I know I'm jumping on the blogosphere (One electroshock for me for using a buzzword) bandwagon for bringing this up, but I think I have a point about GoogleTalk unrelated to the common chatter.
For you Skype purists out there, I know that Google Talk is essentially Skype-lite. I'm only partially excited about Google Talk because of how clean and clear the voice features are. I'm also excited because it's basic, clean and uncluttered. I'll let the screenshots speak for themselves.

Here's MSN Messenger:

And Google Talk:

In a day and age when Microsoft keeps adding tabs to messenger and cluttering the interface with winks, nudges and skins, Google Talk makes me smile. Now I know this is a Beta, so we may see clutter eventually. For now, I'll enjoy simplicity while I can. Now that Google is public and no longer the anti-Microsoft, it's not surpising that They're giving Microsoft a run for its money as the big bad wolf. BTW, you need a Gmail account to use this tool, so if you don't have one, email me. I've got plenty of invites to share.

Here's an interesting image from Channel 9 at MSDN. On the second page, you'll see a talk by Anders Hejlsberg entitled "Programming data in C# 3.0." The image has since changed, but here is the original: I think it speaks volumes about how lack of content workflow means laughs for the rest of the world. Especially when the Evil Empire is involved. Channel9, CM, workflow

In a previous post, Design for Context, Part II, I dug into the Home Depot a bit for their use of the self-checkout stand. Well, the Home Depot got it's lashes and now it's time for Lowe's to hear a few gripes. In this post and my next post, I'm going to do a side-by-side comparison on the experience of searching for a ladder at Lowes.com (in this post) and at HomeDepot.com (in my next post). Last week, I asked the question "What makes for a great search experience?" and listed a couple of my personal requirements. They were: 1. Ubiquitous (or uniform) search box 2. Results easy to identify, even on a crowded page 3. Ability to refine or start over I'll add to that list the #1 thing John mentioned in his comment: 4. Ability of search to differentiate between a search for an actual product or information about a product. I'll test this rule be searching each site for "tips on ladder maintenance and repair." What I intend to do for both Lowe's and the Home Depot is test each site according to the four rules above.

Here's an email I received just now from Koss:

Hot Off The Presses! Be the first to experience the new UR21 Koss Stereophone. Lightweight with deep bass. Order before 8/31/05 and receive free shipping. To take advantage of this offer: 1. Click on the link below. 2. Add UR21 to your cart. 3. Enter coupon code 081605 at checkout. Offer expires August 31, 2005. This offer valid in U.S. only. Not valid with other offers. -- ----------------------------------------------------- http://www.koss.com/koss/kossweb.nsf/04ProductDetailCall?ReadForm&Home+Stereophones%5EUR21

Heck yeah, I want to be one of the first to experience the new UR21 Koss Stereophone. Here's what I got when I clicked on the link:

Looks like Koss has an amazing email promotion system. It so good, in fact, that it sends emails even before products are added to the website. Ouch... What do you think are the chances of a typical user trying this link again and again until it works? Slim to none? I'd be willing to bet that conversion hurts for this, even if they do send another email. And I'm not just picking on Koss here. I like their stuff, or I wouldn't ask for emails from them. The point is that, for many companies, email referrals represent a large segment of traffic to a site. Mistakes like these can be expensive, and the broken link isn't even the biggest problem. I think the biggest issue here is that Koss doesn't have a branded 404 page to keep me on the site.

Here's what I mean:

A friendly message, a link back to the home page and even some product recommendations are what make this an ideal 404 page for Amazon. It's called defensive design. And it works.

This morning, I started working on a couple of posts that will pit the search experience of two competing sites against each other. I plan to finish and publish these in the next few days, but I'd like to get the comment-mill going in the meantime. The question is: What are the things that make for your ideal search experience? If you can, please comment on this post and list a few things you think ypur ideal search needs to have. It doesn't need to be comprehensive, just a few ideas off the top of your head. Also, feel free to link to a site or sites that you think do search well. Finally, since I'd love to get as many comments as possible, feel free send this post around to friends, family, search experts, etc so they can comment as well. I'd love to get a long list of the things people are looking for in their search experience. Here are some of mine to start things off: 1. Ubiquitous (or uniform) search box 2. Results easy to identify, even on a crowded page 3. Ability to refine or start over This is by no means complete. So what do you think? SEO, user experience, search, usability

Donald Norman says "Human-Centered Design Considered Harmful." Abstract:

"Human-Centered Design has become such a dominant theme in design that it is now accepted by interface and application designers automatically, without thought, let alone criticism. That's a dangerous state - when things are treated as accepted wisdom. The purpose of this essay is to provoke thought, discussion, and reconsideration of some of the fundamental principles of Human-Centered Design. These principles, I suggest, can be helpful, misleading, or wrong. At times, they might even be harmful. Activity-Centered Design is superior."

 

-Donald A. Norman in Interactions, 12. 4, (July + August, 2005). Pp. 14-19.

The idea expressed above may seem controversial on the surface, but I think it makes perfect sense. In my Design for Context series (now long overdue for a third installment), I've talked about undertaking web design in a context that works. I think there is a flavor of that in the paragraph above. What need is there to consider the whole person (Human-centered design) when your design needs to cater to what that person wants to do with your product (Activity-centered design). Norman summarizes a key problem with HCD:

"If it is so critical to understand the particular users of a product, then what happens when a product is designed to be used by almost anyone in the world?"

according to Norman, HCD has resulted in a continuation of complex and confusing products because they try too much to cater to a vast array of human idiosyncrasies. Another interesting point Norman makes is that though ACD sounds like something lesser in scope than HCD, it actually requires all of the user-sensitive concerns of HCD, but also "...requires a deep understanding of the technology, of the tools, and of the reasons for the activities." There's a lot more to this article that I don't have time for now. This is one to print, enjoy and mark-up. Thanks, as always Don, for turning us all on our ears. user-centered design, activity-centered design, ACD, HCD, Donald Norman, Usability, User Experience

Hold on to your butts everyone! B.L. Ochman seems pretty confident that technorati.com is about to be cherry-picked. Anyone want to venture a guess who it is? Starts with a "G"... ends with an "oogle." Let the consolidation begin. Who thinks that MSN or Yahoo! buys IceRocket next? Technorati, Google, MSN, Yahoo!, IceRocket

I achieved an empty email inbox today:

It's a pretty amazing feeling to get that sucker emptied out. And even though it doesn't mean I don't have any actionable email right this minute (you can just make out some unread and marked for follow-up email in the image), it's nice to know that for a brief moment, there is nothing vying for my attention outside of what I have on my own task list.

Do you think Microsoft ever considered what "The Empty Inbox" would mean to a user in their design? I'll bet they didn't. I would hope that a little WAV of the Hallelujah Chorus would spin up each time if they had.

And yet, if you read anything on self-organization or Lifehacks (43Folders, GTD, etc.) you'll hear about the catharsis of the empty inbox and what it can mean to a person.

Moral: Sometimes the side-effects of a design can mean more to your users than most of what you intended to do for them.

There's no rhyme or reason, but here are some of the things I've thrown into del.icio.us of late:

The List: http://del.icio.us/thesatch

The Feed: http://del.icio.us/rss/TheSatch

The Links: 31 days to better blogging

Tags: blog howto problogger How to get into blog-reading

Tags: blog blogging blogs howto reference rss web Getting started with "Getting Things Done"

Tags: 43folders gtd lifehacks organization productivity reference Web 2.0

Tags: ajax distributed internet rss web web2.0 wikipedia xml A brief history of Blogging 1.0

Tags: blog blogging blogs killer app web More Web 2.0

Tags: Web2.0, blog blogging blogs web

Let me ask you a question: What do you expect from a double-click of your left mouse button? (One-button mouse users and Mighty Mouse devotees are excluded from answering) Your answer is probably "It depends on where I am and what I'm doing," right? A double-click on your desktop or in explorer will open a file. In quick-launch it will restore a minimized application. Many other applications perform functions that are designed along the context of the application. And that's a valid answer, so let me refine the question: In an interactive map application, what do you expect from a double-click on a point on the map? Since this isn't a chat room, I'll just have to answer for myself: (If you have a take, feel free to throw in a comment) When I double-click on a point on a map, I want the application to center and zoom. I used to think that I was the only one that felt that way because Google Maps (Pictured below) doesn't do that. It simply centers the map, then I have to click on the zoom-bar to get more detail.

Once I used MSN Virtual Earth, though, I realized I was not alone in expecting the double-click to center and zoom because it does actually that.

My point is not that I prefer Virtual Earth over Google Maps. (I'm not ready to make that call yet because I've been using Google Maps since day 1 and I'm trying VE alongside it for comparison.) I'm also not suggesting that my expectation is the one that Google should have yielded to.

My point is that, sometimes, two sets of usability tests on the same application can sometimes yield drastically different results and lead to different conclusions. I know that Google and Microsoft extensively UT their software. The irony of it is that, in the world of User Experience, there are no answers that meet the needs of 100% of your users (There must be someone out there that honestly expects for a double-click on a map to show him his house), so we seek to find answers that satisfy either a majority or 70-80%. Such is our world.

And in this case, Microsoft and Google appear to have each drawn from a different 80%.

Google Maps, MSN Virtual Earth, User Experience