobility.
I expect that businesses that regularly have long wait lines will eventually move to something similar. And in cases like Six Flags' where freeing customers from waiting in lines opens the opportunity for more revenue, I would expect that the paging service will ultimately be free.
It often seems some of the best ideas are simple ones. Six Flags amusement parks recently announced they'd be offering visitors the option of paying $10 a day for a fancy pager that allows them to reserve a place in line for rides. When it's their time to ride it pages them.
"Instead of having to wait in long lines, park visitors can pay extra for the luxury of registering at a special kiosk for each ride. The devices will then notify them when they can return and get on the ride without having to wait"
"In Atlanta, guests "loved it" despite the fees, because the devices allowed them to eat meals, visit shops, watch entertainment shows and more without having to wait for hours at many rides...And the company likes them because if customers aren't in ride lines, they are often spending money in other parts of the park.
Popular restaurants that don't take reservations have been using pagers for quite some time to notify people waiting that their table is ready. Six Flags is just applying the same concept in a different business. Of course if customers aren't waiting in line like cattle, they can be shopping in a gift shop, getting a drink at the bar, or doing something else more enjoyable -- hopefully generating some revenue. It's the old concept of service order numbers used at so many grocery store deli counters over the years, but with more mobility.
I expect that businesses that regularly have long wait lines will eventually move to something similar. And in cases like Six Flags' where freeing customers from waiting in lines opens the opportunity for more revenue, I would expect that the paging service will ultimately be free.
March 05, 2002
Time to bring back vinyl?
Looks like the music companies and the new CD copy-protection measures they're testing have little regard for usability of the end product and also don't comply with existing standards.
"BMG, part of Bertelsmann, was forced to drop copy protection on two CD's it released in Europe when consumers complained that the music would not play on their CD players."
"the advent of silvery discs that do not quite act like CD's have angered Sony Electronics and Philips Electronics (part of Royal Philips Electronics), which co-developed the compact disc format, first introduced in 1983. "We do not approve the use of the CD logo on such products," said Rick Clancy, a spokesman for Sony Electronics of America. "It puts us in a position where we can't guarantee the playability or sound quality of discs that may be used with our devices." -- NY Times
How to copy a copy-protected CD
Of course what the clueless record companies don't get is that pirating will still take place, just as it has for decades with any other type of music format. "Dubs" can easily be created by going from digital to analog to digital. Using good quality analog equipment to make the copy, a listener wouldn't notice much difference on a typical stereo setup when playing back the copy. Sure, audiophiles might notice a difference, but they are unlikely to use pirated copies -- they want the real thing since they also tend to be collectors.
Digital isn't all it's cracked up to be
Further evidence that analog copies will happen is the tradition of bootlegs in the music culture. Hard-core fans create their own live recordings ("bootlegs") -- sometimes even with the band's blessing. Bootlegs are then traded or given to other fans -- a simple web search turns up many examples of available "boots" online. What's important to note about bootlegs is they are often very poor quality recordings, yet they are collected by rabid fans. If people want the music bad enough, they'll settle for lower quality recordings. From what I can tell, piraters could use a simple two-dollar low-tech analog patch cable between a CD player and a CD-R to defeat multi-million dollar hi-tech digital copy-protection measures -- and people would be satisfied with the results. As the old saying goes, "where there's a will, there's a way," and piraters will find a way. Ultimately, the music industry isn't going to prevent illegal copying of CDs.
Caveat listener
Even so, music companies are designing new "CD" products that only work with certain types of CD players without telling consumers what the new equipment requirements are. Another issue is that most music retailers don't allow consumers to return CDs -- a "defective" product can only be exchanged for a replacement of the same title. An exchange won't help an end user if the product design is flawed; an exact replacement fixes nothing. The unsuspecting person who usually listens to CDs on headphones with their CD-ROM drive, but who suddenly can't get a new CD to play correctly, will have no recourse. Oh, and there'll be no error message to tell them that their problem is an intended one.
The root of the problem: lack of user-centered-design
The core of the problem the music industry is creating is that they've forgotten their target user -- the music lover who buy CDs. They obviously haven't profiled and segmented their users. I would guess that many younger music lovers -- teenagers to thirty-somethings who follow current music trends and have more expendable income for entertainment -- are much more likely to use MP3 players and CD-ROM or DVD drives in computers to listen to and, yes, copy music from CD to hard drive or a mix CD-R. My assumption is that this is a very profitable market segment for the industry -- but more importantly, it's the new generation of music buyers. It's also the generation that is more technology savvy, more likely to use the web and e-commerce, and more open to change in music buying habits than the others. Why would the industry want to risk pushing these buyers away? My only answer to that question is it must be because they haven't spent enough time researching their users and designing innovative products that meet BOTH their users' needs and the needs of the industry. They've simply over-reacted with a crude application of available technology with little fore-thought on the implications.
My predictions:
The good thing to keep in mind is that markets work. Music companies and bands that sell copy-protected CDs will get bad press and will risk alienating their target market. Consumers who, for years, have been able to enjoy a music CD on their computer at work will suddenly find that the industry has "fixed" something that wasn't broke...and they will complain to retail outlets, which will flood distributors with exchanged or returned CDs. Warning labels will appear, and like the american NC-17 movie rating, in time they will be avoided at all costs. Only the biggest artists who already command a large market share will be able to withstand a copy-protection warning label. And eventually, the industry will find that CDs with copy-protection will sell fewer units than those without it, and they will drop copy-protection altogether. If not, they will create a huge market opportunity for un-signed artists and independent labels to sell their works online sans copy-protection.
Usability and products that meet the standards consumers demand will win out. The question is, what side will the existing music industry be on?
Looks like the music companies and the new CD copy-protection measures they're testing have little regard for usability of the end product and also don't comply with existing standards.
"BMG, part of Bertelsmann, was forced to drop copy protection on two CD's it released in Europe when consumers complained that the music would not play on their CD players."
"the advent of silvery discs that do not quite act like CD's have angered Sony Electronics and Philips Electronics (part of Royal Philips Electronics), which co-developed the compact disc format, first introduced in 1983. "We do not approve the use of the CD logo on such products," said Rick Clancy, a spokesman for Sony Electronics of America. "It puts us in a position where we can't guarantee the playability or sound quality of discs that may be used with our devices." -- NY Times
How to copy a copy-protected CD
Of course what the clueless record companies don't get is that pirating will still take place, just as it has for decades with any other type of music format. "Dubs" can easily be created by going from digital to analog to digital. Using good quality analog equipment to make the copy, a listener wouldn't notice much difference on a typical stereo setup when playing back the copy. Sure, audiophiles might notice a difference, but they are unlikely to use pirated copies -- they want the real thing since they also tend to be collectors.
Digital isn't all it's cracked up to be
Further evidence that analog copies will happen is the tradition of bootlegs in the music culture. Hard-core fans create their own live recordings ("bootlegs") -- sometimes even with the band's blessing. Bootlegs are then traded or given to other fans -- a simple web search turns up many examples of available "boots" online. What's important to note about bootlegs is they are often very poor quality recordings, yet they are collected by rabid fans. If people want the music bad enough, they'll settle for lower quality recordings. From what I can tell, piraters could use a simple two-dollar low-tech analog patch cable between a CD player and a CD-R to defeat multi-million dollar hi-tech digital copy-protection measures -- and people would be satisfied with the results. As the old saying goes, "where there's a will, there's a way," and piraters will find a way. Ultimately, the music industry isn't going to prevent illegal copying of CDs.
Caveat listener
Even so, music companies are designing new "CD" products that only work with certain types of CD players without telling consumers what the new equipment requirements are. Another issue is that most music retailers don't allow consumers to return CDs -- a "defective" product can only be exchanged for a replacement of the same title. An exchange won't help an end user if the product design is flawed; an exact replacement fixes nothing. The unsuspecting person who usually listens to CDs on headphones with their CD-ROM drive, but who suddenly can't get a new CD to play correctly, will have no recourse. Oh, and there'll be no error message to tell them that their problem is an intended one.
The root of the problem: lack of user-centered-design
The core of the problem the music industry is creating is that they've forgotten their target user -- the music lover who buy CDs. They obviously haven't profiled and segmented their users. I would guess that many younger music lovers -- teenagers to thirty-somethings who follow current music trends and have more expendable income for entertainment -- are much more likely to use MP3 players and CD-ROM or DVD drives in computers to listen to and, yes, copy music from CD to hard drive or a mix CD-R. My assumption is that this is a very profitable market segment for the industry -- but more importantly, it's the new generation of music buyers. It's also the generation that is more technology savvy, more likely to use the web and e-commerce, and more open to change in music buying habits than the others. Why would the industry want to risk pushing these buyers away? My only answer to that question is it must be because they haven't spent enough time researching their users and designing innovative products that meet BOTH their users' needs and the needs of the industry. They've simply over-reacted with a crude application of available technology with little fore-thought on the implications.
My predictions:
The good thing to keep in mind is that markets work. Music companies and bands that sell copy-protected CDs will get bad press and will risk alienating their target market. Consumers who, for years, have been able to enjoy a music CD on their computer at work will suddenly find that the industry has "fixed" something that wasn't broke...and they will complain to retail outlets, which will flood distributors with exchanged or returned CDs. Warning labels will appear, and like the american NC-17 movie rating, in time they will be avoided at all costs. Only the biggest artists who already command a large market share will be able to withstand a copy-protection warning label. And eventually, the industry will find that CDs with copy-protection will sell fewer units than those without it, and they will drop copy-protection altogether. If not, they will create a huge market opportunity for un-signed artists and independent labels to sell their works online sans copy-protection.
Usability and products that meet the standards consumers demand will win out. The question is, what side will the existing music industry be on?
February 27, 2002
Practicing Usability in the future
You could say web design and development today is practiced by more people than just a few years ago, and you'd be right -- if you ignore the quality and complexity of the work. Lightweight HTML development and graphic design tools have opened the field to a much broader set of people. But companies didn't throw away their graphic designers and HTML developers -- they are still at work, but now focus on more difficult, more important, more risk-intensive projects.
Will the same thing happen with Usability and Information Architecture? Should we worry about it?
Yes and No.
Lightweight usability methods will continue to gain popularity. People like Steve Krug and Jakob Nielsen are acting as evangelists for usability. Those two "gurus" are very different in their approach to the unwashed -- Jakob can rub many people the wrong way -- being perceived as dogmatic, and Krug sells simplicity with humor and encouragingly says "you can do it too, this is easy" -- but both effectively convey the principle that "usability" as a concept revolves around being user-centric.
Yet while in the future there will be more developers and designers doing guerilla usability testing -- they will remain novices when it comes to the finer points of User-Centered Design. They won't know a heuristic from a urologist. The good news is that those same novices will get hungry for knowledge and skills...and they will promote usability-as-business-advantage within their organizations. In effect, they will create fertile ground for "the experts" -- who I'm afraid will remain in short supply.
Good information architectures will still be created by the pros in the future. Information Architecture (IA) is not a simple discipline -- just like building architecture -- you might be able to blueprint and build a shed for your mower, but a house or an office building is a whole different story. IA projects in the future will continue to get more complex, and integrating multiple sites, content, and workflow-intensive applications will require an experienced information architect with real training.
In the end, big, critical and risk-intensive projects will involve usability professionals and information architects with significant training and experience. Less experienced practitioners -- usually trying to play many roles -- will take care of the smaller, simpler efforts. We shouldn't worry about this. Instead, we should focus and enhance our skills so we can meet the new challenges ahead: systems that involve more integration, the need to design and test for multiple platforms and devices, and users that will come to expect an even higher level of usability and utility.
You could say web design and development today is practiced by more people than just a few years ago, and you'd be right -- if you ignore the quality and complexity of the work. Lightweight HTML development and graphic design tools have opened the field to a much broader set of people. But companies didn't throw away their graphic designers and HTML developers -- they are still at work, but now focus on more difficult, more important, more risk-intensive projects.
Will the same thing happen with Usability and Information Architecture? Should we worry about it?
Yes and No.
Lightweight usability methods will continue to gain popularity. People like Steve Krug and Jakob Nielsen are acting as evangelists for usability. Those two "gurus" are very different in their approach to the unwashed -- Jakob can rub many people the wrong way -- being perceived as dogmatic, and Krug sells simplicity with humor and encouragingly says "you can do it too, this is easy" -- but both effectively convey the principle that "usability" as a concept revolves around being user-centric.
Yet while in the future there will be more developers and designers doing guerilla usability testing -- they will remain novices when it comes to the finer points of User-Centered Design. They won't know a heuristic from a urologist. The good news is that those same novices will get hungry for knowledge and skills...and they will promote usability-as-business-advantage within their organizations. In effect, they will create fertile ground for "the experts" -- who I'm afraid will remain in short supply.
Good information architectures will still be created by the pros in the future. Information Architecture (IA) is not a simple discipline -- just like building architecture -- you might be able to blueprint and build a shed for your mower, but a house or an office building is a whole different story. IA projects in the future will continue to get more complex, and integrating multiple sites, content, and workflow-intensive applications will require an experienced information architect with real training.
In the end, big, critical and risk-intensive projects will involve usability professionals and information architects with significant training and experience. Less experienced practitioners -- usually trying to play many roles -- will take care of the smaller, simpler efforts. We shouldn't worry about this. Instead, we should focus and enhance our skills so we can meet the new challenges ahead: systems that involve more integration, the need to design and test for multiple platforms and devices, and users that will come to expect an even higher level of usability and utility.
February 22, 2002
The Krugmeister, Krugeroonie, Krugster...
Okay, I don't know Steve Krug that well...I mean I know him a bit...alright, I had to pay for his book, and I've emailed him a couple times -- he even emailed me back once and didn't mention a restraining order.
Anyway, you should check out an excellent interview with Steve on an Irish site called webBusters. I think the things that've made Steve an instant hit are his sense of humor, practicality, and tone. He connects with people actually practicing usability and design in the trenches on real-life projects. Put simply, he doesn't claim to be a guru and knows how to have fun. Those of us practicing or selling usability can learn from the way Steve presents his material and opinions.
Here are some of my favorite quotes from the interview:
"I wrote my book in hopes that I could make life a little easier for people who've been handed the job of designing a site, by teaching them how to think like a usability expert, an information architect, and an interaction designer. (It's really unpleasant to be doing a job when you don't feel like you know what you're doing.)"
On accessibility:
"...the people building the sites are between a rock and a hard place. If they want to do the right thing, they have to get educated about how to do it, which is not easy. ... And then they have to do all this on top of the design, which they don't have enough time for in the first place. ... I think the real solution in the long run is probably improvements to browser and screen reader technology so they work together better."
When asked which web sites will be around in 15 years:
"Sears.com."
And if you happen to be someone involved in web projects who'd like to get started just understanding what usability is about, READ STEVE KRUG's BOOK: Don't Make Me Think. Stop by sometime, I'll let you borrow my copy.
Okay, I don't know Steve Krug that well...I mean I know him a bit...alright, I had to pay for his book, and I've emailed him a couple times -- he even emailed me back once and didn't mention a restraining order.
Anyway, you should check out an excellent interview with Steve on an Irish site called webBusters. I think the things that've made Steve an instant hit are his sense of humor, practicality, and tone. He connects with people actually practicing usability and design in the trenches on real-life projects. Put simply, he doesn't claim to be a guru and knows how to have fun. Those of us practicing or selling usability can learn from the way Steve presents his material and opinions.
Here are some of my favorite quotes from the interview:
"I wrote my book in hopes that I could make life a little easier for people who've been handed the job of designing a site, by teaching them how to think like a usability expert, an information architect, and an interaction designer. (It's really unpleasant to be doing a job when you don't feel like you know what you're doing.)"
On accessibility:
"...the people building the sites are between a rock and a hard place. If they want to do the right thing, they have to get educated about how to do it, which is not easy. ... And then they have to do all this on top of the design, which they don't have enough time for in the first place. ... I think the real solution in the long run is probably improvements to browser and screen reader technology so they work together better."
When asked which web sites will be around in 15 years:
"Sears.com."
And if you happen to be someone involved in web projects who'd like to get started just understanding what usability is about, READ STEVE KRUG's BOOK: Don't Make Me Think. Stop by sometime, I'll let you borrow my copy.
February 18, 2002
Requirements gathering is like sex
Peter Van Dijck's take on how clients fantasize about their conceptual applications. This short post is really great -- I think he's right on target. Of course, the analogy makes you feel a little dirty, and after reading it I don't think I can ever use a certain quote from the movie "Field of Dreams" in a client meeting again.
Peter Van Dijck's take on how clients fantasize about their conceptual applications. This short post is really great -- I think he's right on target. Of course, the analogy makes you feel a little dirty, and after reading it I don't think I can ever use a certain quote from the movie "Field of Dreams" in a client meeting again.
Elegant Hack redesign
One of my favorite sites, Elegant Hack, has recently been redesigned. Not sure I like the new home page -- kinda boxy, but cool photos. Anyway, Christina's style and content are top-notch, especially her blog: "Gleanings". (Come to think of it she also has great names for both, as well as a slick, IA-geeky logo.)
And yes, Christina, you can put "mentat" on your business card. More people in the biz world would probably know what mentat means than "information architect"...plus mentat is much cooler sounding.
One of my favorite sites, Elegant Hack, has recently been redesigned. Not sure I like the new home page -- kinda boxy, but cool photos. Anyway, Christina's style and content are top-notch, especially her blog: "Gleanings". (Come to think of it she also has great names for both, as well as a slick, IA-geeky logo.)
And yes, Christina, you can put "mentat" on your business card. More people in the biz world would probably know what mentat means than "information architect"...plus mentat is much cooler sounding.
February 14, 2002
How OS "upgrades" don't make 'da grade
Excellent post (a "ManifOSto") and very lively discussion at Signal vs. Noise about things an operating system upgrade should do (or not do). The discussion covers a lot of areas including future direction of desktop metaphors.
<excerpt>
It's wishful thinking, but an ideal operating system should...
Excellent post (a "ManifOSto") and very lively discussion at Signal vs. Noise about things an operating system upgrade should do (or not do). The discussion covers a lot of areas including future direction of desktop metaphors.
<excerpt>
It's wishful thinking, but an ideal operating system should...
- Run on my current hardware.
- Require equal or less system memory than the previous OS.
- Require equal or slightly more hard drive space (for the core functionality) than the previous OS.
- Run as fast or faster than the previous OS on the same hardware.
- Include the previous GUI skin as an optional install.
- Back itself up. Automatically.
- Not reduce any of my peripherals to paperweights.
- Allow me to do more with my computer than the previous OS.
- Display error messages a human without a computer science degree can understand.
- Not reduce me to a quivering ball of cytoplasm when things go wrong.
February 13, 2002
A New Architect
Web Techniques Magazine is no more -- it's now called "New Architect". I have to congratulate them on doing one thing right that many other similar sites have done wrong in the past: their old URLs still work. Yes, that's right. They chose NOT to break the thousands of links to their old content. Why am I surprised? Because for some reason, many businesses don't think twice about revamping their site's file structure when they redesign -- they "clean up" things on the server, only to make a mess of it for their users, advertisers...and any associated revenue streams.
Resources on URLs -- why and how to not break them in a redesign:
As far as the new magazine goes, if you're curious about what's the same, and what's different...well, according to the editor:
"We've held on to many of Web Techniques's unique ideas. For instance, we still believe strongly that the cornerstones of any Internet project are strategy, infrastructure, development, and interface. This structure lets you see all sides of the problem, and its solution, before you devote your time and money to it."
"We've added two completely new sections to the magazine: Critical Decisions and Case Studies. Each article in the Critical Decisions section is written with the intent of helping you answer a strategic question."
Web Techniques has regularly covered topics on design and usability in the past, and judging from the first issue of New Architect, it looks like they'll continue that into the future.
Web Techniques Magazine is no more -- it's now called "New Architect". I have to congratulate them on doing one thing right that many other similar sites have done wrong in the past: their old URLs still work. Yes, that's right. They chose NOT to break the thousands of links to their old content. Why am I surprised? Because for some reason, many businesses don't think twice about revamping their site's file structure when they redesign -- they "clean up" things on the server, only to make a mess of it for their users, advertisers...and any associated revenue streams.
Resources on URLs -- why and how to not break them in a redesign:
- InfoWorld: Redesign 404 -- how InfoWorld did it all wrong
- Doc Searls on "Rotten Linkage" caused by some redesigns
- Merges Theory: How to make URLs user-friendly
- Keith Instone's tactics for preventing the dreaded 404 message
- Jakob Nielsen on linkrot
- Moving pages is #6 on Jakob's Top Ten New Mistakes of Web Design
As far as the new magazine goes, if you're curious about what's the same, and what's different...well, according to the editor:
"We've held on to many of Web Techniques's unique ideas. For instance, we still believe strongly that the cornerstones of any Internet project are strategy, infrastructure, development, and interface. This structure lets you see all sides of the problem, and its solution, before you devote your time and money to it."
"We've added two completely new sections to the magazine: Critical Decisions and Case Studies. Each article in the Critical Decisions section is written with the intent of helping you answer a strategic question."
Web Techniques has regularly covered topics on design and usability in the past, and judging from the first issue of New Architect, it looks like they'll continue that into the future.
Uncle Sam needs Information Architects
"The IT systems in place at the CIA and at other agencies within the intelligence community have made analysts less efficient, because they spend valuable time searching for information stored in many different locations, Louie said. The systems don't allow users to quickly find or compare data especially if the search terms aren't exact.
"We had an IT failure — all of the systems that we put together with the best intentions weren't doing the job," he said. "We couldn't fuse the data."
"This fact was made glaringly clear Sept. 11 when CIA employees at almost every level ended up printing out stacks of paper and searching them manually because it was faster than searching through data stored in IT systems, he said."
Federal Computer Week: Systems fail to deliver
(Via SIGIA)
"The IT systems in place at the CIA and at other agencies within the intelligence community have made analysts less efficient, because they spend valuable time searching for information stored in many different locations, Louie said. The systems don't allow users to quickly find or compare data especially if the search terms aren't exact.
"We had an IT failure — all of the systems that we put together with the best intentions weren't doing the job," he said. "We couldn't fuse the data."
"This fact was made glaringly clear Sept. 11 when CIA employees at almost every level ended up printing out stacks of paper and searching them manually because it was faster than searching through data stored in IT systems, he said."
Federal Computer Week: Systems fail to deliver
(Via SIGIA)
February 12, 2002
Why be stupid when you can keep it simple?
An article on spartan design from webreference.com. The first page is golden, the rest get down into development techniques (not all of which I agree with).
A few poignant quotes:
"The first goal I have is to convince some of you to simplify everything that you are doing. There are several reasons for this, the most enticing that your income will likely go up."
"It is not easy to create something very simple, and I believe it takes more artistic talent to create a beautiful page when the designer must work within usability restrictions. There is always one thing I keep telling myself as I ponder this age-old art question. My attitude towards producing useable work is the primary reason I have made a good living as an artist for close to fifteen years without a "day job." And isn't that what it is all about?"
An article on spartan design from webreference.com. The first page is golden, the rest get down into development techniques (not all of which I agree with).
A few poignant quotes:
"The first goal I have is to convince some of you to simplify everything that you are doing. There are several reasons for this, the most enticing that your income will likely go up."
"It is not easy to create something very simple, and I believe it takes more artistic talent to create a beautiful page when the designer must work within usability restrictions. There is always one thing I keep telling myself as I ponder this age-old art question. My attitude towards producing useable work is the primary reason I have made a good living as an artist for close to fifteen years without a "day job." And isn't that what it is all about?"
February 11, 2002
Outlook, how do I hate thee? Let me count the ways.
ZDNet has a good rant and discussion of Outlook frustrations. Here are a few of mine:
ZDNet has a good rant and discussion of Outlook frustrations. Here are a few of mine:
- Can't drop a contact in the To field of a new email message
- Forgets any aliases I don't use after few weeks -- frustrating
- Rules management sucks...you end up with way too many rules
- Rules performance is horrible. They take forever to run and won't run in the background
- Outlook runs rules when mail "arrives"...but not if it "arrives" while Outlook isn't running.
- Takes forever to start up over dialup. Has to process all reminders, events, tasks, etc. before you can get to your inbox. (Hint to MS developers: multitasking means some tasks can run in the background.)
- HTML email authoring is a mystery...where do I enter my code, please?
The Web Standards Project: Phase II Coming
Hmm...looks like the WaSP is undergoing a metamorphosis. According to their site, they are "retooling, and a Phase II will "launch soon". Their last signoff on Phase I leaves some clues to possible new directions:
"Browser makers are no longer the problem. The problem lies with designers and developers chained to the browser–quirk–oriented markup of the 1990s...It lies with “helpful” software that generates sites optimized for 4.0 browsers with nary a thought for document structure, open standards, separation of structure from presentation, or the long–term durability and viability of web documents...above all the problem lies with clients who confuse the web with print...who are so concerned with “backward compatibility” that they neglect the far more important issue of forward compability."
Given the focus of "phase I", my prediction is that they'll target tool makers. Developers and clients are the more difficult of the three to tackle, and in phase I they went after browser makers...Let this serve as a warning for Adobe, Microsoft and Macromedia.
See previous post Whither (or wither) the WaSP?
(found via Zeldman)
Hmm...looks like the WaSP is undergoing a metamorphosis. According to their site, they are "retooling, and a Phase II will "launch soon". Their last signoff on Phase I leaves some clues to possible new directions:
"Browser makers are no longer the problem. The problem lies with designers and developers chained to the browser–quirk–oriented markup of the 1990s...It lies with “helpful” software that generates sites optimized for 4.0 browsers with nary a thought for document structure, open standards, separation of structure from presentation, or the long–term durability and viability of web documents...above all the problem lies with clients who confuse the web with print...who are so concerned with “backward compatibility” that they neglect the far more important issue of forward compability."
Given the focus of "phase I", my prediction is that they'll target tool makers. Developers and clients are the more difficult of the three to tackle, and in phase I they went after browser makers...Let this serve as a warning for Adobe, Microsoft and Macromedia.
See previous post Whither (or wither) the WaSP?
(found via Zeldman)
Jakob Nielsen on false prophets
I received an email from Jakob Nielsen about my previous post on usability snake oil vendors. Here's what Jakob had to say:
"I noticed your essay on false usability a few days ago. I commented on the same phenomenon back in 1999, calling it "voodoo usability":
Unfortunately, as you point out, flawed approaches have been increasing, rather than declining, in the time since my essay, so it's good that you took the initiative to revive interest in the matter."
--
Jakob Nielsen
Author, "Homepage Usability: 50 Websites Deconstructed"
Nielsen Norman Group
I've received a number of other comments via email, all supporting what I said. One person said they avoid using the term "usability" to describe what they do because it is just too vague. They think its vagueness allows an opening for "snake oil merchants". That may be, but in my book wrong is wrong, no matter how big an "opening" is provided by the victim or the environment.
I received an email from Jakob Nielsen about my previous post on usability snake oil vendors. Here's what Jakob had to say:
"I noticed your essay on false usability a few days ago. I commented on the same phenomenon back in 1999, calling it "voodoo usability":
Unfortunately, as you point out, flawed approaches have been increasing, rather than declining, in the time since my essay, so it's good that you took the initiative to revive interest in the matter."
--
Jakob Nielsen
Author, "Homepage Usability: 50 Websites Deconstructed"
Nielsen Norman Group
I've received a number of other comments via email, all supporting what I said. One person said they avoid using the term "usability" to describe what they do because it is just too vague. They think its vagueness allows an opening for "snake oil merchants". That may be, but in my book wrong is wrong, no matter how big an "opening" is provided by the victim or the environment.
February 07, 2002
False prophets of Usability - Part 1
In the past few years usability has become somewhat of a buzzword. That's both a good and a bad thing. What's bad is that the meaning of usability gets muddied, re-interpreted and sometimes even set aside. You have software companies selling "automated usability testing solutions" (no one really sells products anymore). You have traditional graphic designers passing themselves off as "interaction" this and "user experience" that. And of course most of the "buyers" don't know what is what -- they're just buying instant 'usability" -- or so they think. I'm not saying I'm perfect, but there are clearly some folks in the "usability game" who are just jumping on a bandwagon and bringing their own version of snake oil with them.
Here's an example:
NetConversions has some pretty neat software to sell. It's mostly event logging / data capture type of stuff. It could be very useful to a business or a usability engineer doing research. But, listen to this claim from the NetConversions site:
"True Usability™ is an innovative and rapid data driven method to test for website usability using your actual visitor traffic to improve the user experience and to optimize bottom-line results." [November 2005 Update: Netconversions is now "Atlas" and is still offering True Usability™]
Note that they've co-opted and trademarked "True Usability" as their product name. Of course this really has little to do with "truth" or "usability" as you'll soon see. They have a "white paper" on their site claiming to compare various "approaches to usability": heuristic evaluations (aka "experts"), focus groups, surveys, server logs, and of course "True Usability™". This supposed comparison has more errors in it than I can cover here, but here are the highlights:
Supposedly a heuristic evaluation is "an analysis of the site with respect to a set of usability guidelines. These usability guidelines are often based upon the expert’s past testing and consulting experiences." -- No, a heuristic evaluation is based on heuristics. A guideline review is based on guidelines, and most "experts" don't create their own guidelines from scratch. Clearly they don't know what they are talking about. Looking at their "about us" page, there isn't a person listed with a background in HCI, Usability Engineering or User Centered Design -- instead they are technologists and marketing data research types. Don't get me wrong -- I like those types of people, but I know usability professionals when I see them, and I don't see any at this company. If they're really selling "usability" expertise, shouldn't they show their qualifications in the field?
The "comparision" opens with a very nice quote about usability testing from the Industry Standard.-- evidently to promote NetConversions' product. Of course the types of usability testing Usability Engineers have been doing for decades -- involving humans observing and listening to users isn't even mentioned in this comparison. It seems anything that can help you evaluate usability of a system is now considered "usability testing".
Unfortunately NetConversions isn't the only company doing things along this line, and even many usability professionals can fall into the trap of promising to solve all of a customer's problems in one fell swoop. Usability (as a field) suffers when "experts" don't meet expectations. We have to set realistic expectations with clients, help them select the tools, methods and approaches that meet their needs. We can't over-promise and under-deliver. Perfect usability is a goal never attained, but great strides can be made in that direction if businesses, designers and developers work together.
There's plenty of bad usability out there -- more than enough for all the traditional usability professionals and the new entrants to the "usability game" alike. We can work together -- tool-makers and practitioners, researchers and designers, marketers and engineers. Let's just quit promising that we can get companies to the moon on the next bus leaving town.
Be realistic, helpful and truthful...and maybe Real Usability™ will happen.
In the past few years usability has become somewhat of a buzzword. That's both a good and a bad thing. What's bad is that the meaning of usability gets muddied, re-interpreted and sometimes even set aside. You have software companies selling "automated usability testing solutions" (no one really sells products anymore). You have traditional graphic designers passing themselves off as "interaction" this and "user experience" that. And of course most of the "buyers" don't know what is what -- they're just buying instant 'usability" -- or so they think. I'm not saying I'm perfect, but there are clearly some folks in the "usability game" who are just jumping on a bandwagon and bringing their own version of snake oil with them.
Here's an example:
NetConversions has some pretty neat software to sell. It's mostly event logging / data capture type of stuff. It could be very useful to a business or a usability engineer doing research. But, listen to this claim from the NetConversions site:
"True Usability™ is an innovative and rapid data driven method to test for website usability using your actual visitor traffic to improve the user experience and to optimize bottom-line results." [November 2005 Update: Netconversions is now "Atlas" and is still offering True Usability™]
Note that they've co-opted and trademarked "True Usability" as their product name. Of course this really has little to do with "truth" or "usability" as you'll soon see. They have a "white paper" on their site claiming to compare various "approaches to usability": heuristic evaluations (aka "experts"), focus groups, surveys, server logs, and of course "True Usability™". This supposed comparison has more errors in it than I can cover here, but here are the highlights:
Supposedly a heuristic evaluation is "an analysis of the site with respect to a set of usability guidelines. These usability guidelines are often based upon the expert’s past testing and consulting experiences." -- No, a heuristic evaluation is based on heuristics. A guideline review is based on guidelines, and most "experts" don't create their own guidelines from scratch. Clearly they don't know what they are talking about. Looking at their "about us" page, there isn't a person listed with a background in HCI, Usability Engineering or User Centered Design -- instead they are technologists and marketing data research types. Don't get me wrong -- I like those types of people, but I know usability professionals when I see them, and I don't see any at this company. If they're really selling "usability" expertise, shouldn't they show their qualifications in the field?
The "comparision" opens with a very nice quote about usability testing from the Industry Standard.-- evidently to promote NetConversions' product. Of course the types of usability testing Usability Engineers have been doing for decades -- involving humans observing and listening to users isn't even mentioned in this comparison. It seems anything that can help you evaluate usability of a system is now considered "usability testing".
Unfortunately NetConversions isn't the only company doing things along this line, and even many usability professionals can fall into the trap of promising to solve all of a customer's problems in one fell swoop. Usability (as a field) suffers when "experts" don't meet expectations. We have to set realistic expectations with clients, help them select the tools, methods and approaches that meet their needs. We can't over-promise and under-deliver. Perfect usability is a goal never attained, but great strides can be made in that direction if businesses, designers and developers work together.
There's plenty of bad usability out there -- more than enough for all the traditional usability professionals and the new entrants to the "usability game" alike. We can work together -- tool-makers and practitioners, researchers and designers, marketers and engineers. Let's just quit promising that we can get companies to the moon on the next bus leaving town.
Be realistic, helpful and truthful...and maybe Real Usability™ will happen.
February 05, 2002
Megway TH. Bigger than Jesus
This is amazing! I gotta find out where to get me one of these.
"Due to its unique Opposable Digits Technology™, each Megway is capable of carrying up to 120 pounds in its front cargo compartment in the form of either boxes or bags. The optional broom, mop, and floor buffing attachments (not shown) turn Megway into a powerful cleaning machine.
The advanced technology behind the Megway is really cool.
Thanks to Jason Kottke...great stuff.
This is amazing! I gotta find out where to get me one of these.
"Due to its unique Opposable Digits Technology™, each Megway is capable of carrying up to 120 pounds in its front cargo compartment in the form of either boxes or bags. The optional broom, mop, and floor buffing attachments (not shown) turn Megway into a powerful cleaning machine.
The advanced technology behind the Megway is really cool.
Thanks to Jason Kottke...great stuff.
Don't let your web site fall out of the window
The question of whether to open a new browser window for offsite links came up on CHI-WEB. Lois Wakeman has a nice article about why this generally presents a problem for users. She includes some good examples and usage scenarios (see the sidebar). Personally, I've seen every one of the scenarios she lists occur with users in usability testing. I've seen users with 6 or more windows open (unbeknownst to them) as well as users who accidentally close their only browser window thinking it was another popped-up window. She also covers the topic of popup (or pop-up) windows with a nice working example.
I'm still looking for some guidelines that talk about good uses of popups. If you know of any, please drop me an email and I'll post a link here. I think areas where popups MIGHT be useful are user assistance (e.g. help, glossary, etc.) and showing full-size images when browsing thumbnails.
Generally I avoid designs that open new windows for users. I've yet to find a web user who couldn't find the Back button or some other way back to the previous site when needed.
The question of whether to open a new browser window for offsite links came up on CHI-WEB. Lois Wakeman has a nice article about why this generally presents a problem for users. She includes some good examples and usage scenarios (see the sidebar). Personally, I've seen every one of the scenarios she lists occur with users in usability testing. I've seen users with 6 or more windows open (unbeknownst to them) as well as users who accidentally close their only browser window thinking it was another popped-up window. She also covers the topic of popup (or pop-up) windows with a nice working example.
I'm still looking for some guidelines that talk about good uses of popups. If you know of any, please drop me an email and I'll post a link here. I think areas where popups MIGHT be useful are user assistance (e.g. help, glossary, etc.) and showing full-size images when browsing thumbnails.
Generally I avoid designs that open new windows for users. I've yet to find a web user who couldn't find the Back button or some other way back to the previous site when needed.
February 04, 2002
Faceted Classification Example
I've been trying to get my head around the concept of "faceted classification." This topic has been discussed a bit lately on the SIGIA list, and I wanted to understand what's different about
"faceted classification" from my previous understanding of "classification". FacetMap is an online example and tutorial on faceted classifications. I guess I've never thought of web "taxonomies" or classification systems as using strictly mutually exclusive categories -- where items only fit in one location. Maybe this is why facets don't seem to be a big revelation.
I think providing the user "multiple paths to success" is important whenever possible. For example, "Salt Products" might fit under both "Food" and "Industrial" categories since there is table salt and road de-icing salt. On an intranet, one user might think to look for an organization chart under "about us", while another user might look under "contacts". Where they look might depend on the task they are trying to accomplish at the time. I seem to run into examples like this all the time. Sometimes you can get away with supplementary navigation to get the user to the one spot where something resides (e.g. "Related Links"), but other times you have to actually place the content/item in multiple places.
So there is value in being able to distinguish between "faceted classification" and "hierarchy" or "taxonomy" -- "faceted classification" is a more specific term -- it lends clarity to the discussion. I also like the fact that conceptually "facets" should be determined by user needs. This helps focus the information architect on the user, rather than just on the content.
Read more about faceted classification at PeterMe:
- Innovation in Classification
- Fa-Fa-Fa-Fa-Fa-cets!
I've been trying to get my head around the concept of "faceted classification." This topic has been discussed a bit lately on the SIGIA list, and I wanted to understand what's different about
"faceted classification" from my previous understanding of "classification". FacetMap is an online example and tutorial on faceted classifications. I guess I've never thought of web "taxonomies" or classification systems as using strictly mutually exclusive categories -- where items only fit in one location. Maybe this is why facets don't seem to be a big revelation.
I think providing the user "multiple paths to success" is important whenever possible. For example, "Salt Products" might fit under both "Food" and "Industrial" categories since there is table salt and road de-icing salt. On an intranet, one user might think to look for an organization chart under "about us", while another user might look under "contacts". Where they look might depend on the task they are trying to accomplish at the time. I seem to run into examples like this all the time. Sometimes you can get away with supplementary navigation to get the user to the one spot where something resides (e.g. "Related Links"), but other times you have to actually place the content/item in multiple places.
So there is value in being able to distinguish between "faceted classification" and "hierarchy" or "taxonomy" -- "faceted classification" is a more specific term -- it lends clarity to the discussion. I also like the fact that conceptually "facets" should be determined by user needs. This helps focus the information architect on the user, rather than just on the content.
Read more about faceted classification at PeterMe:
- Innovation in Classification
- Fa-Fa-Fa-Fa-Fa-cets!
February 01, 2002
Are you changing the world?
Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, says "I keep things focused. The speech I give everyday is: 'This is what we do. Is what you are doing consistent with that, and does it change the world?'" Pretty neat attitude.
Here's the full PCWorld interview:Three Minutes With Google's Eric Schmidt
See previous post: When you want to be a millionaire, you use Google.
Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, says "I keep things focused. The speech I give everyday is: 'This is what we do. Is what you are doing consistent with that, and does it change the world?'" Pretty neat attitude.
Here's the full PCWorld interview:Three Minutes With Google's Eric Schmidt
See previous post: When you want to be a millionaire, you use Google.
January 27, 2002
The Internet is NOT evil
A UK group has called for an "International Internet Free day". They are asking people take the day "to meet friends and family and rediscover life in the 'real world'."
This attitude that the Internet somehow degrades the quality of "real life" is absolutely ridiculous. The Internet, like other technologies is more often used to enhance peoples live than to degrade it.
But, if I were in London, I could spend the day with this bunch of technophobes touring Royal Festival Hall, Oxo Tower Wharf, the Tate Modern museum, and Shakespeare's Globe theatre. But since I don't live in London, maybe I could just check these interesting places out on the web. Some, like the Globe, even have a virtual tour. ...or maybe I'll chat or trade emails and photos with my friends and relatives who live far away.
Can people over-use technology? Sure. Take a look at telephones, television, pagers, video games and hair color. As they say, moderation is the key.
A UK group has called for an "International Internet Free day". They are asking people take the day "to meet friends and family and rediscover life in the 'real world'."
This attitude that the Internet somehow degrades the quality of "real life" is absolutely ridiculous. The Internet, like other technologies is more often used to enhance peoples live than to degrade it.
But, if I were in London, I could spend the day with this bunch of technophobes touring Royal Festival Hall, Oxo Tower Wharf, the Tate Modern museum, and Shakespeare's Globe theatre. But since I don't live in London, maybe I could just check these interesting places out on the web. Some, like the Globe, even have a virtual tour. ...or maybe I'll chat or trade emails and photos with my friends and relatives who live far away.
Can people over-use technology? Sure. Take a look at telephones, television, pagers, video games and hair color. As they say, moderation is the key.
How to save 49 weeks of development time
If you're a developer or development team lead, you'll want to get familiar with Joel Spolsky's site. True to form, he's provided yet another article showing good development processes in action. His latest installment talks about why you should consider a code "scrub" rather than a complete re-write.
Other gems by Joel:
If you're a developer or development team lead, you'll want to get familiar with Joel Spolsky's site. True to form, he's provided yet another article showing good development processes in action. His latest installment talks about why you should consider a code "scrub" rather than a complete re-write.
Other gems by Joel:
- Good Software Takes Ten Years. Get Used To it.
- The Joel Test: 12 Steps to Better Code
- User Interface Design for Programmers
January 25, 2002
Corporate blogging (or Blogging for Dollars)
Peter has some great thoughts about web logs ('blogs") and how they facilitate "free-ranging discussions hopping from page to page, with little structure apart from the hyperlink... Such discussions can be hard to 'follow,' but I think attempting to 'follow' them misses part of the point.."
I think it's likely to spur some good discussion. Personally, I've been looking into the use of weblogs within a corporate environment. I think they can help move "knowledge management" closer to something attainable.
I think what's really cool about blogs is the power they give people to share -- it's knowledge management at its most informal and chaotic. It's about a virtual community -- a community of communities if you will. I think there's a place for managed chaos in a corporate setting. Chaos is at the heart of much invention and innovation...
Blogging also has a aspect of reputation management as David Walker said on his site:
"Weblogs' users don't vote within the site; they vote by choosing the site as a reliable source of guidance. In effect, they say to the site's author: "you make the choices I'd make if I had time". The Webloggers become the makers and breakers of reputations within their (usually narrow) areas of interest. And the mass of Weblogs becomes another reputation management system."
In a corporate setting, a reputation management system could help people find subject matter experts and could help identify the most successful or valuable projects.
Peter has some great thoughts about web logs ('blogs") and how they facilitate "free-ranging discussions hopping from page to page, with little structure apart from the hyperlink... Such discussions can be hard to 'follow,' but I think attempting to 'follow' them misses part of the point.."
I think it's likely to spur some good discussion. Personally, I've been looking into the use of weblogs within a corporate environment. I think they can help move "knowledge management" closer to something attainable.
I think what's really cool about blogs is the power they give people to share -- it's knowledge management at its most informal and chaotic. It's about a virtual community -- a community of communities if you will. I think there's a place for managed chaos in a corporate setting. Chaos is at the heart of much invention and innovation...
Blogging also has a aspect of reputation management as David Walker said on his site:
"Weblogs' users don't vote within the site; they vote by choosing the site as a reliable source of guidance. In effect, they say to the site's author: "you make the choices I'd make if I had time". The Webloggers become the makers and breakers of reputations within their (usually narrow) areas of interest. And the mass of Weblogs becomes another reputation management system."
In a corporate setting, a reputation management system could help people find subject matter experts and could help identify the most successful or valuable projects.
Why taxonomy is important
If you're struggling to convince business sponsors that building a taxonomy is important, you can probably get a few bullet points from Gerry McGovern's article on Clickz.com. He makes some excellent points about the challenges of creating a good taxonomy and why it's costly to business if done wrong. Here are just a few:
The first point about the "map" and "geography" is a great one. Site structure and navigation majorly impact site content. On the web, many second-level pages (right off the home page) are essentially navigation only pages -- 'branches" of the tree if you will. The navigation pages effectively become "meta-content". For example, the Yahoo World News page is really a branch page -- yet as meta content it provides the reader with an overview or summary of the day's news. No one wrote a summary, but aggregating microcontent on one page and providing navigation and structure to the leaves of the tree, the articles, provides a constantly updating overview.
On web projects, it's easy to focus either too much on the leaves or the branches. In planning a new site, where no content exists, it's common for team members to plan for a lot of branches without know how big the leaves really are. Sometimes they plan for a number of pages about "our unique business proposition", when in the end they end up with three paragraphs. Other times, when repurposing content or redesigning an existing site, too much focus is given to arranging the leaves, and branches are not well thought out. Those sites can end up with branches that are too short -- linking to too many pages from one page without proper introduction -- or they can end up with branches that are too "skinny" -- navigation pages that don't contain enough information about the pages they link to. It's difficult to get the focus right -- achieving a balance where each page from top to bottom works well. Often this requires restructuring existing content to make it work.
Many companies are moving in the direction of Corporate Portals...an internal web trailhead to all things related to the company. These often include a type of enterprise taxonomy, and can be very difficult to plan, implement and maintain. They require a lot of research, analysis and process -- even changing corporate culture to some extent. These taxonomies make the typical web site taxonomy look trivial in comparison. If you're looking at corporate portals or other technology to categorize web content, keep in mind that regardless of what the technology vendor says, the challenge of creating taxonomy has little to do with technology, and lots to do with unique user and business needs.
If you're struggling to convince business sponsors that building a taxonomy is important, you can probably get a few bullet points from Gerry McGovern's article on Clickz.com. He makes some excellent points about the challenges of creating a good taxonomy and why it's costly to business if done wrong. Here are just a few:
- Web site classification impacts both the "map" and the "geography." Classification is not simply about mapping content that is already on a Web site. It also dictates the very structure of the Web site.
- The organization often has a preexisting classification that is understood by its employees but not by its customers. A difficult decision needs to be made with regard to whether to design two classifications or create a single unified classification that is understood by both.
- Web site classification is an ongoing process prone to error. Each time a new document is published on the Web site, it needs to be classified. If the document is classified incorrectly, then it undermines the entire classification design.
The first point about the "map" and "geography" is a great one. Site structure and navigation majorly impact site content. On the web, many second-level pages (right off the home page) are essentially navigation only pages -- 'branches" of the tree if you will. The navigation pages effectively become "meta-content". For example, the Yahoo World News page is really a branch page -- yet as meta content it provides the reader with an overview or summary of the day's news. No one wrote a summary, but aggregating microcontent on one page and providing navigation and structure to the leaves of the tree, the articles, provides a constantly updating overview.
On web projects, it's easy to focus either too much on the leaves or the branches. In planning a new site, where no content exists, it's common for team members to plan for a lot of branches without know how big the leaves really are. Sometimes they plan for a number of pages about "our unique business proposition", when in the end they end up with three paragraphs. Other times, when repurposing content or redesigning an existing site, too much focus is given to arranging the leaves, and branches are not well thought out. Those sites can end up with branches that are too short -- linking to too many pages from one page without proper introduction -- or they can end up with branches that are too "skinny" -- navigation pages that don't contain enough information about the pages they link to. It's difficult to get the focus right -- achieving a balance where each page from top to bottom works well. Often this requires restructuring existing content to make it work.
Many companies are moving in the direction of Corporate Portals...an internal web trailhead to all things related to the company. These often include a type of enterprise taxonomy, and can be very difficult to plan, implement and maintain. They require a lot of research, analysis and process -- even changing corporate culture to some extent. These taxonomies make the typical web site taxonomy look trivial in comparison. If you're looking at corporate portals or other technology to categorize web content, keep in mind that regardless of what the technology vendor says, the challenge of creating taxonomy has little to do with technology, and lots to do with unique user and business needs.
January 24, 2002
Web-based wizards and the Sorcerer's Stone
IBM's developerWorks site discusses the topic of web-based wizard interfaces. The author shares her learnings from designing and testing web-based wizards for nearly a year. She nicely covers the various project team roles involved in crafting a good wizard, including the roles of information architect and usability specialist. Reasons why you should not auto-tab in forms and why a controlled vocabulary is important are included and really make this article a gem.
Interesting book reference: Designing Effective Wizards: A Multidisciplinary Approach
"Nuts-and-bolts guide to designing wizards Includes checklists and examples The complete guide to wizard design. Practical usability and design techniques for successful wizard and software projects"
The Web Design Pattern for a Wizard by Martin van Welie provides a nice overview of what wizards are good for, the principle behind them, and the basics behind creating one. Not familiar with patterns? Try this past post for more information.
IBM's developerWorks site discusses the topic of web-based wizard interfaces. The author shares her learnings from designing and testing web-based wizards for nearly a year. She nicely covers the various project team roles involved in crafting a good wizard, including the roles of information architect and usability specialist. Reasons why you should not auto-tab in forms and why a controlled vocabulary is important are included and really make this article a gem.
Interesting book reference: Designing Effective Wizards: A Multidisciplinary Approach
"Nuts-and-bolts guide to designing wizards Includes checklists and examples The complete guide to wizard design. Practical usability and design techniques for successful wizard and software projects"
The Web Design Pattern for a Wizard by Martin van Welie provides a nice overview of what wizards are good for, the principle behind them, and the basics behind creating one. Not familiar with patterns? Try this past post for more information.
Who needs bookmarks?
Recent discussion on WebWord talked about how some folks are using Google instead of bookmarks. When I first discovered Google (they were in "beta"), I made it a personal mission to tell everyone I knew about it.
My new mission is to tell folks about Powermarks, a really great utility that is so much better than Google for returning you to your previous haunts. It's better than bookmarks because you don't have to think so much about organization. I mean do you really want to create a whole taxonomy for your bookmarks (aka favorites)? With bookmarks, I could never figure out where I put things, plus navigating through the various folders took too long. Powermarks allows you to do a very fast search of things you've "powermarked", and it also lets you add metadata (keywords) to each entry. It ends up being faster and more accurate than Google (really). Since all my hundreds of Powermark entries are for web pages that have already passed my "smell test", I can generally find something useful without having to scan very many search results. It's also great for those times when I think "didn't I read something about this once?" -- I can quickly find it in my powermarks.
Someone mentioned Powermarks once on CHI-Web or SIGIA, and It's really changed the way I work ever since. I can retrieve information much faster than I ever did before. For example, in a matter of seconds, without opening any new browser windows, I just looked up the URLs for CHI-Web and SIGIA. Since it's a desktop app, there's no network or page load delay...yes, native apps are still good for something!
Oh, and one of the really cool things the software does is synch your "powermarks" between PCs!
Recent discussion on WebWord talked about how some folks are using Google instead of bookmarks. When I first discovered Google (they were in "beta"), I made it a personal mission to tell everyone I knew about it.
My new mission is to tell folks about Powermarks, a really great utility that is so much better than Google for returning you to your previous haunts. It's better than bookmarks because you don't have to think so much about organization. I mean do you really want to create a whole taxonomy for your bookmarks (aka favorites)? With bookmarks, I could never figure out where I put things, plus navigating through the various folders took too long. Powermarks allows you to do a very fast search of things you've "powermarked", and it also lets you add metadata (keywords) to each entry. It ends up being faster and more accurate than Google (really). Since all my hundreds of Powermark entries are for web pages that have already passed my "smell test", I can generally find something useful without having to scan very many search results. It's also great for those times when I think "didn't I read something about this once?" -- I can quickly find it in my powermarks.
Someone mentioned Powermarks once on CHI-Web or SIGIA, and It's really changed the way I work ever since. I can retrieve information much faster than I ever did before. For example, in a matter of seconds, without opening any new browser windows, I just looked up the URLs for CHI-Web and SIGIA. Since it's a desktop app, there's no network or page load delay...yes, native apps are still good for something!
Oh, and one of the really cool things the software does is synch your "powermarks" between PCs!
January 22, 2002
Dialing for Doritos
When I read that Doritos will abandon their Super Bowl advertising this year and instead triple their investment in online advertising, you could say I was a bit surprised. Given that millions of people actually watch the Super Bowl just to see the ads (as many as 8% of the 120 millions viewers by some accounts), while studies show more and more web users have "banner blindness", I have to wonder what the snack food marketing folks know that we don't. I understand that web ad prices have plummeted and that the cost of 30 seconds time during the Super Bowl would buy year long exposure online -- even on major name properties like MTV.com. What I don't get is Doritos' campaign featuring a character named "Clive" and a fake "underground" site called fortheboldanddaring.com.
I'm sure most of their online target market of 12-24 year olds will hear about this fake site, and realize they are being targeted and being treated like total fools who can't see the difference between the real thing an a bad corporate parody of it. I'm also not sure how this underground site will help sell Doritos' products. Just like the Pets.com puppet didn't drive sales of pet food, my prediction is Clive and the related campaign will create a buzz, win lots of awards for the ad agency, but fail when it comes to the bottom line. Then again, I could be wrong -- maybe this is just so clever I don't get it.
I'm reminded of a quote from that epic "rockumentary" This is Spinal Tap:
"It's such a fine line between stupid and...clever."
When I read that Doritos will abandon their Super Bowl advertising this year and instead triple their investment in online advertising, you could say I was a bit surprised. Given that millions of people actually watch the Super Bowl just to see the ads (as many as 8% of the 120 millions viewers by some accounts), while studies show more and more web users have "banner blindness", I have to wonder what the snack food marketing folks know that we don't. I understand that web ad prices have plummeted and that the cost of 30 seconds time during the Super Bowl would buy year long exposure online -- even on major name properties like MTV.com. What I don't get is Doritos' campaign featuring a character named "Clive" and a fake "underground" site called fortheboldanddaring.com.
I'm sure most of their online target market of 12-24 year olds will hear about this fake site, and realize they are being targeted and being treated like total fools who can't see the difference between the real thing an a bad corporate parody of it. I'm also not sure how this underground site will help sell Doritos' products. Just like the Pets.com puppet didn't drive sales of pet food, my prediction is Clive and the related campaign will create a buzz, win lots of awards for the ad agency, but fail when it comes to the bottom line. Then again, I could be wrong -- maybe this is just so clever I don't get it.
I'm reminded of a quote from that epic "rockumentary" This is Spinal Tap:
"It's such a fine line between stupid and...clever."
January 21, 2002
Seek out the experts
The Royal National Institute for the Blind has a fascinating site, especially if you're doing any work around web accessibility. They have a very comprehensive list of access technology suppliers.
The Royal National Institute for the Blind has a fascinating site, especially if you're doing any work around web accessibility. They have a very comprehensive list of access technology suppliers.
Wall Street Journal Redesign
The WSJ Online has redesigned their site...and it appears they are moving in the right direction. The redesign "tour" hints that they are moving their online layout to be quite different from their print heritage:
"Newspaper readers and Web users don't always have the same needs. So we've reorganized our navigation in a way that works better online. We've moved some sections and pages, and given some of them new names that more directly describe the subjects they cover. "
They seem to have improved their article format by adding a related links sidebar -- a much under-used feature on most web sites. After all, what is the web without links? You guessed it...without links it's pretty much newpaper content trapped in a browser. :-) Great "related links" can add tremendous value (see Strategic Linking Techniques by John Rhodes of Webword.
Another change is the move to 2 site maps. One is really an index that they call an alphabetical site map. The second is a typical site map (if there is such a thing) listing the site's sections and primary pages under them. See Jakob's recent Alertbox article for a good discussion of site map usability.
[thanks to Christina at ElegantHack for the WSJ pointer]
The WSJ Online has redesigned their site...and it appears they are moving in the right direction. The redesign "tour" hints that they are moving their online layout to be quite different from their print heritage:
"Newspaper readers and Web users don't always have the same needs. So we've reorganized our navigation in a way that works better online. We've moved some sections and pages, and given some of them new names that more directly describe the subjects they cover. "
They seem to have improved their article format by adding a related links sidebar -- a much under-used feature on most web sites. After all, what is the web without links? You guessed it...without links it's pretty much newpaper content trapped in a browser. :-) Great "related links" can add tremendous value (see Strategic Linking Techniques by John Rhodes of Webword.
Another change is the move to 2 site maps. One is really an index that they call an alphabetical site map. The second is a typical site map (if there is such a thing) listing the site's sections and primary pages under them. See Jakob's recent Alertbox article for a good discussion of site map usability.
[thanks to Christina at ElegantHack for the WSJ pointer]
January 18, 2002
New "Polar Bear book" on the way
A second edition of the definitive book on Information Architecture for the web is underway. It should be out this summer -- around July, according to Lou Rosenfeld, one of the book's authors, in comments on his web log yesterday.
A second edition of the definitive book on Information Architecture for the web is underway. It should be out this summer -- around July, according to Lou Rosenfeld, one of the book's authors, in comments on his web log yesterday.
January 17, 2002
Information Architecture primer
Keeping hearing about "IA", and want to get up to speed? Check out John Rhodes' introductory article on the topic over at WebWord. He breaks it down into three basic components:
Keeping hearing about "IA", and want to get up to speed? Check out John Rhodes' introductory article on the topic over at WebWord. He breaks it down into three basic components:
- Orientation - determining your current position
- Navigation - helping people figure out where they want to go
- Routefinding - the art of finding the best path given your skills and equipment
January 16, 2002
How many ways can you fail...let me count the ways.
From USA Today: Designs that made consumers, reviewers cringe. What's amazing is how many of the products covered had huge design budgets and professional designers and engineers at the helm. Would be interesting to find out what they would do different if they knew then what they know now.
From USA Today: Designs that made consumers, reviewers cringe. What's amazing is how many of the products covered had huge design budgets and professional designers and engineers at the helm. Would be interesting to find out what they would do different if they knew then what they know now.
Agony of defeat for accessibility at the Olympics site (again)
Shirley Kaiser reviews the 2002 Olympics web site for accessibility on her blog, Brainstorms and Raves. I found it escpecially ironic (in a bad way) that even the Paralympics site doesn't follow accessibility guidelines. The Paralympics are the Olympics for athletes with a disability.
Shirley Kaiser reviews the 2002 Olympics web site for accessibility on her blog, Brainstorms and Raves. I found it escpecially ironic (in a bad way) that even the Paralympics site doesn't follow accessibility guidelines. The Paralympics are the Olympics for athletes with a disability.
January 15, 2002
This site best viewed in a movie theatre
"Say you went to the video store and rented "Apocalypse Now," a movie that truly deserves to be seen in a theater on a big screen with surround sound. But, not unreasonably, you wanted to watch it at home on your 21" TV. You put the tape in your VCR and saw: "To view Apocalypse Now you must have a 54" or larger screen equipped with Dolby® Digital SurroundSound."
"Would you be impressed with Francis Ford Coppola's artistic vision? Or would you be angry at his arrogance?"
"Say you went to the video store and rented "Apocalypse Now," a movie that truly deserves to be seen in a theater on a big screen with surround sound. But, not unreasonably, you wanted to watch it at home on your 21" TV. You put the tape in your VCR and saw: "To view Apocalypse Now you must have a 54" or larger screen equipped with Dolby® Digital SurroundSound."
"Would you be impressed with Francis Ford Coppola's artistic vision? Or would you be angry at his arrogance?"
Design Not Found
One of my favorite sites lately is "Design Not Found": a site dedicated to "the best and worst of contingency design." They point out good and bad design elements. For example they show how Amazon helps users who enter the wrong URL, or how Apple further frustrates users who are already having trouble.
What is contingency design? Here's the answer from the Design Not Found FAQ:
"Things go wrong online. Contingency design is the way the creators of the site right the ship. It includes error messaging, instructive text, information architecture, programming, and graphic design. Successful contingency design helps wayward surfers succeed at their goals in obtaining information, completing a transaction, or other tasks. Poor contingency design results in frustration and lost visitors."
Although I really like Design Not Found, I have to say the company that created Design Not Found, 37signals, has a home page that is pretty...uh, shall we say "overly-creative".
Update: 37signals redesigned their site and the old home page can be seen here.
One of my favorite sites lately is "Design Not Found": a site dedicated to "the best and worst of contingency design." They point out good and bad design elements. For example they show how Amazon helps users who enter the wrong URL, or how Apple further frustrates users who are already having trouble.
What is contingency design? Here's the answer from the Design Not Found FAQ:
"Things go wrong online. Contingency design is the way the creators of the site right the ship. It includes error messaging, instructive text, information architecture, programming, and graphic design. Successful contingency design helps wayward surfers succeed at their goals in obtaining information, completing a transaction, or other tasks. Poor contingency design results in frustration and lost visitors."
Although I really like Design Not Found, I have to say the company that created Design Not Found, 37signals, has a home page that is pretty...uh, shall we say "overly-creative".
Update: 37signals redesigned their site and the old home page can be seen here.
January 14, 2002
Usability is lacking in the consumer electronics world as well.
An LA Times article, The Curse of Complexity, shows how bad usability is becoming in electronics like TVs, satellite receivers and stereos.
Pretty good article, even with the obligatory 2 cents opinion from Jakob Nielsen. You have to wonder if Jakob accepts every possible interview opportunity...seems like he's the only usability "expert" professional writers can locate.
An LA Times article, The Curse of Complexity, shows how bad usability is becoming in electronics like TVs, satellite receivers and stereos.
Pretty good article, even with the obligatory 2 cents opinion from Jakob Nielsen. You have to wonder if Jakob accepts every possible interview opportunity...seems like he's the only usability "expert" professional writers can locate.
January 13, 2002
Divining standards from the most popular sites?
The Web Developer's Virtual Library (WDVL) presents an interesting survey of the most popular sites on the web. They compare the sites' designs, looking at fonts, colors, links, navigation, titles, page width, use of JavaScript, CSS and page download size.
While I'd never jump to the conclusion that being one of the most popular sites means you have the best design, I would concede that it means you probably haven't committed as many design sins as Boo.com. [Maybe we should just call design flaws "boo-boos"...]
I also think that many developers who are not experienced in the intricacies of UI design and usability should, whenever possible, copy aspects of well established designs rather than try to invent their own "creative" solutions.
I think it's interesting that Disney differs greatly from many of the other sites. I'm sure Jared would have a few words to say about that given that he seems to rip Disney in almost every interview, article, class, and book. You'd think Disney was the only bad site on the web.
The Web Developer's Virtual Library (WDVL) presents an interesting survey of the most popular sites on the web. They compare the sites' designs, looking at fonts, colors, links, navigation, titles, page width, use of JavaScript, CSS and page download size.
While I'd never jump to the conclusion that being one of the most popular sites means you have the best design, I would concede that it means you probably haven't committed as many design sins as Boo.com. [Maybe we should just call design flaws "boo-boos"...]
I also think that many developers who are not experienced in the intricacies of UI design and usability should, whenever possible, copy aspects of well established designs rather than try to invent their own "creative" solutions.
I think it's interesting that Disney differs greatly from many of the other sites. I'm sure Jared would have a few words to say about that given that he seems to rip Disney in almost every interview, article, class, and book. You'd think Disney was the only bad site on the web.
Usability web sites du jour
The National Cancer Institute's Usability site is a great reference. I especially like the way they try to sort through the clutter of sometimes conflicting usability guidelines available by assessing the amount and types of evidence to support specific guidelines.
Also, what's up with our buddy Keith over at UsableWeb? Looks like he's been too busy with the new day job at IBM to do much updating. He even calls it a "stale" site himself . I'll have to pester him about it at CHI. ...but if your just starting out, there's no better place to immerse yourself to learn about usability as it relates to the web.
The National Cancer Institute's Usability site is a great reference. I especially like the way they try to sort through the clutter of sometimes conflicting usability guidelines available by assessing the amount and types of evidence to support specific guidelines.
Also, what's up with our buddy Keith over at UsableWeb? Looks like he's been too busy with the new day job at IBM to do much updating. He even calls it a "stale" site himself . I'll have to pester him about it at CHI. ...but if your just starting out, there's no better place to immerse yourself to learn about usability as it relates to the web.
January 11, 2002
When you want to be a millionaire, you use Google
It's not a surprise, but more validation of something I've known for at least a few years: that Google is the best search engine out there.
"Google is so fast and accurate, it is used by millions of viewers of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire. Google's statistics show spikes in usage after each question." -- from an article in USA Today.
It's also worth pointing out that it's not JUST Google's technology that makes them the best --it's their design. Their interface, speed, accuracy and pure utility have all been "baked into" their design. The technical stuff (e.g. server farm) is just there to support the design.
Note that while some engines like Norhern Light are conceding that web advertising doesn't work, Google is proving that a better design can work. And it can provide something that both users and businesses want. In the last year I've probably clicked on more ads in Google's search results than on all other web sites combined...and I find stuff I like and need...therefore I click again in the future. Google doesn't annoy me with animation, popups or other trickery. They don't imply that the content I want is less important than some stupid banner ad that says "punch the monkey and win!". Rather, they deliver relevant ads with real content and build my trust.
Can you say "best practice"? I thought you could.
How would you feel if Google just vanished tomorrow? I think I'd feel like I lost a leg.
It's not a surprise, but more validation of something I've known for at least a few years: that Google is the best search engine out there.
"Google is so fast and accurate, it is used by millions of viewers of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire. Google's statistics show spikes in usage after each question." -- from an article in USA Today.
It's also worth pointing out that it's not JUST Google's technology that makes them the best --it's their design. Their interface, speed, accuracy and pure utility have all been "baked into" their design. The technical stuff (e.g. server farm) is just there to support the design.
Note that while some engines like Norhern Light are conceding that web advertising doesn't work, Google is proving that a better design can work. And it can provide something that both users and businesses want. In the last year I've probably clicked on more ads in Google's search results than on all other web sites combined...and I find stuff I like and need...therefore I click again in the future. Google doesn't annoy me with animation, popups or other trickery. They don't imply that the content I want is less important than some stupid banner ad that says "punch the monkey and win!". Rather, they deliver relevant ads with real content and build my trust.
Can you say "best practice"? I thought you could.
How would you feel if Google just vanished tomorrow? I think I'd feel like I lost a leg.
January 10, 2002
Buy our products and make us rich
A small software shop called OmniGroup uses a pretty catchy tone on their web site to get a leg up on the competition. The tone makes you want to buy their products because they are a small, likable company -- not some big faceless corporation. It's a great example of a small firm differentiating their brand image through the tone of writing on their site. Check out Peter's post that shows some of the text. Note you have to scroll down a bit.
Too bad they only develop Mac software. I'm just not cool enough for a Mac.
A small software shop called OmniGroup uses a pretty catchy tone on their web site to get a leg up on the competition. The tone makes you want to buy their products because they are a small, likable company -- not some big faceless corporation. It's a great example of a small firm differentiating their brand image through the tone of writing on their site. Check out Peter's post that shows some of the text. Note you have to scroll down a bit.
Too bad they only develop Mac software. I'm just not cool enough for a Mac.
January 09, 2002
Excuse me, your Johnson & Johnson is showing...
Maybe I should have named this post "crappy mega-company-site-o-the-day". Johnson & Johnson is #57 in the Fortune 500 according to Hoovers Online, but could their corporate home page suck any more?
Why would a designer say "let's bombard our customers and potential investors with no less than nine, yes *9*, drop-down navigation boxes"? Notice that some drop-downs only have one choice -- why not just use a simple link?! I suppose someone said something about "we have to be consistent for usability's sake", bastardizing the precepts of User Interface Engineering like a religious zealot quoting scripture out of context. Also note that the "Company websites" drop-down has 368 options in it!!!! This has got to be some kind of nightmarish UI record. See the linkable list of web sites for a sense of the number of sites in the drop-down. (Scroll down to see the full list.) Evidently they need to learn the concept of "Information Architecture".
Oh, did I forget to mention the auto-scrolling Java applet for news headlines? I love it when sites determine how fast I can read, and then give me a moving target to catch with the cursor. What fun!
The "Johnsons" also choose to speak to us in a very friendly tone (in bigger bolder text than everything else on the page): "You are solely responsible for your interactions with that website [that we link to above]." I understand the need to give the lawyers their space, but don't let them command the spotlight on your front doorstep.
Any consulting IAs or usability types looking for work might want to give J&J a ring...they could use the help.
Maybe I should have named this post "crappy mega-company-site-o-the-day". Johnson & Johnson is #57 in the Fortune 500 according to Hoovers Online, but could their corporate home page suck any more?
Why would a designer say "let's bombard our customers and potential investors with no less than nine, yes *9*, drop-down navigation boxes"? Notice that some drop-downs only have one choice -- why not just use a simple link?! I suppose someone said something about "we have to be consistent for usability's sake", bastardizing the precepts of User Interface Engineering like a religious zealot quoting scripture out of context. Also note that the "Company websites" drop-down has 368 options in it!!!! This has got to be some kind of nightmarish UI record. See the linkable list of web sites for a sense of the number of sites in the drop-down. (Scroll down to see the full list.) Evidently they need to learn the concept of "Information Architecture".
Oh, did I forget to mention the auto-scrolling Java applet for news headlines? I love it when sites determine how fast I can read, and then give me a moving target to catch with the cursor. What fun!
The "Johnsons" also choose to speak to us in a very friendly tone (in bigger bolder text than everything else on the page): "You are solely responsible for your interactions with that website [that we link to above]." I understand the need to give the lawyers their space, but don't let them command the spotlight on your front doorstep.
Any consulting IAs or usability types looking for work might want to give J&J a ring...they could use the help.
January 08, 2002
Amen to that...K.I.S.S. me
"Perhaps then we should design more simply? If we don't do any of the complex stuff then maybe it will display on everything just fine and we can sleep at night."
Edge of my Seat reminds us it doesn't have to look the same…
Note the elegant (and simple) CSS and XHMTL design. I count only two images on the site. Beautiful!
"Perhaps then we should design more simply? If we don't do any of the complex stuff then maybe it will display on everything just fine and we can sleep at night."
Edge of my Seat reminds us it doesn't have to look the same…
Note the elegant (and simple) CSS and XHMTL design. I count only two images on the site. Beautiful!
January 07, 2002
New ACM SIG-CHI mailing list
ACM's Special Interest Group (SIG) on computer-human interaction just announced a new listserv for announcements of resources of interest to the CHI community, for example: seminars, conferences, events, products, books, and web sites. Check out the CHI-Resources list page for more information. If you're looking for more community interaction and dialogue, check out the CHI-Web list it has about 3,200 subscribers.
ACM's Special Interest Group (SIG) on computer-human interaction just announced a new listserv for announcements of resources of interest to the CHI community, for example: seminars, conferences, events, products, books, and web sites. Check out the CHI-Resources list page for more information. If you're looking for more community interaction and dialogue, check out the CHI-Web list it has about 3,200 subscribers.
Big changes @ Yahoo
A new CEO, and new directions. Check out the NY Times article: Mr. Semel's Internet Search.
Notable: No more free listings on Yahoo? -- "And soon Yahoo will no longer provide a directory of all the sites on the Web. Rather, any company that wants its site listed on Yahoo will need to pay an annual fee."
A new CEO, and new directions. Check out the NY Times article: Mr. Semel's Internet Search.
Notable: No more free listings on Yahoo? -- "And soon Yahoo will no longer provide a directory of all the sites on the Web. Rather, any company that wants its site listed on Yahoo will need to pay an annual fee."
Handspring Treo: product of good design processes
I was impressed with the number of good design practices mentioned in an article about the new Handspring Treo, which combines PDA, wireless Internet access and a mobile phone
Prototyping: "You can sit around and argue for another hour, but with the prototype, it becomes obvious where you screwed up"
User profiling: "Novice users are supposed to find the most- used functions in an intuitive way, while more advanced users can find shortcuts through more complex button sequences."
Ethnographic research: "Celine Pering sat for hours near busy intersections or near entrances to subway stops in Europe and Japan, examining how people used their cell phones. She also hopped into the cars of friends and family of Handspring workers, snapping pictures and taking notes on drivers who were dialing."
Now I'm interested in actually playing with a Treo...I could use a better cell phone.
I was impressed with the number of good design practices mentioned in an article about the new Handspring Treo, which combines PDA, wireless Internet access and a mobile phone
Prototyping: "You can sit around and argue for another hour, but with the prototype, it becomes obvious where you screwed up"
User profiling: "Novice users are supposed to find the most- used functions in an intuitive way, while more advanced users can find shortcuts through more complex button sequences."
Ethnographic research: "Celine Pering sat for hours near busy intersections or near entrances to subway stops in Europe and Japan, examining how people used their cell phones. She also hopped into the cars of friends and family of Handspring workers, snapping pictures and taking notes on drivers who were dialing."
Now I'm interested in actually playing with a Treo...I could use a better cell phone.
January 04, 2002
It's all about who you know
I just found this awesome "people browser" on the CHIplace site. You could use the same type of navigation for a skills-based directory of employees or community members. Try the checkboxes on the right...you can combine them to find people with multiple roles (can do an "and" or "or" search)!
I just found this awesome "people browser" on the CHIplace site. You could use the same type of navigation for a skills-based directory of employees or community members. Try the checkboxes on the right...you can combine them to find people with multiple roles (can do an "and" or "or" search)!
Online shopping experiences getting worse. Amazon can learn from a few competitors
A recent NY Times article shows that setting and meeting customer expectations is critical to a successful online customer experience.
[A] "Jupiter survey found that one-third of online consumers expect a response to an e-mail inquiry within six hours, and that virtually all consumers expect a response within 48 hours. Nevertheless, the number of sites meeting this expectation, including retailers, travel suppliers and financial services companies, slipped to 22 percent in the fourth quarter of 2001, the lowest level since Jupiter began tracking customer service response times."
It also looks like Amazon is no longer the best total user experience on the web according to a Reuters article in the Chicago Tribune:
"While Amazon's mediocre B-minus grade earns it a ranking below e-tailers like Target.com, which got a B-plus rating on PlanetFeedback, and Drugstore.com Inc.'s A, it is hardly alone with its rising level of unhappy customers."
I also noticed that in the NYTimes article, Target.com responded to customers within 6 hours, while Amazon only responded within 24 hours. The PlanetFeedback ratings seem to support the idea that response times have an impact on overall customer satisfaction.
A recent NY Times article shows that setting and meeting customer expectations is critical to a successful online customer experience.
[A] "Jupiter survey found that one-third of online consumers expect a response to an e-mail inquiry within six hours, and that virtually all consumers expect a response within 48 hours. Nevertheless, the number of sites meeting this expectation, including retailers, travel suppliers and financial services companies, slipped to 22 percent in the fourth quarter of 2001, the lowest level since Jupiter began tracking customer service response times."
It also looks like Amazon is no longer the best total user experience on the web according to a Reuters article in the Chicago Tribune:
"While Amazon's mediocre B-minus grade earns it a ranking below e-tailers like Target.com, which got a B-plus rating on PlanetFeedback, and Drugstore.com Inc.'s A, it is hardly alone with its rising level of unhappy customers."
I also noticed that in the NYTimes article, Target.com responded to customers within 6 hours, while Amazon only responded within 24 hours. The PlanetFeedback ratings seem to support the idea that response times have an impact on overall customer satisfaction.
January 03, 2002
Is your web site self-centered?
The We We Copy Calculator tries to measure the text on your site for customer focus. It's an interesting reminder that the words we choose imply our internal focus. The text version (linked above) works better then the URL fetching version -- plus it gives more explanation of the words evaluated.
The We We Copy Calculator tries to measure the text on your site for customer focus. It's an interesting reminder that the words we choose imply our internal focus. The text version (linked above) works better then the URL fetching version -- plus it gives more explanation of the words evaluated.
If you keep saying these words, then the terrorists will have won.
In the wake of 9-11 these frigging words were banished with a surgical strike using doppler friendly fire.
In the wake of 9-11 these frigging words were banished with a surgical strike using doppler friendly fire.
January 02, 2002
Upcoming usability conferences
Make your travel plans now...
Make your travel plans now...
- CHI 2002 -- There will likely be another IA happy hour type of gathering with folks from the SIGIA mailing list similar to the one at CHI 2001. That was a very good time with great turnout.
- UPA 2002
- IBM's Make IT Easy 2002
- Usable Web Calendar of Events
December 31, 2001
A better Word?
Interesting review of Word X for the Mac in BusinessWeek. It covers various interface improvements and oversights.
Interesting review of Word X for the Mac in BusinessWeek. It covers various interface improvements and oversights.
December 30, 2001
Linux needs focus not whiners
I recently read an article in LinuxWorld by a guy who I think is very representative of many Linux (and other open-source software) zealots. I'm sick of constantly hearing about the Evil Empire from Linux and Open Source zealots. Grow up! Are you saying "The Man" is keeping you down? Do you take no responsibility for your current condition? Are the rules of the game unfair?
The reason Linux is floundering, if at all, is that there is no unified Linux vision. There is no strategy, no marketing -- not even a targeted market segment. Who is leading product development for Linux? Who has identified and profiled the target users and their needs? Can anyone tell me, even in general terms, who Linux is designed for? So much Open Source development relies on the concept of evolution -- but evolution takes too long. In business, "If you don't know where you're going, any road will get you there".
If success for Linux were defined as being a great, cheap, open source *NIX-like OS, then Linux has already succeeded many times over. The problem is that UNIX was never meant to be a broad-base desktop environment -- just like Cray's aren't built for gamers. So if you've defined Linux's success as domination of the desktop computing market, then you've probably started with the wrong product -- Linux was not designed as a desktop computing product for the masses. If Linux ever does become a Windows-killer for average computer users, then it will fail to deliver what most hard-core Linux users want today -- a free and powerful *NIX clone.
The question is not "Is Linux ready for Joe Sixpack?" nor "Are you ready for Linux on your desktop(s)?", but rather "Who's desktop is Linux designed for?". As far as I can tell, Linux is designed for people using Linux...since Linux developers add features they would like for themselves. Of course most business and home computer users are nothing like a highly technical software developer -- especially not in the ways they understand and use software.
The Linux community needs to determine what their goals are, get organized, and quit whining and blaming others for their situation. If all the energies of that community were focused, I'm sure they could make huge strides toward a better product and higher market share -- in whatever market they target.
Disclaimer: I'm not an MS hack -- I've installed and run both Slackware and Mandrake versions of Linux dating back to 1997...I use UNIX and Linux regularly. I was an OS/2 fan, and still crave the power of DOS and UNIX command line interfaces at times. I have seen the wonders that are PERL, awk, and grep and marveled at their beauty and power. And for all you conspiracy theorists: I also grimace at many of the things MS does. but Microsoft is an I/T vendor like all the others. I loved Netscape in the early days but was disappointed in them many times. I've seen both the up and down sides of IBM, Oracle, and other vendors...it's always a love/hate relationship. When usability and security take back seat to profits and market share, the idealist in me cringes -- but the realist in me reminds me that I'm free to NOT buy MS products, and I'm free to build my own alternative if I so choose.
I recently read an article in LinuxWorld by a guy who I think is very representative of many Linux (and other open-source software) zealots. I'm sick of constantly hearing about the Evil Empire from Linux and Open Source zealots. Grow up! Are you saying "The Man" is keeping you down? Do you take no responsibility for your current condition? Are the rules of the game unfair?
The reason Linux is floundering, if at all, is that there is no unified Linux vision. There is no strategy, no marketing -- not even a targeted market segment. Who is leading product development for Linux? Who has identified and profiled the target users and their needs? Can anyone tell me, even in general terms, who Linux is designed for? So much Open Source development relies on the concept of evolution -- but evolution takes too long. In business, "If you don't know where you're going, any road will get you there".
If success for Linux were defined as being a great, cheap, open source *NIX-like OS, then Linux has already succeeded many times over. The problem is that UNIX was never meant to be a broad-base desktop environment -- just like Cray's aren't built for gamers. So if you've defined Linux's success as domination of the desktop computing market, then you've probably started with the wrong product -- Linux was not designed as a desktop computing product for the masses. If Linux ever does become a Windows-killer for average computer users, then it will fail to deliver what most hard-core Linux users want today -- a free and powerful *NIX clone.
The question is not "Is Linux ready for Joe Sixpack?" nor "Are you ready for Linux on your desktop(s)?", but rather "Who's desktop is Linux designed for?". As far as I can tell, Linux is designed for people using Linux...since Linux developers add features they would like for themselves. Of course most business and home computer users are nothing like a highly technical software developer -- especially not in the ways they understand and use software.
The Linux community needs to determine what their goals are, get organized, and quit whining and blaming others for their situation. If all the energies of that community were focused, I'm sure they could make huge strides toward a better product and higher market share -- in whatever market they target.
Disclaimer: I'm not an MS hack -- I've installed and run both Slackware and Mandrake versions of Linux dating back to 1997...I use UNIX and Linux regularly. I was an OS/2 fan, and still crave the power of DOS and UNIX command line interfaces at times. I have seen the wonders that are PERL, awk, and grep and marveled at their beauty and power. And for all you conspiracy theorists: I also grimace at many of the things MS does. but Microsoft is an I/T vendor like all the others. I loved Netscape in the early days but was disappointed in them many times. I've seen both the up and down sides of IBM, Oracle, and other vendors...it's always a love/hate relationship. When usability and security take back seat to profits and market share, the idealist in me cringes -- but the realist in me reminds me that I'm free to NOT buy MS products, and I'm free to build my own alternative if I so choose.
You matter more than you'll ever know
All kinds of people die every day. Paul Battaglia just happened to die in the World Trade Center attacks. His Web page, however, lives on, complete with photos of his now-crumbled office and the view he once had. Since Battaglia was killed, people, including his parents, friends and family , have been remembering him in his guestbook. See the tragedy from a personal story is incredibly powerful.
The powerful part of it is not how he died or who he was or what he did, but realizing how many lives we each touch every day -- and that we make a difference. Whether you know it or not, you are valued and cherished by others. It's just amazing how we never get around to expressing that until after the car crashes, the doctors fail, or the bomb drops.
All kinds of people die every day. Paul Battaglia just happened to die in the World Trade Center attacks. His Web page, however, lives on, complete with photos of his now-crumbled office and the view he once had. Since Battaglia was killed, people, including his parents, friends and family , have been remembering him in his guestbook. See the tragedy from a personal story is incredibly powerful.
The powerful part of it is not how he died or who he was or what he did, but realizing how many lives we each touch every day -- and that we make a difference. Whether you know it or not, you are valued and cherished by others. It's just amazing how we never get around to expressing that until after the car crashes, the doctors fail, or the bomb drops.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)