usability archives
““Good” beats “Innovative” nearly every time. An obsession with innovation leads executives down the wrong path. Just trying to be good would be a smarter focus.”
Former colleague Scott Berkun in a recent Business Week article. Before objecting, read the whole article; innovation will happen, but not if that is the primary goal. The primary goal should be to produce Something Good. If innovation is required to get there—great! But if there are tried and true solutions, all the better.
posted by
ted
on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010
·
1 comment
A friend of mine hunts down dangerous fugitives for a living.
Bill is a U.S. Marshall and is very good at what he does. A few months ago, I saw him walking with a bandage on his hand. Curious, I asked him what happened. Maybe he cut it doing some yard work? “Well”, he said, ”I had to smash through a car window to pull out a fugitive who tried to escape.” “Really?” I replied, “The worst injuries I get at work are a slight cramp in my pinky from too many mouse clicks.”
Bill and I go to the range every once in a while and shoot the breeze (no pun intended). I enjoy picking his brain as I like the Chuck Norris-esque of his job and am sure he pulls out a roundhouse kick from time to time. I asked him about what helps track these guys down. Without giving detail, he explained the importance of research. Bill spends more time learning about the fugitive, their habits, family, their likes, dislikes, etc… than anything. The more information he has, the easier it is to anticipate their next move.
How many times have you had a client approach you with the need for X as soon as possible and it needs to “look good”? Only after asking them who will be using it and what the site’s objectives are do they even think about it.
The problem is, they want results and research doesn’t come in a shiny package. It is up to us as designers to persuade them to understand its importance… even if that means a roundhouse kick (Disclaimer: Don’t actually roundhouse kick a client, however, if needs be, show a picture of yourself doing a roundhouse kick so they understand).
With that said, Bill could spend all his time researching and never catch anyone if he never went to work. The key is to gather a comfortable amount of user research so we have a clear focus before embarking on our designs.
Just like Bill and his hopeless fugitives, the more we know about our users, the better we can anticipate their next move.
posted by
jbarron
on Thursday, Feb 11, 2010
·
4 comments

Props to our own Jason Lynes for his article over at Think Vitamin. Love the idea of conversational URLs and even though I don’t speak Rails I got a good idea of what he did.
Nice work Jason!
posted by
aaron
on Friday, Jan 29, 2010
·
1 comment
Some useful design tips for comparison shopping interfaces from Get Elastic. Brings me back to my Carpoint days at Microsoft… It’s tough to put a lot of data across multiple products into tight columns, but it can be done well. Have you seen some good examples?
posted by
ted
on Wednesday, Jan 20, 2010
·
2 comments
“Usability is like cooking: everybody needs the results, anybody can do it reasonably well with a bit of training, and yet it takes a master to produce a gourmet outcome.”
Jakob Nielsen, effectively treading the fine line between easing fears of Big Usability and talking people out of hiring his firm. From a good article on striking the right balance on usability.
posted by
ted
on Tuesday, Dec 22, 2009
·
0 comments
How the art of visual design plays a role in usability: A usability review of Microsoft and Apple websites.
Beyond the initial PC vs. Mac appearance of this article, it really points to how a great design team has worked to unify a company and present a unified message. No matter the size of your company, I think every design team struggles with focusing the company in one direction, especially when there are many people contributing to product development and content.
No small feat.
posted by
emmy
on Friday, Sep 11, 2009
·
3 comments
Jakob Nielsen recently ran a Twitter post through 5 rounds of iterative design to get the impact he wanted. At first blush I was thinking, “That sounds like a lot of effort to optimize a Tweet!” But if you are using twitter as a marketing medium, I guess it makes sense. (Far as I can tell, these were just design rounds; he wasn’t running a user study or anything.)
See his article for lessons learned in each round, from concision to focus, impact, and re-tweetability. (There, I’m making up new words right and left.)
He finishes the article with a notable quote: “Text is a UI. It’s a common mistake to think that only full-fledged graphical user interfaces count as interaction design and deserve usability attention. ... In fact, the shorter it is, the more important it is to design text for usability.”
posted by
ted
on Monday, Aug 24, 2009
·
2 comments
case study
In our quest to design simple, intuitive, and efficient things, we must be careful to not over-design. I have run into several examples recently where I believe the designer (or more often, the business employing them) is trying too hard—too hard to be everything, too hard to have too many options, too hard to up-sell, too hard to be original or innovative, too hard to be too simple—and has failed. A fine line is walked between questioning traditions and standards for irrelevance, age, or oversight, and respecting them for their tenure of existence. A delicate balance must be struck between production costs, competition, patents, marketing, aesthetics, work-flow, and usability. While we most often are not the one with the final say, I believe it’s a designer’s duty to satisfy a project’s many requirements simultaneously while diligently advocating usability—resisting and preventing the mistake of over-designing.
posted by
wade
on Monday, Jun 29, 2009
·
4 comments
Jakob Nielsen’s Alertbox today proclaims that we we should Stop Masking Passwords. He claims the usability costs are too high, especially on mobile devices where typos are more common.
I was skeptical, but he has some great points, the most important being that the greatest security risks when you are entering a password are really electronic—someone snooping your password through an unsecure connection. Someone watching your screen can just as easily watch your keyboard to see what keys you tap. But most of the time this is irrelevant, since you are at home and not really being stalked by an over-the-shoulder snooper.
And to cover the occasional Internet kiosk scenario, he suggests providing a checkbox that will let users decide whether they want to mask their password. I like it! Virtual equivalent of cupping your hand around the keypad at an ATM.
Now that I think about it, I have recently noticed that when I type a password on my mobile phone, it briefly shows the last character I typed before replacing it with an asterisk. (Is that an Opera Mobile feature?) That seems to be a concession to some of Nielsen’s points regarding mobile password entry. But I wonder whether it really makes sense either. If it’s visible to you briefly, then it’s visible to a snooper briefly too. But what are the chances that someone can see that teeny tiny text you are taptapping on your phone anyway???
So I guess he’s convinced me! Death to the Asterisk!
posted by
ted
on Wednesday, Jun 24, 2009
·
7 comments
Interesting Alertbox from Jakob Nielsen finding that “non-profits would collect much more from their websites if only they’d clearly state what they are about and how they use donations. ... Sadly, only 43% of the sites we studied answered the first question on their homepage. Further, only a ridiculously low 4% answered the second question on the homepage.” In other words, content usability and message design are as important as functional usability, especially if you are asking for money!
posted by
ted
on Monday, Mar 30, 2009
·
0 comments
“New technology + same old thinking = same old outcome with a buggy
interface.”
Mark Hurst, in his latest Good Experience newsletter. Some important thoughts here about how a change in technology without a change in commitment to customers simply results in more efficient ways to annoy, frustrate, and exploit people.
posted by
ted
on Tuesday, Mar 24, 2009
·
0 comments
Refresh this page. Now do it again and this time note the moment that fifty-percent of the page is loaded. Got it? Do you know when it was? What about speed? Can you give me an idea how fast the page is loading? What if you were on a slow connection like the wifi I use on the bus to commute to work? Would you know if the page was loading fast or slow? Would you have an idea of how long you were going to have to wait? Should you switch to another tab and continue reading the news because it’s going to be a while?
If you were using Safari, you’d have an answer for me; other browsers leave you in the dark.
Well, at least that’s how it used to be (save Safari Mobile). Safari 4 Beta was released this morning and with it came a gaggle of exciting new features (including a Web Inspector and Console that can now hang with Firefox’s Firebug plugin). Unfortunately, Apple also removed one of Safari’s greatest features.
While the standard loading indicator for web browsers is a spinning icon, the great minds that designed Safari’s interface decided to innovate and instead take advantage of the functionless (after you have entered a URL and struck the return) address bar and animated a progress meter behind the text. Instead of a nearly useless icon that communicates little more than that the browser is running, Safari’s indicator simply and effectively let’s you know both how much has loaded and how fast it’s loading.

With Safari 3, the browser’s state is clear. With the requested site’s title prefixed by the word “Loading” at the top of the browser and the progress meter status indicator, the state of the browser and the action taking place is immediately obvious to the user. Even viewing this static screenshot, having not physically interacted with the browser and requested the page yourself, you are able to quickly and accurately discern this.

The state of Safari 4 Beta on the other hand is a mystery. I have requested northtemple.com but the browser still displays the title of the previous site. The only indicator that the new site is loading is the small animated “spinner” on the right side of the address bar. Both versions of Safari display the requested URL prefixed by the word “loading” in the Status Bar in the footer, but most users do not have this bar turned on.
Here’s to hoping that it’s absence is just an oversight in the beta.
posted by
wade
on Tuesday, Feb 24, 2009
·
14 comments
Nielsen/Norman Group is offering a free report on Rich Internet Applications”. It’s from 2002 and most of the apps reviewed are Flash-based—but hey, it’s free :-) And most of the findings focus on the interaction itself, not the technology. Quick skim looks promising…
posted by
ted
on Monday, Dec 15, 2008
·
0 comments
“You have to tell [them] your job role twice, your
job title once, and the language you prefer to speak 3 times—all
in English.”
Jared Spool, dazed by the number of hoops needed to pass through just to get to see (not buy) a product catalog of branded merchandise for a major technology company. (From a re-print of a year-old post on sign-in mistakes to avoid.)
posted by
ted
on Tuesday, Dec 09, 2008
·
0 comments
“It takes a strong
UX practitioner to stand up to an ill-informed team who think that Agile is about
speed rather than about better project control, and who subsequently think that user
experience work is a waste of time.”
Looking forward to reading the rest of Nielsen/Norman’s Best Practices for User Experience on Agile Development Projects
posted by
ted
on Monday, Dec 01, 2008
·
0 comments
Many of the newer cool phones are moving to a touch screen only interface (iPhone, G1 [when closed], Storm, etc). They are also supporting the ability to view the same websites that we design for the desktop. This is naturally pretty cool in that they get all those bells and whistles we designed and we don’t have to create a second version of our site specifically for them.
The other day I was on my iPhone, navigating around a site where some of the links didn’t look like links and you wouldn’t think they were links by their placement. I’m going to guess that the designer thought:
- These links aren’t very important
- The user can use their mouse to hover over things to find what is a link and what isn’t (making the user do extra work isn’t very nice btw)
- The user can tab to these links and will discover them that way (still not very nice)
Well as an iPhone user, the links were important, I didn’t have a mouse (cursor really as I can still click), and I didn’t have a tab with which to hop around. The only reason I clicked on them was because I was familiar with the site and knew they were there.
In this new world where mobile devices can see our regular sites, we need to be even more diligent in going back to basics of making sure links are easily viewable. As I mentioned above, it’s not very nice to expect a user to move their mouse over any given word to see if it is a link or not. Our senior generation can’t see subtle differences in color. Now we have devices that don’t have a mouse as we currently understand it and can’t hop between links with a tab key or joystick.
There naturally needs to be a fine line between big bold links and design. I wouldn’t want my page littered with default blue underlined links everywhere. But skewing too far to subtlety, while more aesthetically appealing, may not be very user friendly in general, and out right unusable on these newer devices.
posted by
aaron
on Monday, Dec 01, 2008
·
4 comments
“It’s so hard to find things.
I’m finding it hard to not blame you.”
My wife Caryn, experiencing the joys of using lds.org.
posted by
jason
on Tuesday, Nov 18, 2008
·
4 comments
“Turn off your internal problem-solver and just listen to people.”
Indi Young explaining her genius approach to usability in the lastest A List Apart
posted by
sam
on Monday, Oct 13, 2008
·
0 comments
New in Gmail Labs: Stop sending email you later regret. This isn’t a joke, and it’s genius. Enable “Mail Goggles,” and Gmail will ask you a few math problems before it sends your email to make sure you’re sober enough to really mean what you just wrote. The feature is only active late at night in your timezone, and only on weekends, when some people might be prone to doing things they regret.
Love this idea, of designing things to be harder to encourage a certain behavior. We did something similar in our new Mission Office application here internally, making certain financial actions harder by requiring extra clicks or making the controls slightly obscure to discourage using them. Speed bumps are another example of using “poor” design to lead your user to act a certain way.
posted by
jason
on Tuesday, Oct 07, 2008
·
0 comments
“Companies and organizations still
can’t explain what they do in one paragraph.”
Jakob Nielsen on the ubiquitous but often uninformative “About Us” page.
posted by
ted
on Monday, Sep 29, 2008
·
0 comments