David Weinberger, author of Everything is Miscellaneous has conducted a very interesting interview with BoingBoing co-editor, digital rights activist and entrepreneur Cory Doctorow.
The genius of tags over taxonomy is discussed, as well as the ways implicit meaning can by mined from masses of disharmonious metadata to discover new meanings and do things like on-the-fly disambiguation.
The implication is that mess helpful. If only the same were true in the offline world!
Anyone else think this looks a lot like BlueList? :)
Thursday, May 3, 2007
Friday, April 27, 2007
MTV launches new site - drops flash site after only 9 months
MTV has dropped its flash website - which launched 9 months ago - in favour of a new XHTML site - stating that speed and overall user experience were key factors.
The MTV labs blog (worth a read) shows an interesting insight into why they chose to make this change so quickly and user feedback that led them to it.
Interestingly, on the MTV blog post there now seems to some backlash from those who liked the flash site.
Saw this news posted on UX mag site where there is a discussion forming.
The MTV labs blog (worth a read) shows an interesting insight into why they chose to make this change so quickly and user feedback that led them to it.
Interestingly, on the MTV blog post there now seems to some backlash from those who liked the flash site.
Saw this news posted on UX mag site where there is a discussion forming.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Network Nav - Channel 10 example
Check out this link to 'newish' Channel 10 template
What NOT to do with your network navigation and advertising methinks
http://www.ten.com.au/ten/1706.html
- strange multiple tiered advertising that breaks the navigation spatially (note just had another look and the triple layer adverts have gone now, perhaps it was a glitch)
- unclear repetition of the navigation item / title
Not wanting to come over all self righteous with this post - but sometimes its useful to see examples of what really does not work. This really looks as if someone at 10 was getting a bit greedy and wanted to find another banner ad spot without regard for overall experience.
I am currently seeking out examples of global navs with a lot of options that DO work - any suggestions welcome as comments to this blog post.
A couple of other potential user experience and overall design issues for C 10.
- Hidden search box top right... dark colours blend it into the background of the template.
- Large amount of wasted real estate above the fold
http://www.ten.com.au/ten/talk-play.html
- alternating height of heading areas - in same section
e.g. 1:http://www.ten.com.au/ten/talk-play.html
e.g. 2: http://www.ten.com.au/ten/talknplay-forum.html
On a postitive note - the part at the base of their page where they expand on the content available in each section is a nice way of displaying a lot of options at a glance - at a part of the page users may be expected to look to navigate to another area or away from the site altogether.
The Where of UX
Our last discussion (some time ago now, my apologies) was around where in an organisation User Experience work best fits.
Many people experience geographical issues. People don't sit together; sometimes, they sit in different countries. This obviously makes things difficult in any team.
For others, the issue is around who has budget and institutional power. In one example, development teams drove the development of new applications, from the conception of the idea to the final implementation. The development team also managed all the budget. This means that the design of the user experience is entirely defined by developers, and doesn't necessarily meet the needs of users; the organisation is trying to develop touch points to get user experience teams involved earlier in the process.
Business Analysts were identified as one such touch point. There was a strong feeling that BAs need to have a sense of ownership over questions such as 'what do users want?' and 'what problems are we trying to solve?'. Where BAs are aware of user experience issues and are involved in user testing, we believe results will be better.
Where i work, we recently completed some training in interaction design. Most of the group was from outside the user experience team, mainly project managers and BAs. One of the most valuable things we got out of the session was a common language for talking about these issues. So far, it seems to be working.
If you have thoughts on how organisational structure supports or complicates your work, we'd love to hear your comments.
Many people experience geographical issues. People don't sit together; sometimes, they sit in different countries. This obviously makes things difficult in any team.
For others, the issue is around who has budget and institutional power. In one example, development teams drove the development of new applications, from the conception of the idea to the final implementation. The development team also managed all the budget. This means that the design of the user experience is entirely defined by developers, and doesn't necessarily meet the needs of users; the organisation is trying to develop touch points to get user experience teams involved earlier in the process.
Business Analysts were identified as one such touch point. There was a strong feeling that BAs need to have a sense of ownership over questions such as 'what do users want?' and 'what problems are we trying to solve?'. Where BAs are aware of user experience issues and are involved in user testing, we believe results will be better.
Where i work, we recently completed some training in interaction design. Most of the group was from outside the user experience team, mainly project managers and BAs. One of the most valuable things we got out of the session was a common language for talking about these issues. So far, it seems to be working.
If you have thoughts on how organisational structure supports or complicates your work, we'd love to hear your comments.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
The Age of User Experience?
The other night i attended a seminar by Microsoft's User Experience Evangelist, Shane Morris. The session was titled 'The Age of User Experience', and Morris opened by arguing that we can no longer hope to rely on adding new features - we must offer a better experience. He claimed that users would be making choices based on their experience, and that products therefore needed to be differentiated on experience, not just features. One example was the NYTimes desktop application, which offers readers a different experience of the news - you can browse by image, for example, to find stories you like. The NYTimes has apparently released stats saying that readers using the desktop reader spend ten times as long reading the news than those using the website. And while the user experience of the desktop reader is rather nice, it also packs quite a lot of features that the website doesn't offer.
I found this very interesting in light of the recent flurry of discussion around simplicity. For those of you who may not have seen this debate, Don Norman recently published an article claiming that simplicity is overrated. His core claim is that features sell - even useless ones - and as a result he challenges the idea that simplicity should be a design goal. (A bunch of people have posted thoughtful responses, including Josh Porter and Gerry McGovern.) My question is, if Norman is right and customers are selecting products for their additional features, are those same customers thinking about the experience? Norman claims that people will buy a product based on features, and only discover later that it is hard to use. In order to make the leap into the age of user experience, as envisioned by Morris, users need to value the experience at least as much as they value the features. I think that's a gap that will be bridged, but i don't think we're there yet. As user experience people, we should be considering what we can do to bridge that gap for users.
Of course, Norman is talking primarily about physical products, and websites (as McGovern argues) have a different set of issues. McGovern argues that the things that make us desire complexity, such as the need to exhibit status or the desire to insure ourselves against future needs, do not apply to websites, where the experience is immediate and usually private. However, i think this depends on the type of website in question. In user testing on our homepage, people consistently say that the page is very busy, but then quickly add that it has everything they need. There is a desire for complexity here, but also a desire for ease of use. It's not enough to say that simplicity is essential, because sometimes, it's quite the opposite. Website use may be immediate, but it can also repeat - if the features aren't there, will you get the repeat traffic you want? And if the features really are desirable enough will people really care about the quality of the experience? TripAdvisor is a great example. I hate this site - i find it horribly confusing to use once i'm off the homepage. But a colleague tells me that if you persist with the site, you learn it quickly - it almost teaches you as you use it. And it certainly has no trouble attracting traffic and registered users.
I'm not convinced that the Age of User Experience is upon us just yet (i wish it was!). I'm also not convinced that simplicity is irrelevant, especially on websites. I think we're faced with continuing to negotiate complexity vs. simplicity, features vs. experience, and we probably always will be. But if the Age of Experience is nigh, we have a real opportunity to shape it.
Love to hear the thoughts of others in the group on these issues.
I found this very interesting in light of the recent flurry of discussion around simplicity. For those of you who may not have seen this debate, Don Norman recently published an article claiming that simplicity is overrated. His core claim is that features sell - even useless ones - and as a result he challenges the idea that simplicity should be a design goal. (A bunch of people have posted thoughtful responses, including Josh Porter and Gerry McGovern.) My question is, if Norman is right and customers are selecting products for their additional features, are those same customers thinking about the experience? Norman claims that people will buy a product based on features, and only discover later that it is hard to use. In order to make the leap into the age of user experience, as envisioned by Morris, users need to value the experience at least as much as they value the features. I think that's a gap that will be bridged, but i don't think we're there yet. As user experience people, we should be considering what we can do to bridge that gap for users.
Of course, Norman is talking primarily about physical products, and websites (as McGovern argues) have a different set of issues. McGovern argues that the things that make us desire complexity, such as the need to exhibit status or the desire to insure ourselves against future needs, do not apply to websites, where the experience is immediate and usually private. However, i think this depends on the type of website in question. In user testing on our homepage, people consistently say that the page is very busy, but then quickly add that it has everything they need. There is a desire for complexity here, but also a desire for ease of use. It's not enough to say that simplicity is essential, because sometimes, it's quite the opposite. Website use may be immediate, but it can also repeat - if the features aren't there, will you get the repeat traffic you want? And if the features really are desirable enough will people really care about the quality of the experience? TripAdvisor is a great example. I hate this site - i find it horribly confusing to use once i'm off the homepage. But a colleague tells me that if you persist with the site, you learn it quickly - it almost teaches you as you use it. And it certainly has no trouble attracting traffic and registered users.
I'm not convinced that the Age of User Experience is upon us just yet (i wish it was!). I'm also not convinced that simplicity is irrelevant, especially on websites. I think we're faced with continuing to negotiate complexity vs. simplicity, features vs. experience, and we probably always will be. But if the Age of Experience is nigh, we have a real opportunity to shape it.
Love to hear the thoughts of others in the group on these issues.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Colaborative news is trumping traditional media
"Without the internet, I wouldn't learn anything."
I just finished having a conversation with Little Bro Pete about the way news media is changing, especially with respect to young, net-dependent types. The emerging coverage of the Virginia Tech tragedy makes a good example.
One of the better Australian newspapers, The Age, provides patchy coverage summarised into reader-friendly article lengths, and run with standard post-massacre editorial clichés.
U.S. MSNBC provided slightly more insightful, relevant editorials:
10 Myths about school shootings
The psychology of mass murder
Also worth noting is that MSNBC highlighted new sections of text in articles which were updated during the day to help users follow developments.
The wikinews coverage has been even quicker to the get the facts online, taking contributions from locals and witnesses while still managing to keep a very high standard of quality through it's user administration system. The article pages cite their sources and are already linking up wikipedia bio pages of some of the victims, some detailing last movements and moments.
Overall, the collaborative online news coverage has been more accurate, better referenced, faster and more comprehensive than the mainstream media. It's very impressive, and deliberately vetted to remove biased voice and hype.
The key to it all seems to be the voluntary, open community. While news outlets beg readers to e-mail their eyewitness accounts and media it's a fair bet that potential contributors are already uploading, blogging, forum-posting and article-editing at a site where their contribution will appear with and be reviewed by peers, rather than below and by a centralised editorial authority.
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Simple guide to designing for usability
The kind folks at Information Architects Japan have produced a one-stop 100% easy-to-read standard for web designers. Read and enjoy (thanks to Amelia).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)