Paul Boag writes about the current trend of poster-like web pages. As always, one must design for the medium, and a designer cannot treat a web page like a poster. Nevertheless, poster design has a few lessons for web design: “Stop designing websites, start designing posters.”

Mark Riggan takes the same approach, but from a different direction: “6 Things Video Games Can Teach Us About Web Usability.”

In this interview, Matthew Curry talks about running the website for Wiltshire Farm Foods, which sells food mostly to consumers over 80 years old, online. Targeting this audience means addressing the most extreme instances of users’ needs and disabilities. Yes, it’s possible—it’s all about usability: “Q&A: Matthew Curry on selling to older folks online.”

Landscape of world around is changing drastically with innovations like Sixth Sense, Project Natal , and multi-touch man-machine interfaces. Software is opening up new frontiers in collaboration. What is more, Cloud computing is changing the deployment and usage model of software taking it more towards a service paradigm.

I believe, these augurs well for the world at large as it brings technology closer to people. For me? I have different hats. Good for most hats but not so good for others

It is fascinating for the curious onlooker in me. It is good for my business as it provides new possibilities in improving my customers’ business. It is good for software developer in as I get to work with something new, different and probably even unique. It is a new challenge for the architect in me, as I grapple with the unknown.

It alarms the tester in me. I know, I will be in the middle of it in no time at all; even before the world comes to terms with it. The world understand the need for architect, developer and user to learn and adapt but the tester is expected to get into the situation and has to come to terms with it on their own. For instance, what are the techniques that hold good? Where are my tools?

Well, we like it or not, the cheese is moving. I am diving in…. better to be proactive than reactive, right?

I am happy to announce the latest version of the CuteTime jQuery plugin.

CuteTime provides the ability to easily…

• convert timestamps to ‘cuter’ language-styled forms (e.g. yesterday, 2 hours ago, last year, in the future!),
• customize the time scales and output formatting, and
• dynamically update the displayed CuteTime(s) upon request and/or automatically.

There was some excellent feedback from many of you following the initial release of CuteTime. And much of that feedback has been incorporated into this release.

Changes to Version 1.0.5…

• updated the ‘cutetime’ attribute to use HTML 5 compliant ‘data-timestamp’ custom attribute
• updates to settings are now non-constructive
• added translations.txt to the bundle to store all contributed translations of the cuteness translations (special thanks to Vincent Rolfs for providing the first translation, German)
• minified version now compiled using YUI Compressor

CuteTime is a customizable jQuery plugin that automatically converts timestamps to formats much cuter. Also has the ability to dynamically re-update and/or automatically update timestamps on a controlled interval.

If used by Selector, replaces the text of the provided object with a cuteTime.

If used as a function, returns a string containing a cuteTime version of the provided timestamp.

Implementation

$('.timestamp').cuteTime();
$('.timestamp').cuteTime({ /* OPTIONS * / });

cutetime_object = $('.timestamp').cuteTime();
cutetime_object.update_cuteness();

$.cuteTime('2009/10/12 22:11:19');

For more details about CuteTime and its implementation, visit http://tpgblog.com/CuteTime

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Add to Social Bookmarks:

One of the things I love about my local CVS is how open and airy the store feels. If I recall correctly, it’s part of the group of newer CVS stores that have lower aisle heights, brighter navigational signage, and generally less clutter than the old stores. Unfortunately, all of that changed when the holiday decorations went up a few days ago.

The low and airy aisles are now topped off and crammed with cheesy holiday signs and cheap gift ideas. The walls are covered with yet more holiday products. In all, the place looks just like your typical Walgreen’s or an older CVS, with the products from late-night infomercials seemingly dominating the merchandising strategy.

What went wrong? I’m guessing that CVS sends the same holiday decoration kit, and imposes the same merchandising plan, on all their stores — without regard for the differing store designs across the country. As a result, the generic holiday decorations overwhelm the store design in the newer and cleaner locations. That’s a shame, since it takes away the aesthetic and shopping enhancements that seemingly make the newer stores more enticing the shoppers. Hopefully someone from CVS will eventually take notice, and try something besides a one-size-fits-all approach in the future.

As a usability professional, it’s important to understand users from all walks of life. http://ow.ly/GZs5

An interesting observation on Google Wave adoption Google Wave Invites, the new zucchini . I too share author’s view that Google Wave is all about communication. I look forward to see that it catches on, and I hope that communication and collaboration tools of our times evolve in similar lines

Let me share an experience from the past.

I grew up in a remote town in a developing country (that is, India). Our life there was a lot different from the world we live in.

Fuel used at home during my early childhood days was wood and kerosene. I remember that Liquid Petroleum Gas was getting to be in popular use, during my school days. One of my cousins happened to be one of the early users to get the gas connection (gas connection being issued by a Government agency).
Interesting twist to the story is that they surrendered the connection back finding it to be more of nuisance.

More than tool, its application is important. A tool helps when we understand its strength and apply the tool for a purpose leveraging its strength. What I find interesting about Google Wave is that it renders itself to human thought process and dynamics of group discussion, both of which are typically non-linear. It should help when used in group processes; not necessarily a replacement of email and IM

Success depends on adoption and large scale application, ensuring critical mass. Has it come ahead of time? Not necessarily. I hope people appreciate the strength of Google Wave, in its own right, beyond the hype. It is a new kind of communication/collaboration tool that we have seen so far

Cooking dinner. Steam broccoli and grilled chicken. Only one problem. The Broccoli Must Die: http://ow.ly/GX5N

Currently there are a number of similar approaches addressing grandfathered conditions. Limitations which have guided online shopping experiences.

It’s important to address the consequences of dealing with grandfathered conditions as the solutions have been less than ideal brand experiences: credit fraud fear, established instore expectations, payment system introductions, the generate confusion of not insisting on familiarity between consumer and shopping experience but rather insisting unfamiliarity have led to time consuming and brand depreciating demands on the consumer.

That said, it would take a marketing proposition and not a technology answer to create a true shopping experience online. Using the available tools. Not impossible, but effort intensive if your firm has invested heavily in the technology base, but there are always solutions…

Consumer Demands

Online consumer requirements have for the most part been task-oriented and are not inline with intuitive shopper behavior – again due to grandfathered conditions. It’s important to remember that as we have centuries developing behaviours and interests within markets, these activities have also found incorporation within a consumer’s life. Therefore, there is opportunity in following them. These consumer behaviours provide for non-consumer activity; life planning, time management, social activity, family orientation, value support, etc…

This isn’t a new observation, but the interpretation by online effort appears to be a less-than appreciative perspective.

Instore, so called offline environments, have the more fluid brand experience. What steps or directions are online displays undertaking? Recently, a few have begun using and AJAX enabled “drop” off area to address the shortcoming of e-cart solutions. 

Nonetheless, these “drop” offs mimic more closely a consumer’s behavior instore, where collecting articles is a primary instore behaviour. It follows a shopper pushing a cart until checkout, rather than having to return the cart as a result of having selected an article. Very counter-intuitive to do otherwise, very dead in its approach to brand building.

A truly integrated online-cart, therefore has to begin from the landing page, or from a lead in that provides information on the consumer. It also has greater room to employ a sales strategy supporting marketing effort, inlife, rather than it being so focused on resurrecting the diminishing consumer interest. For instance, current Sales messaging strategies, although they provide support, in these dead end areas, fail to engage consumers along the established marketing proposition. Rather, generally speaking, they’re design to hawk a ware at the checkout counter and suggest that customer service is supporting their long term interests. Essentially asking them to reconsider leaving. 

This is a enormous misstep in brand building as it inaccurately addresses consumer behaviour. It is more recuperative in nature than confident in positioning. 

The counter argument needless to say surfaces along catching the consumer well within the experience. This is a wasted consideration. Sales strategies at this level of the experience do the opposite. By enticing the consumer into believe something else remains to be purchased Effort and Immediacy become barriers. At checkout, after which a consumer has been led through a time consuming process, each step removing them from the shopping environment, the door becomes an increasingly attractive option.

Instore, the activity of checkout is surrounded by the experience. This raises an interesting observation. Psychographics play a huge role within instore shopping. They are what I’ll call dynamic data, by-products which lead to insight of a consumer’s extended interests: They can be formed around notions of: Browsing for social communication. Social survey purchasing. Brand relevance for providing diversity and social currency. Personal management, as well as research towards the fulfillment of a number of personal interests. With or without purchasing an item.

Moreover, the timing of these events: Time at purchase, developing histories revealing Short- and Long- term goals can lead to defining a customer service strategy aligned with personal value. All of these brand building opportunities exist within any single one visit. Yet, as long as task-orientation drives traffic through an experience these by-products will not have a natural environment within which they can surface.

Community as a Solutions

I recently reviewed a video where social networking was touted as a great way for consumers to connect with the brand. Via the employee who is empowered through sales activity, a channel for customer service and reciprocation appeared established, forthcoming. Great!, you’d think, but it’s dishonest. There are several proposed expectations which are not true. Return for Participation and Company Flexibility. 

We would all like to think that like a very few, those intimately tied to consumer health, for instance, replying expeditiously with innovation and immediate product address, consumer connections occurs. The truth is, the bulk of firms have very few mechanisms in place to facilitate this – Stock holders, responsibility for retaining a solvent firm, and employment are prohibitively expensive negotiating tools. Thus, these are barriers to replying individually to consumer requests and incorporating interest, theirs, within whole product directions – Customer service, yes. Product provisions, no, not now, or yet. Process orientation, yes, in time. Therefore, it’s dishonest to tout complete brand access. 

Is it wishful thinking a community tool can resolve the issues mentioned above, drive interest, hold a consumer, ensure a sale? It can’t, nor can it really. Community tools, it should be noted, although they generate interest, that interest is self-depreciating. Contributing to a commercial forum exhausts the interest. As they are not political venues for expression, interest in the brand, also diminishes. The life of the activity, in effect, ensures its exhaustion as there is little transferrable motivation to continue – unless of course the brand is failing on all fronts and complaints are necessary to bring this to corporate attention. 

Single minded shopping scenarios insisting checkout, and community tools distracting the experience poorly address branding. A branded shopping experience, including checkout should begin at the point where relevance begins assembling. “Trial” or “Investigation” areas/landings can then become appropriate as they mimic carts and dressing rooms. However, as instore, the experience is focused on pursuing the experience and not checking out. The course from here is obvious: Brand unique experiences which retain consumers while building general interests along serviceable routes.

It may be time to replace the general positioning strategy of online displays from “acceptable for everyone” with “confident branded experience”.

The remaining tools, features and employment strategies will enjoy a correct conditioning rather than addressing an existing condition. More importantly it creates a vehicle for correcting brand parity amoungst the various online entities. 

Confidence Shopping

I’ve always been fascinated by how women shop. More to the point, why they shop. Online, there must be, I hope, experiences which mimic this. I have yet to find one.  

Addressing the question above, how and why do women shop, I’ve always found female behaviour, instore, equally interesting. They are perhaps the barometer for a brand experience.

Another like observation is, I found, within large stores, for instance, an REI environment. It’s activity is outdoor wear and gear. 

A consumer walks through the aisle and as we elevate ourselves through the various strata ladders, those which enable mobility and affluence within our lives, the question which came to mind was, What is the relationship between an end-island and an aisle’s value proposition – as a brand building event. 

Do customers completing an aisle adventure where “durability”, “challenge” and “personal potential” value propositions provide resounding answers of confidence and the brand’s acknowledgement of their being an outdoor adventurer? Or, as they approach the end island display have they been exposed to assumptions leveling them to accepting a bulk, cheap end-aisle item as the only relevance they’ll share with the brand.  

The latter is what I believe accosts consumers online. Though an item is in hand, the end-aisle messaging, sales messaging, places shoppers in a less than comfortable position. It’s very inconsiderate. 

Addressing again female shopping behaviour, in addressing a brand along any of its relevance points, social mechanism begin to surfaces. These do not dissipate in consistency or effectiveness over time. Beyond, “One bad experience, never again”, they become tangent points for social activity. Not all negatively leverage brand failures, but they do enjoy airtime which is lost air time, lost potential, lost equity, lost opportunity for word of mouth transference – each which could positively communicate your brand’s value. 

Needless to say, relying on “community tools” is a funny idea. It begs the parody which community? Here on the internet or the hundreds of thousands micronets walking about. Sharing their experience to their captive audience. 

Yet “viral” activity is an insistence. Again, but from a different direction, an exhausted interest also exhaust the equity built to that point. Communities are customer service functions and should always reinforce developing shoe-ins for the brand – new customer referrals from existing customer satisfaction.

Recentemente a Brastemp lançou no mercado o refrigerador “Inverse”, cujo slogan é: “Saia do Óbvio” e com a chamada: “Assim tudo que você mais usa fica ao alcance das suas mãos”. Ao projetar esse refrigerador a empresa inovou pois inverteu a posição do freezer e da geladeira dos refrigeradores até então conhecidos pelo público brasileiro. No Inverse, o freezer que geralmente é menos utilizado está posicionado na parte inferior;  e a geladeira que é mais utilizada pela maioria dos usuários está localizada na parte superior, proporcionando um acesso mais fácil e mais intuitivo por parte dos usuários.

Provavelmente não deve ter sido o cliente da Brastemp que demonstrou essa necessidade, já que todos os refrigeradores funcionavam de forma semelhante e os usuários já estavam mais que acostumados com esse mecanismo / forma de uso.  No entanto, é nossa função enquanto designers de interação, observar como os usuários interagem com o mundo e com as soluções que projetamos e sempre buscar facilitar a vida deles, inovando e ousando caso seja necessário.

Com essa atitude, a Brastemp antecipa as necessidades e desejos do consumidor,  surpreendendo-o de maneira positiva e agregando um enorme valor à marca. Mas essa solução é tão obvia que nos perguntamos: como ninguém nunca pensou nisso antes? E é isso que devemos ter em mente ao projetarmos experiências: devemos buscar o óbvio e  algumas vezes desapegar de conceitos / formas de uso já estabelecidos, nos perguntando se o modelo existente é de fato o mais fácil e o que agrega maior valor à marca do nosso cliente.

Então meus amigos, sigamos o exemplo da Brastemp: geladeira em cima, freezer embaixo! Boa semana a todos

Link: Brastemp Inverse

Usability is a simple word that’s tough to pin down.

If you define it as “capable of being used” the implication is, you can either use something, or not. Pretty cut and dry.

Ah, but there’s more to it. A car, for instance, can operate perfectly fine; or it can start and stall and start up again. While you can still use the vehicle, it’s hardly an ideal ride.

Same goes for a web site — your preference is for a smooth experience.

But how do you know if your web site is a well-oiled machine rather than a clunker? Not by looking, that’s for sure.

You are not the target audience

Having what appear to be the right elements does not ensure your site offers an ideal user experience; as in, it’s easy to use and intuitive.

The sticky wicket here is, because you created the site, it all makes perfect sense. Your judgment is clouded by already knowing what everything means and how everything is supposed to work.

News flash: You are not the target audience — web visitors ultimately decide if a site works. If they stall out, they’re apt to go elsewhere.

The do-it-yourself method to web usability testing

You can spend a lot of money to hire someone to conduct usability tests of your web site where techniques may involve sophisticated labs and analysis. That’s great if you can afford it. Budgets, however, often don’t allow for the expense.

Still, it’s important to do some kind of usability testing prior to launch. You didn’t put up a site just for show, right? You want it to deliver the goods; tell your story, sell your product or service; in a way that’s meaningful and satisfies website visitors.

The good news is, you (yes, you) can do a decent job of usability testing for low or no cost. You don’t even have to test a lot of people. Patterns in response arise after questioning five to eight individuals.

Notice I said individuals. The best way to do this is one person at a time; where the participant is comfortably sitting at a computer while you’re observing how they use and perceive the site. Groups or even two people at once are not as accurate because one person will influence the other(s). It’s not intentional on anyone’s part, even so, that’s what happens. One at a time, got it?

Also, if you have a few target audiences, or personas, as is now the popular parlance, test five per persona. Each group has different expectations — you want to see if the site satisfies these varied wants and needs.

When soliciting volunteers — yes, many will do this for free, just ask — indicate you’re looking for feedback on a web project. As opposed to saying you’re doing usability testing. Testing implies there are right/wrong answers and the word usability is not commonly understood.

The key is to ask open-ended questions

To prepare for testing create a set of questions. You can have a pre-determined order, however, you are also reacting to feedback, so be flexible — better to ask questions in a way that makes sense for how your test is going rather than stick to a rigid scheme. The main thing is to reiterate there are no right or wrong responses, and you must ask non-leading open-ended questions.

So, rather than, “Do you think this is a good design?” go with “What is your impression of this site?”

The response may or may not have to do with design. That’s fine. You’ll find out what people think from a variety of perspectives  — extremely valuable information. This will also open up other avenues for questioning.

If, after asking, “What is your impression of this site?” the reply is, “I like it.” Then you go, “Why?”   On the other hand, if the response is “It’s confusing,” ask “How so?”

More good questions:

• What do you think this site is for? Why do you think so?
• Who do you think would use this site? Why?
• What kind of product/service do you think is being offered? Why?
• What do you think this button/link is for?
• What do you like best/least about the site?
• If you could improve one thing about the site what would it be?

Don’t take it personally

Take notes. Stay objective. Remain neutral regardless of feedback — never argue with, praise or help the participant. Do not explain why something is the way it is. You’re looking to extract information. If a person asks “What’s this for?” respond, “What do you think it’s for?

You can ask participants what they think a particular button or link is for, to discern user expectation. If a person thinks a link will lead to something it does not, ask why they think it will go to there. This helps refine nomenclature. Even seemingly obvious words may not be clear to your audience.

When trying to determine if web architecture offers a logical path, or looking to see how users would likely complete a task, ask “How would go about doing/finding “x”? (fill in “x” as applies to specific circumstance). Closely observe the process and make note of areas of difficulty — here’s where you’ll want to make adjustments before the site goes live.

Test early, and preferably more than once

It’s ideal to catch problems early on, before too much coding is done. In fact, for truly low budget early-stage tests use Photoshop versions of web pages.

If you can manage a series of tests, all the better. Use static pages to start, get feedback, make adjustments and re-test to see how the changes fare. Hold off on the actual development (coding), until you feel you are close to the end-result, or at least as far as you can go until you need to test out a series of process flows.

It’s good to know what’s right, and even better to know what’s wrong

While it’s nice to hear what’s right with your site, it’s equally important, if not more so, to learn where things fall short. Where are the trouble-spots, design issues and misinterpretation of intent?

Now, go forth and test. Know in your head to welcome responses that point to problems. Discover glitches and make fixes. After all, once the site goes live, hang-ups and stall-outs represent lost opportunity.

For additional resources visit:

Usabilty.gov: Your guide for developing usable and useful Web sites

Useit.com: Jakob Nielsen’s Website

Usereffect blog

- Deni Kasrel

Is this information helpful? Do you have experience with do-it-yourself web usability testing? How’d it go? Comments welcome.

Related article:

The Most Overlooked Step To Website Success

Microsoft’s Future Vision – Interfaces of the future (A Must See) http://ping.fm/lgI1a

Would a professor just pick any student to come up and teach an important class? Would administrators send in students with no particular training to run a vital student-affairs program? Of course not. So why, in higher education, do so many think bringing in students with no real knowledge of Web standards to do a Web page is an acceptable solution? As if the Web were a hobby, not a profession?

With today being Blue Beanie Day in support of Web standards, it’s as good a day as any to argue that working with the Web is, indeed, a profession. It’s becoming the most important avenue of communication in higher education. Many of us seek out top conferences and training on usability, techniques and practices. We scour the Web for great sites and blogs telling us the latest developments. We amass networks of fellow Web professionals to broaden our knowledge base. So when we hear from time to time that someone in an office has just hired a student who wants to design a Flash-based splash page with animated clip art graphics, I think it’s fair to be concerned.

Let’s not let Web quality continue to live the life of Rodney Dangerfield. The Internet is no longer in its infancy where chaos ruled. We’ve come to learn some techniques and tactics work best, even as we leave plenty of room for creativity. Those using the Web as a profession should take up the cause of standards. If not us, then whom? When we create Web sites that our users can easily access and navigate, and when we provide positive user experiences, everyone benefits.

I was really surprised yesterday when I decided to boot (BootStrap is the most technical and original term for booting up) from my Mac OS 9.1 iMac install on my G3 B&W Mac to run disk repair. The reason for this surprise was I have the Ati Readeon 9200 Mac edition PCI card installed and the specs state the minimum Mac OS is 9.2 for this card to run. I’ve tried to boot from this Disc with this configuration before and it didn’t work! Oh, BTW, 9.2.2 is the OS on the G4. The 9.1 iMac install was the disk I had handy, so that’s what I tried! It worked!

I also booted from the Norton System Works CD to run AV, System utilities, and a benchmarking utility that really didn’t seem to get the record straight! It was reporting long discontinued Macs out performing my G3. That’s baloney! For a G3 this machine performs very well and I’d bet $10 this Mac can out perform any pre-G3 Mac running without a CPU upgrade, like my G3.

Anyway, I just wanted to update on this as this is something that’s never happened before with the booting. I also have a eMac 9.2 OS install that I got from, I think Fastmac.com and the 9.1 I purchased from OWC (Macsales.com) along with the G3 that’s performed so very well.

On a side note I wonder why the G3s where ever discontinued. They where a very nice processor and they didn’t run so awfully hot as their predecessors the now ever lonelier G4s and then finally the G5 (The last nail in the coffin). Have you read any of the horror stories about the G5’s reliability issues? And I’m not talking about serious gamers who beat the crap out of their Macs either. I’m talking about the Pros who use them for everyday tasks such as video and photo editing. I feel sorry for those guys who spent 3000 dollars on a G5 rig and shortly after the warranty ends their System starts breaking down like a junk pile.

Then there’s those knuckle heads who had to have a G5 even after the Intel transition was announced. I know I’m a bit harsh, but really. Why on earth would you spend $3000 on something that’s been given a death sentence to go obsolete sooner than it ever should? And you know what? It did! The last G5s that came out came out with Mac OS 10.4.x. (The .x if you don’t know means the update number, what ever it is.)

The latest OS from Apple for Macs is 10.6.x (I don’t currently know what the .x is for Leopard (10.6). And the G5s can’t run it, they’re stuck forever and that roadblock is Mac OS 10.5.8 or 10.4.11 (now obsolete of support mostly but not user use preference as all things computer)

Did you know the Latest intel Mac minis out perform the last line of G5s. Oh, OK, maybe they don’t get as many FPS on Unreal Tournament 2004 as a Quad G5 with a $500 video card! Aw, shucks! The mini still kicks the G5 in the pants up and down the road and back again! Keep in mind that PowerPC support is being dropped little by little and here and there for major Apps such as Divx, other Sharewares, games (so what), and of course the most important, Mac OS 10.6 Leopard

And then there’s those guys on MacWorld who still insist that a Mac mini is a tipping point choice of buy  because it can reasonably play a FPS war game, it makes a mini a good deal.

I really don’t get their reasoning other than boosting their ego and wallets. Like I’ve said before, if you want a good gaming rig, why not get a PS3, Xbox 360, or at least a Nintendo Wii.

One thing that sticks out for me with the mini is it has one whole FireWire port! Like, totally wow, man!! Can I, I, I, like share it with everyone or what dude??!! Yeah, yeah folks. I know, I know. It’s a green machine and it saves you cashola. Yeah, I know, it’s a Steve Jobs world wonder, but if I wanted a green machine any greener I’d buy a house plant with pretty purple flowers that smell sweet. Anyway it’s fast and I’d buy one just to save some more cashola on my phone bill with MagicJack and take a trip to Cali and go surfing all day. Oops, well maybe not the trip to Cali as that would take my savings out the window.

M

This has been something that has cropped up for me a number of times over the past few days. The value of passion as it comes across to me is a very human quality that can’t really be measured and tracked through a spreadsheet but can impact the bottom line dramatically. It’s one of those intangibles that business has to be aware of and consider, otherwise it’ll be too late.

For me the easiest description comes through music. For example, Britney Spears’ Three single. Perfectly fine popcorn music but thoroughly lacking in any passion, despite the content of the lyrics. It’s an exercise in marketing. I’m sure the people involved in the exercise have a passion for the project/track but fundamentally it is borne out of a marketing plan, a demographic study etc. Those lyrics mean nothing to her, she didn’t write them because she’s fascinated by threesomes, is experimenting with her sexuality etc, it’s cynical, obvious and demeaning. Has it been a hit, sure, everyone makes out like a bandit with cash in hand I’m sure. But, everyone feels a little soiled by it and Britney as an ‘artist’ is somewhat diminished by it – sure, you could argue she’s not an artist in the first place etc etc but her next single/album will come with a question mark in the mind of the listener.

With Britney again, her tour is lip-synching. So what, you might argue, she’s a performer not a Singer. However, what was the reaction of some of the crowds? They walked out, it was wrong it was a mechanical answer to an emotional problem. So what if she gets out of breath or bums a note, the point is that connection between ‘performer’ and audience was broken. Will she have any problems selling tickets? Probably not, but not as many the next time and fewer again the following time and so on.

Just lately, I’ve come across a number of items that are the opposite of that. Paul Newman’s food line, the Crank films, The Swell Season, Toyota’s manufacturing process. All completely disparate activities but fundamentally sharing in the same thing – passion. Whether to make the best food with all natural ingredients, to go so far over the top in making a story for film, to make raw, emotive music or simply to make the perfect car. All of them, whether individually or collectively, come from a straight human emotion applied to a ‘business’ context.

It’s what drives me nuts about Rupert Murdoch and his empire. He and it are not evil per se but they spoil everything they touch by draining it dry and cynically deriving as much income as possible without giving anything back to those they’re wringing dry. Sport, news, TV, film – they’re all spotting with good things and good people but at the heart is that dry, methodical and mechanical process. His is a passion for winning, making money etc. All fine and good but surely, little by little his products are losing ground, little pieces falling off the empire every day as readers, viewers and consumers drift away one at a time.

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with making money, I’m as much a capitalist as the next man but there’s something important in the way you go about it. If you don’t add value to something, if it’s not rich in deep value for the consumer, day by day it’ll wither and die.

Google is an interesting case in point. Fundamentally, the company is adding value for the end-user in the majority if things it does. It’s thriving, making money hand over fist. Not everything it does is good but there’s a touching innocence about most of its works. There’s a passion in adding value to simple experiences like search and that value is worth hundreds of dollars per share.

Apple is another major business case in point. Again, some fairly stupid mistakes are made but the passion in adding value through usability, beauty and simplicity has seen the company return from the brink of extinction to fairly rude health. Yup, it, Apple, screws you on price but the value of their products goes well beyond the dollars and cents. Brand values etc to one side, you feel good owning and using Apple products and that stems from the likes of Steve Jobs and Jonathan Ives (and countless others) imbuing those products with a passion for quality, functionality and beauty.

There are many others, the last two just spring to mind as they’re closest to hand.

I’m working with a company at the moment who are entirely focused in sharing their passion for what they do. It’s got me excited to be involved in the way I am. It makes me want to add whatever quality I can to the process. The end result will be great and whatever flaws may exist will be overlooked and forgiven by users because at the heart of the end product will be a passion and that will add that special value that most people instinctively sense and are drawn to.

Maybe that’s the value of passion. People engage, enjoy and forgive whatever small issues there may be, whereas when the business, process or product is driven by cold hard calculations, it’s all to human to recoil and reject.

A good case in point and much better written: Miranda Sawyer on Simon Cowell

The ubiquitous keyboard and mouse that have dominated computing for the last 30 years are getting some company and competition as gesture interfaces become a reality outside the test lab.

Microsoft’s Project Natal for Xbox 360 promises an immersive user experience in which the interface becomes more invisible than ever before. With Natal the user is the interface. Looking to take the user experience far beyond Nintendo’s Wii, Natal uses a 3-D depth camera and microphone for motion, gesture, and audio input. Xbox claims Natal will let people steer an on-screen race car by moving their arms in steering motions and use gestures like actual kicks to move a soccer ball on screen. In one demo, Natal recognizes a person’s face and automatically logs them into their Xbox profile. Think Wii without the controller. Wikipedia has a brief article on Natal’s background and technology.

And if you think this is a just going to be a high-tech gamer toy, look at the opportunities for communication and commerce in this post on Engadget. Imagine manipulating your TV’s menu system with the same gestures you’d use on an iPhone. No convoluted controller or touch screen required. It’s like Minority Report in your media room.

Motion-detecting interfaces aren’t limited to efforts as ambitious as Natal. Here’s a look at Pek Pongpaet using the accelerometer in the WiiMote to control an on-screen X-Wing fighter. Many areas of education, from aeronautics to architecture, could be revolutionized with touchable and movable experiences. Pek also did a recent demo at DePaul University in Chicago where he used the Wii Balance Board to connect to a website through WiiFlash Server to steer a car on screen by leaning in the direction he wanted to steer the car.

It’s clear new ways of human-computer interaction are coming thanks to multi-touch UIs and gestural interfaces. Aching gamers’ thumbs everywhere will be rejoicing.

Taken from http://scienceblogs.com/chaoticutopia/

It is easy to mistake a programming task to be simple. This is especially true in user interface.

The executive is looking at the “trivial” two fields login screen and innocently estimates it to be a two hours job.

This is a common mistake, similar to some extent to The Three Body Problem in physics. Taking a simple, solvable problem and changing one parameter can result in an exceptionally complex problem. While the two-body problem is integrable and its solutions completely understood, solutions of the three-body problem may be of an arbitrary complexity and are very far from being completely understood. See a nice graphic example.

Login screens are not that complex, but take a look at the next example and see how many open questions\bugs can you come up with ?

Simple Login

1. Is it “Log-in” “Login” or “Log in”?
2. Is it clear that email is equivalent to user name?
3. Do you need a “Cancel” button?
4. Should there be a visible mark for the mandatory fields? Which mark?
5. Seems like a “Forgot My Password” link and screen are missing.
6. Is a Captcha needed to fight bots?


Simple Login Form

7. Is validation done on the client side or the server-side ?
8. How is the feedback given to the user? Where?
9. Security demands that we don’t tell the user what’s the exact problem (missing email or password). Usability does.
10. Where is the sign-up page? Where does Log-Out go out to?
11. “Email” , “eMail” or “email”?


Nice Login Form

12. Do we use SSL for the login but move to clear HTTP for the rest of the application ?
13. Cross browser testing?
14. How shall we do unit testing for the screen?
15. It turns out that validating an email address can be a nightmare.
16. After the user made a mistake, which events clear the warning notification?
17. Shall we support Hebrew? How about the German umlaut?
18. Shouldn’t “email” and “password” be left aligned?
19. Is the colon required after “Login”?
20. Do we want to limit the length for any of the fields? Minimum password strength?

Notice how we got to twenty non trivial questions without discussing the actual user authentication or the graphic design, which can be huge topics on their own.

My simplistic recommendation is to use of the shelf components whenever possible and go through the annoying step we used to call “feature design” even in this agile world we live in.

Sample Login Screen

Say you walk into a restaurant and ask for a table. If you have a medium or large party, perhaps four people or more, there’s a good chance they’ll ask you a simple question: “Is your entire party here?” Answer “Yes”, and they’ll seat you promptly. Answer “No”, and they’ll instruct you to wait around and check back with them once everyone in your group has arrived.

It makes perfect sense why restaurants do this. The last thing they want is to seat a few people, and have them sit around for 15 or 30 or 45 minutes waiting for the others to arrive. Such a group would be consuming a scarce resource — table space — without contributing much in revenue during that time. Granted, they might order a few drinks or an appetizer, but I guess it’s not enough to make up for the regular, non-delayed party whose table they’d be taking up.

But there’s one kink in this approach: the math only works when the restaurant is nearly full. If there are plenty of tables to spare, why relegate the incomplete parties to a waiting area? Wouldn’t it be better to just seat them in a table where they can get settled and order a few things? The answer seems obvious to me.

If you think about it, virtually every restaurant has certain days and times when business is slow. During those times, asking “Is your entire party here?” is just silly. Try restricting the full-party question to busy periods only, and I bet customers will use that extra table time to spend more money.

“Is that him?” the 70-years young father asked me as he peered carefully at the computer monitor.

“Yes!  Here’s the camera,” I said tapping the web cam, “Sit down right here.”

Suddenly the picture on the screen moved and a voice said, “Hey, Dad!”

Dad smiled.  He was seeing his son, a deployed solider, for the first time in 6 months.

His son’s hair was significantly longer than normal and Dad laughed as he shouted back at the computer, “Hey, I know a good barber.”

The shouting continued as father and son reunited on Thanksgiving Day.

“You look good.  I was really worried about you when I left, man, but you look good,” said the relieved son.  Before deploying his father was gravely ill.  So seriously that he wondered if he would get to see his father again.

Yesterday, they both got to see each other again.

When the video chat ended Dad said to me, “Wow!  The technology is just amazing.”

And indeed it is.  Especially if you’ve never seen it before.

I am thankful video chat made the reunion possible.

I am thankful for the opportunity to see the delight and awe on a 70 year old’s face.

I am thankful for the men and women who bravely serve this country.

To the treadmill http://ow.ly/GgYE

You need to STOP AND READ THIS. Increased emotionality = primes brain for memory/memorable experience. So Move Me! http://ping.fm/9Ygnm

Every week I read thousands of blog posts. Here, for your weekend enjoyment, are some highlights from my recent reading, for you.

	On Starting Up… http://www.markpeterdavis.com/getventure/2009/11/bootstrapping-vs-venture-funding.html On choosing the right financing strategy.
	On Design & Product Experience… http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2009/11/iterative-web-app-new-look-for-gmail.html The iterative and incremental design process at Google mobile and Gmail.
	On Modular Innovation… http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/linkedin_platform_pros_and_cons.php A look at LinkedIn’s Modular Innovation progress.

Have a great weekend!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Add to Social Bookmarks:

It’s been a bit quiet on the blog recently, but that’s because we’ve been hard at work improving Smarkets. The latest releases saw some pretty big improvements all round, but in this post I’ll talk a little about the bet slip in particular.

Original bet slip

The bet slip (or widget) is the area on the right of the screen which displays the current status of the users matched and unmatched bets. The piece above the bet slip is called the user card and this is where we display the profile links, avatar and account balance. As you can see, the original user card was pretty hard to read.

The bets used to be grouped by ‘matched’ and ‘unmatched’ with the name of the bet and the amount remaining. A matched bet was where 100% of your stake had been matched by other Smarkets users, an unmatched bet was one where only part of your bet had been matched.

We knew the look and feel needed updating but, after some user testing (conducted on a laptop with rough mock-up prototypes in Omnigraffle), we came across a lot of confusion about what ‘matched’ and ‘unmatched’ bet actually meant. So we went back to the drawing board.

New bet slip!

First we reorganised the user card so the avatar was bigger and the account balance easier to read. Then we tidied up the betting slip with a new layout, removed some of the visual clutter and created cleaner headings. Rather than list the full team names in the match, we’re now showing a short code version of the team names to make it easier to scan.

We’ve also introduced new groupings. All your active bets are shown together at the top of the slip. If your bet isn’t fully matched by other Smarkets users then you’ll see the percentage matched in red. You can cancel unmatched bets with a little cross icon and if you’ve made bets at different odds then you’ll see a pop up window asking you which bet you want cancelled.

Rather than digging around account history pages to find out what happened to your settled bets, underneath your active bets we show your two most recently settled bets along with how much you won or lost.

These changes will make it a lot easier to see the state of your bets, but we’re always interested in your feedback so get in touch.

Twitter jest obecnie jednym z najgorętszych tematów e-marketingowych, a ja trafiłem na ciekawe badania dotyczące użyteczności tego serwisu przeprowadzone w lipcu 2009 przez SURL. Pokazuje one na jakie problemy w korzystaniu z Twittera napotykają nowi użytkownicy.

Badanie użyteczności obejmowało szereg dość prostych operacji. Ogólny poziom satysfakcji użytkowników był zaskakująco niski – 38.46%, a generalnie badani stwierdzili, że Twitter jest mało intuicyjny w użytkowaniu.

Dwie operacje sprawiły badanym szczególne problemy:
1) wysłanie tweet’a do konkretnego użytkownika,
2) odpowiedź na tweet od konkretnego użytkownika.

Twitter - problemy z użytecznością

Jak widać interfejs Twittera sprawia nowym użytkownikom wiele problemów, a w szczególności jego język, który jest specyficzny dla serwisu. Różnice między niektórymi funkcjonalnościami nie były zbyt klarowne, tak samo jak używana symbolika “@” przy kierowaniu informacji do danego odbiorcy, czy “#” dla zaznaczania tematu wiadomości.

Duża część badanych odnalazła analogię między “What are you doing?” Twittera, a “What’s on your mind?” na Facebook’u, który jest obecnie najpopularniejszym serwisem społecznościowym na świecie. Pozornie obie funkcje są podobne – pozwalają na publikowanie krótkich wiadomości. Jednakże Twitter posiada szerszą funkcjonalność: odpowiadanie na wiadomości  oraz wysyłanie wiadomości publicznych lub bezpośrednio do konkretnych użytkowników. U niektórych badanych prowadziło to do konfuzji.

Najważniejsze wskazówki dla ulepszenia użyteczności serwisu:

1. Warto, by język Twittera był bardziej intuicyjny i zrozumiały dla nowych użytkowników;
   
2. Grafika dla różnych trybów komunikacji powinna być  zróżnicowana;
3. Nowi użytkownicy powinni mieć do dyspozycji więcej wskazówek jak używać serwisu.