Archive for September, 2008

Google Android First Look

Tuesday, September 23rd, 2008

There’s been a big stir in the technology world for some time around the Google Android Operating System for mobile devices.  It’s been touted as a viable competitor to the Apple iPhone, the current king of mobile devices (in my opinion).

If you are feeling excited about Google Android, maybe you should check out this video (embedded below) of its interface in action before rushing out to pick up the imminent HTC Dream.  Quite frankly, the interface really needs some work.  Compare the time taken to zoom in and out of web pages on the Android Device to performing the same task on the iPhone.  Also compare the clustering of icons on the home screen, with minimum spacing between them.  Given some people have complained about the iPhone’s icons being not spaced enough, they are unlikely to find any relief with the first Android phone.

Of course, it’s early days and we’re yet to get our hands on a proper handset.  Google have also tried their best to create as open a platform as possible, so much of the initial problems can be ironed out.  But comparing early Android footage to early iPhone footage, there’s no real competition here.

Popularity: 24% [?]

WordPress and Scheduled Posts

Monday, September 22nd, 2008

If you run a blog and hope to keep the content on it fairly fresh, utilising any sort of future scheduled post functionality it really important.  It means the difference between updating your blog when you’re out of the contry or not.  When using such a feature, there are certain aspects that must be clearly conveyed to the user.  With that in mind, let’s take a critical look at the current (Version 2.6.2) WordPress implementation of scheduled posts.

WordPress Post Status Options

The image to the right is a screenshot of the controls used to schedule (or backdate) a post in WordPress.  The date controls aren’t visible by default, but rather are accessed by clicking an Edit button next to the “Publish Immediately” text. This is replaced by the word “Cancel” when clicked.

An immediate problem you’ll notice is the Cancel option itself.  Being placed to the right of the text “Publish Immediately” implies that clicking it will cancel the immediate publication.  That isn’t the purpose of the option.  The text “Publish Immediately” also remains, even after a new date has been chosen (it remains after the post has been auto saved and will only update when the post is saved by the user, or published.  Many users will publish posts without ever saving them first, and as such won’t ever see the updated text).  This is completely misleading and confusing.  In short, the design leaves the user with some serous doubts as to when the post will be published, if at all.

Once you’ve selected your published date and time, you have two options.  You can either “Publish” or “Save”.  Once again, the options are ambiguous.  If I click publish, will I actually be publishing the post, or will it be published when the date and time I have chosen is reached?  Likewise, if I save the post now, with a status of “Unpublished”, but with a future publish date, will the status of the post change when the date is reached?

All entirely valid questions that could be answered with better form design.  Thankfully, Automattic are looking at a thorough reworking of the WordPress back end for the next release (2.7), let’s hope they put a little more thought into it this time.

Popularity: 28% [?]

Why we’re Still Using the Default Theme

Friday, September 5th, 2008

Since starting this blog a few months ago, I haven’t changed the appearance from the default WordPress theme and I thought I should address why.

As a rule, I only use WordPress themes that I’ve designed myself.  This is for a number of reasons, but mostly because I feel it gives me a better sense of ownership over the blog.  I also like to add some custom functionality to the blogs I run and always feel safer when I know how the theme works, in case something goes wrong or I have to make changes.  There’s also something to be said for uniqueness in the highly competitive world of blogging.

So with all that in my mind, I’ve started thinking about a theme for this blog.  Seeing as this is a blog about usability, the theme is going to be as usable as possible.  That’s going to be the prime focus.  In order to do that, I’m going to do some fairly heavy research into structuring and displaying content, typography and readability.  I want it to be as near to perfect in terms of usability as possible.  And seeing as I’m big on sharing, I’ll be posting about the process, progress and results in due course.

Out of this process I expect to produce: -

  1. A set of guidelines that can be applied to information sites, and specifically blogs on the best way to structure and display information.
  2. Best practices on typography for as near as ideal readability.
  3. A framework for WordPress themes that can be adapted and used by others, with the lessons learnt in the above two steps engrained within it.
  4. A new theme for The Usability Blog.

As you can see, it’s not a one step process.  I want to lay the groundwork, the foundations, that can be used again by myself and others.  I’m not going to build this house on sand.  And for those of you wondering, I’ve developed a number WordPress themes in the past, and written a number of articles on the subject.  I also plan on launching a WordPress themes site to support my theme development shortly.  So there’s alot going on!

Popularity: 23% [?]

Google Chrome: A User Interface Review

Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008

When Google’s Chrome was announced, I made some comments based on the information we had to hand at the time.  To summarise, I thought the layout of Chrome was badly considered when assessing it based on Fitts’s Law.  Now that Chrome is actually out (for Windows, at least), we can take a closer look at it, put it to the test as it were.  But unlike some other sources, who seem really caught up on whether Chrome is actually the fastest browser out there (Chrome on Windows XP through a VM doesn’t feel as fast as Safari on OSX, but that’s neither here nor there), I wanted to look at it from a user’s point of view.  After all, if Google wants to be a success in the Browser Wars II (this time it’s personal?), they’re going to have to win the hearts and minds of ordinary users, and that isn’t done by rendering a JavaScript heavy page x milliseconds faster than FireFox.  It’s done by being easy to use, and friendly.  So let’s look at Chrome from a Use Experience and Usability point of view.

Disclaimer

Before I get any further, I want to point two things out.  Firstly, Google Chrome is a very early beta product.  It’s not ready for your Gran to use yet, it may not be ready for you to use yet, depending on your disposition. So tread carefully.  And let’s take this as an IR beta, and not a Google beta.  I don’t expect it to be flawless, neither should you.

Secondly, I’m an OSX user (you’ll find that many people in the field of user experience favor Macs).  As such I’m testing Chrome on an iMac through Parallels Desktop which is running a Win XP Pro Virtual Machine.  Results are indicative of this setup.

Breaking Conventions

Google seem intent on breaking some well established conventions with Chrome.  We’ve seen with the iPhone that breaking established conventions can be a liberating thing, something that frees designers from the shackles of the past and allows them to come up with something truly great.  There is, of course, a downside. Unless your new interface is truly intuitive, which is very difficult to do in an IT system, there’s going to be a steeper learning curve than usual.  There’s also going to be mistakes and failures.  And when you knowingly introduce failures and mistakes, you run the risk of user abandonment.  Sometimes this will be abandonment of a task, but in cases like Chrome, and the iPhone, it will be abandonment of the tool.

Interface Differences between Chrome and FireFox 3

Interface Differences between Chrome and FireFox 3

The image to the right highlights some of the differences you will notice between Chrome and a more conventional browser, in this case I’ve used FireFox version 3 on Windows XP in vanilla form.

I’ll be addressing each of these differences in turn.

Standard OS Interface Elements

Something that’s been a pet peeve of mine over the years has been where applications choose to change some interface elements that are intended to be common throughout the Operating System’s interface.

Unfortunately, this is something Google has chosen to do with Chrome.  You’ll notice in the top right hand corner of the Chrome window that it appears to be using Windows Vista interface elements, even though it was running on Windows XP. Is this important? Yes.  The problem here is not that it is using Vista’s icons, but more that it is not obeying any customisations made by the user.  For example, I know users who have poor eyesight, they tend to increase the size of these controls so they can easily minimise windows without accidentally closing them.

Window Controls in Chrome and FireFox

Window Controls in Chrome and FireFox

If you enlarge these controls through Windows XP, the controls on Chrome do not change.  It’s also worth noting that the buttons don’t have the characteristic coloration that controls on other windows do, this is also likely to confuse less experienced users.

To some users, the large red button that closes the window has now become the small blue button, but only for Google Chrome.  And that last point really is key.  Google Chrome performs differently to the rest of the OS.  It’s the one car in the showroom with the steering wheel on the roof.

State-Sensitive Objects

You’ll see on the screenshot earlier in this post that I’ve highlighted the status bar and the tab bar in Chrome.  The reason I’ve singled these two elements out is that they behave inconsistently.  The status bar only becomes visible when there’s something to display, and it works fairly well.  Essentially, it only shows up when you mouse over a link (to display the destination URL) or when the page is still loading.  It’s working on the principal that at all other times, there really is nothing interesting that needs to be fed back to the user, so there’s no need to eat up valuable screen space and display extra interface elements that may confuse users.

What’s more interesting is the approach to tabs.  Unlike FireFox, Google Chrome always displays the tab bar, regardless of how many tabs you have open.  FireFox hides the tab bar if only one tab is open.  In Chrome, the result is that you have a state-sensitive status bar (i.e. the status bar only displays when the browser is in a certain state) and a tab bar that is not state-sensitive.  This is likely down to the push by Google to emphasise the tabbed aspects of Chrome.  It’s a selling point, something they want to push, so I suspect the decision to keep the tab bar constantly visible was taken with more a marketing hat on, rather than a UI one.

Personally, I’m ambivalent about this.  I feel it warrants being pointed out, but it’s not a huge issue.  Just a difference that people need to be made aware of.

Auto Feed Discovery

As highlighted in the image towards the top of this post, Google Chrome does not feature automatic feed discovery.  This seems like a strange choice given that Google runs one of the most popular Feed Reading services on the planet, Google Reader, as well as the hugely popular FeedBurner.  Whether this is a feature that’s yet to be implemented, or something that’s been intentionally omitted in the name of simplicity remains to be seen.  But it would appear that yet another common interface element is gone, at least for now.

Miscellany

There are a few other things that I just briefly wanted to mention that doesn’t fit in with the “breaking conventions” theme of this post.  So consider this a miscellaneous section.

Task Manager

Google Chrome Task Manager

I have a real issue with my browser requiring its own Task Manager and it seems strange that Google are pushing this as a feature.  Windows Mobile has been mocked repeatedly for it’s use of a Task Manager, in fact Apple referenced it in a keynote about the iPhone, that’s how laughable the feature is.  The reason it doesn’t work is that Windows Mobile runs on mobile devices.  People don’t want to manage their mobile devices, they just want them to work.

I think Web browsers are similar.  My browser is a gateway to services, in the same way a phone is a gateway to a service.  The best browser, much like the best phone, is the one that allows me to most easily access and make use of the service I am trying to connect to and utilise.  Making me consider things like memory and resource usage is not going to achieve that, I just don’t want to think about it.  I want my browser to just handle that back end stuff, and leave me get on with what I want to do.

Options

The Options available in Chrome

The Options available in Chrome

Another of my pet peeves is options.  Many applications have many different ways of structuring and organising options.  Currently there are very few options available in Chrome, which isn’t a bad thing.  I’d personally like to see more customisation opportunities, and it is required before it becomes mainstream, but at the moment it’s fine.

What’s not fine is the structure, grouping, wording and logic of the existing options.  I won’t go into any details, as I could spend an entire post on it, but it needs a complete overhaul.

Have you been using Chrome?  If so, what do you think?  If not, why not?

Popularity: 100% [?]

Google’s New Chrome Browser and Fitts’s Law

Monday, September 1st, 2008

If you’ve been on the internet today, you’ve probably heard something about Google, and a new browser they’re working on called Chrome.  As someone who’s passionate about usability, something on page 18 of their comic caught my eye.  They are talking about moving the “tab” section of the browser to the top, above the location bar.  This strikes me as odd for two reasons.

Fitts’s Law

For those that aren’t familiar, Fitts’s Law states that the time taken to move to an object is a function of the object’s size and distance.  Google appear to be suggesting that the reason for moving the tabs to the top of the browser is that they “… are the primary piece of the user interface …”.  Personally, I can’t believe anything other than the view port being the primary part of the user interface, but either way, Google are sugesting that tabs are the most important which leaves the viewport as the second.

So if you consider Google to be correct, they are, at least according to Fitts’s Law, making their browser less usable.  They are effectively increasing the amount of time taken to perform certain tasks.  Now, it’s important to remember that we haven’t even seen any screen shots of Chrome yet, let alone used it, so it’s enirely possible that Google will do something clever to offset this (although, to offset this problem as far as Fitts’s law is concerned, they would have to icnrease the size of the tabs, which would cause its own problems).  But moving tabs to the top of the browser causes other problems…

Memory and Expectations

One factor at play here is the expectation that the URL, or location, bar sits at the top of the browser with the tabs below.  People are used to it, they expect it, and anything different will confuse them.  Sorry, it’s just a fact.  And not only are they moving the tabs, but they are also moving the other interface elements.  In order to move the tabs to the top of the window, they will also have to move the location bar away from the top.  This includes common, standard interface elements such as the back, forward, stop and refresh buttons.  Moving these elements up and down a few pixels may not seem like a big deal at first, but you have to consider the ramifications fully – and to do that you have to think about muscle memory.

For the longest time, moving your mouse to the top left of your browser and clicking would take you back a page – no longer.  Now, it’s going to bring the first tab into focus.  This may seem like an easy thing for a user to overcome, but why would they?

There are enough competitive browsers out there, if they try one and they fail at a few tasks there’s no need to continue with it.  They’ll just move in to FireFox, or Safari, or Opera, or …

In Summary

I don’t want to come across as if change and innovation are bad things.  But I’ve always felt that there should be a driver behind interface change where you are changing an established standard.  Here, I don’t see it.  This smells more of a “Unique Selling Point” rather than a genuine attempt to improve the interface.

Popularity: 44% [?]