71 posts posts about user experience design, living in new york city, and more…
My friend Karl just sent me a link to his art blog flamingodingo.blogspot.com
I love his raw style. I also love how there is this sense that the same characters (or their cousins) re-appear in different art pieces. Hard to explain, but it’s weirdly sort of Stockholmish Swedish, culturally - well, that’s just my opinion - I’m sure he’d disagree :)
I’m currently using Firefox 3 RC2 FireFox 3 and absolutely loving it - I love the new tags feature, the overall faster browsing experience, everything…
Well, almost. One thing that I find quite strange is the location of the control for jumping back several pages:
I remember the first time I needed to go back several pages and saw this and sort of looked at it like “hmm, seems like you can jump ahead several pages, but how do I jump back several pages?” But after clicking on the little control, it turns out that to go back several pages at once, you click on the control next to the forward link:
Unintuitive indeed. Would it not make sense to have this control be next to the back button, maybe something like this?
Here, the location of the control maps to our mental model of where we want to go, as in backwards.
Over the weekend, I think, Google updated their favicon (or shortcut icon) …
First off, I was pretty confused when I saw this, since seeing that g out of context doesn’t remind me at all of the Google brand. The old favicon was much better:
While that lowercase g could be pretty much anything, it’s hard to confuse this with anything other than Google. But worse, and this was the case with their previous favicons as well, they have the same favicon for several different services, such as search, maps, and news. So why is this a big deal (or a small-big deal)? Well, I use favicons as buttons in my bookmarks toolbar…
This is a great way to conserve space. The only requirement is that the people who are designing the website are thinking about how favicons might be used. (Ok, in addition to the requirement of having a favicon in the first place.) Maybe what I’m doing is a bit unusual - basically turning favicons into buttons by removing the text description, but it seems to make sense, no? So, if you happen to be someone who designs favicons or has any say about it, if you’re working on a suite of services, don’t use the same favicon for all of them. Even if users aren’t being nerdy like me, it still makes it easier to target the right app if it has distinct visual mark or brand.
Just got an email from Wimbledon Live containing the following
Dear Anders,
As a previous Wimbledon LIVE customer we are contacting you about your preferences. If you would like to be notified about the 2008 Wimbledon LIVE service, please take the following steps to update your preferences:
1) Go to www.wimbledon.org/LIVE.
2) Click “My Account/Login” on the left navigation bar.
3) Login with your email address and password.
4) Click “Change preferences”.
5) Check the box to sign up for the “MediaZone mailing list”.
6) Click “Save changes”.We thank you for your continued interest in Wimbledon LIVE.
Sincerely,
MediaZone
I’m not sure whether to laugh or cry. I feel so sorry for the people who run the Wimbledon Live site, who are stuck with this horribly inept solution to something that should be very simple, such as
As a previous Wimbledon LIVE customer we are contacting you about your preferences. Please click on the link below if you would like to be notified about the 2008 Wimbledon LIVE service.
[here, there would be a link the user can click on which takes them to a web page where they can click on a button to confirm their preference - in other words, take the user directly to the last step above]
So what is the cost of those 5 extra unnecessary steps? Probably that a lot of people, such as myself, couldn’t be bothered to deal with them, which in turn means that less people will be notified about the 2008 service, which in turn means lost business.
This is just such a great example of designing without thinking holistically. In other words, just looking at the design of the individual web page or whatever as if it were its own little island, when the reality is that its part of a larger flow, a larger context.
On the brighter side, really looking forward to Wimbledon as always - though I don’t think he’ll do it, would be incredible if Federer pulled of six in a row.
Olga just sent me a link to her new project UX Social, in which she’s interviewing some guy on how IA could/should be applied to government policies and the like. Oh wait, that’s me!
(watch the 2nd part at Olga’s site)
In this interview, Olga gave me an opportunity to vent a little bit about the bane of my existence, and probably that of a few million other fellow New Yorkers, the MTA. Officially, the acronym stands for the Metro Transit Authority, though I think a more accurate meaning of is Mysterious Train Activity.
Anyhoo, one of the many many many stupid things that our beloved MTA did was to install ‘Emergency Exits’ at all of the several hundred subway stations. Problem is, these exits used to be normal exits, except they were bigger and wider than subway turnstyle exits, so that people with bikes and baby carriages could use them. The thing was, though, you had to press a tiny button next to the door and then wait for a subway attendant to buzz you through. And if there was no nearby attendant booth, well then there was no large exit door, so you’d have to trek to the opposite end of the station to be able to exit with your bike or whatever.
To address this problem, the MTA came up with a brilliant, brilliant!, solution. Y’know those doors with the big horizontal bar on the insider of the door that you push to exit? Well, they replaced all the old doors and installed additional doors at unattended areas with that *huuuge* button just begging to be pushed, which allows people to exit even if there is no attendant around. Oh, one small detail, there is a very noisy alarm that goes off when you push that huge irresistible button. But what do you care, you’re long gone up the stair and out of the subway, while the people on the platform have to contend with a sharp whining sound that seems like it’s never going to stop. Well, there’s more to the story, but check out Olga’s page for the rest of it.
Thanks Olga!
Oh, and she’s got lots of other great interviews with people a lot smarter than me at UX Social.
Just came across this at Machine Thinking:
At first, I thought this was two guys in something akin to one of those two-person horse costumes, but then as the video kept playing, I eventually had to accept that this in fact is a machine. Be sure to continue watching until a guy kicks the robot really hard in the side - the way that it regains it’s balance is incredible. Then, when they show it trudging through deep snow, t just appears to struggling so much, I almost started feeling bad for the thing - won’t be too long now before somebody starts PETR - People for the Ethical Treatment of Robots :)
JotSpot used to be my favorite Wiki tool and I was so sad to see it vanish after being acquired by Google. Today, at long last, JotSpot is back in the form of Google Sites. Weirdly, the only way you can sign up to use it (for now), is if you have a Google Apps account - which I think is something primarily used by small businesses. Not sure why Google would assume that individuals would not be just as interested in this tool - for the same reason that BaseCamp is used both by teams and individuals. Well, no matter, I happen to have a Google Apps account and started playing around with the app - and I have to say, I wasn’t very impressed. Sure, it’s still in ‘Beta’ - but Google has sort of shot themselves in the foot with their liberal use of that term (with Gmail still in Beta, Google has basically rendered the term meaningless) - so because it’s meaningless, people ignore that supposed message that things may not be quite working as expected, and expect everything to work just right. The whole experience still feels a bit clunky, at least by Google standards - for example, I created a new page, assuming it would then show up in my list of pages in the sidebar - but for some mysterious reason, I have to go into the settings for that page and choose to have it display in my page list - makes no sense. Considering that this app is integrated with the apps suite, it’s also not clear to me what the relationship is between the various dashboards you can create as part of this app and the dashboard that is part of the Google Apps suite - to be clear, this is not the same as the iGoogle dashboard. In fact, it seems like Google in general is having a bit of an IA problem - lots of apps all sort of interconnected but no overall semblance of order.
Anyway, bottom line is that Google Sites will probably be a worthwhile Wiki, Team Tool, whatever, eventually, but for now, it’s still a bit rough around the edges.
Anyone and everyone who is voting this Tuesday should watch this video - if nothing else to be inspired.
Can also be found at www.yeswecansong.com
So, not unexpectedly, the aging 800-pound gorilla Microsoft recently put in a bid to acquire a big box of Viagra aka Yahoo for 44 some billion dollars, hoping to stave off it’s losing battle against the young-buck 800 lb (8000 lb?) gorilla Google. Call me a pessimist, but even if this deal goes through, I don’t think it’s going to achieve what Microsoft appears to hope it will achieve. Neither Microsoft nor Yahoo have been leaders in innovation on the web. They’ve both been one step behind Google, mimicking whatever Google does, and rarely leading the way. I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say that the web, for better or worse, would not be what it is today were it not for Google. The only way, then, that any kind of collaboration between Microsoft and Yahoo could be successful–be it the current potential acquisition or something else–it would need to fundamentally reshape the web. The point that I am meanderingly getting to here is that two 800-pound gorillas are not necessarily better than one. Sure, in the short term, they could launch some gigantor campaign with lots of cool free stuff and whiz-bang services or whatever, but ultimately, unless they are truly innovating, they’ll wither away. In fact, one of the main problems Microsoft already is struggling with is that it’s becoming so much of a dinosaur (man, I just seem to love those animal metaphors), that it’s too slow and too unwieldy to get anything done in any reasonable amount of time (one word: Vista) Adding to Microsoft’s bulk with another not-so-small company would not alleviate this (though Ballmer appears to think that acquiring Yahoo would allow eliminating redundancies between the organizations.) So, unless some magical synergy thing happens between the companies should the deal go through, I think it’s just going to be more of the same. That’s not so say that Google will continue to be the leader. In fact, while Microhoo are busy exchanging billions, there are probably a couple young geniuses sitting in some garage (why is it that all computer innovations have to happen in a garage?) developing an idea that will reshape the web as we know it and make this whole acquisition thing irrelevant.
Deputy Mayor of New York City Dan Doctoroff (who will almost certainly never use this toilet himself) today announced, with great fanfare, new public toilets to be installed in locations throughout the city. The idea of public restrooms is all good and well, and frankly it’s pretty embarrassing that this is being announced in 2008 and not, say, 1908. But no matter, when reading the description of the new toilets, there are just so many IMO terrible design choices that were made that I have to wonder if any kind of prototyping/usability testing was completed. I just can’t imagine these toilets being a success and these are some reasons why:
There is a very strong association between a stainless steel toilet attached to the wall with no seat and what you might find in a prison cell. In fact, when I first saw a picture of the toilet, I thought that it was a picture of exactly that. The idea of a prison toilet has a pretty negative association, as in “citizens of New York are so uncivilized and prone to destruction of property that we have to take the same approach to designing a toilet for them as we would for prison inmates.” Sad indeed.
The reason for this is not only about logic, but also that I would just find it weird. And wouldn’t the toilet also get very hot in the summertime and very cold in the wintertime? Why couldn’t they at least have a plastic top on the toilet that can’t be lifted?
Like the NYT article says, this will
possibly be the longest and most awkward 20 to 30 seconds of a person’s day. The door slips open like an elevator, but then it stays open, to accommodate those who need extra time getting in. Meanwhile, men and women in suits walk past. It is very difficult to look inconspicuous in a bathroom on a sidewalk in New York with the door open. There is just nothing to do but stand there. And the delay will not please those who are in distress.
So here I am, really needing to go. With most every other toilet I’ve ever encountered, I can close the door behind me as soon as I enter. But here I am supposed to just stand there looking stupid with people walking by? The fact that certain disabled individuals may need more time is all good and well, but they should be able to keep the door open rather than creating awkwardness and discomfort for everyone else. Truly moronic IMO.
Interestingly, this second ‘feature’ is in complete contradiction to the door remaining open on entry. What if I am a disabled person who needs more time? I would be publicly humiliated. And, frankly, even if I technically would be able to finish my business in that amount of time, I just don’t like the idea of this time limit hanging over me. And this isn’t just about disabled people, what about older people who need more time? Or parents with their kids? Very very bad, IMO.
If these toilets supposedly are completely automated, why in the world can they not be available 24/7? After all, the time when I think a lot of people would want to use something like this is when everything else is closed.
This is according the NYT City Room Blog. Keeping in mind that the EPA’s recommendation of water use for a single flush is around 1.5 gallons, this is absolutely egregious. To be clear, the 14 gallons are used to hose down the toilet between each person who has used it. This kind of water waste is IMO just not environmentally ethical, and reason enough for me to avoid it.
