Tips on designing consistent user interfaces

Notes From Getting To Consistency: Don’t Make Your Users Think
SXSW, Saturday morning
Panelists: Paul Schreiber from Apple; Jennifer Fraser, Corel ; Alex Graveley, VMWare and Steve Johnson, Adobe.

Products don’t have to look the same, but they should perform the same. When you do something in one program, the same sequence of keystrokes or clicks should do the same thing in another program. Example of shortcut keys, which frequently don’t work the same from program to program.

Example of the USPS automated postal counter. It makes you answer yes/no in awkward sequence. “Is there any question that the package will fit? Will your package fit?” First question sets you up to answer “no,” but second requires you to answer “yes.”

Consistency doesn’t mean staying consistent with your entire legacy base. Apple was smart in ditching the floppy drive and just moving on. You shouldn’t let the needs of a very small number of users constrain you from innovating.

There are costs to inconsistency. Tech support costs are higher. You may actually alienate customers if they believe that you’re ignoreing their platform or designing an inferior product for it. You could incur costs to reverse-engineer consistency later.

Electronic Arts hasn’t changed the UI for Madden Football since version 1. What’s the customer’s goal and what can we do to help them achieve that goal as quickly as possible? If you can do that using consistency that users expect, then that’s great. But if you have to break a sequence to achieve a goal for the user, that’s what you have to do.

Go out and watch customers. If what they’re doing to achieve something doesn’t make sense, redesign it.

Adobe saw wide-screen monitors coming into widespread use and so provided a way to easily reconfigure the UI for different aspect ratios.

But they won’t always tell you what they want. Malcolm Gladwell was recently talking about spaghetti sauce. He said that spaghetti sauce makers used to think there was one ideal kind of spaghetti sauce. But it turned out there were different groups of tastes that people wouldn’t admit to. They liked chunky spaghetti sauce but didn’t think to say that. Prego figured this out and made hundreds of millions of dollars.

Who are your users going to be? You don’t need to be consistent between interfaces for a fourth grader and a legal secretary. Likewise, when you introduce something new, do you do it for your new customers or existing customers? Different expectations if you’re introducing something that helps people get started with the product. In that case, you don’t need to consider consistency with previous versions.

Cross-platform considerations. How much do you make it look like your product on another platform and how much like the other platform’s conventions. There’s “OK-Cancel on Windows, “Cancel-OK” on the Mac. You need to conform to these conventions. VMWare is creating its first Mac product and has had to revisit its whole approach to interface design to make the experience consistent for Mac users.

Features are the F-word. This was a point Steve Johnson made. Engineers fall in love with new features, but features can disrupt the user’s experience. Are you introducing features for the user or because you think it’s cool?

SXSW contrasts

I’m at the South by Southwest (SXSW) conference for the first time in its 14-year history. It holds great promise as a fusion of film, music and interactive digital media, but my first impressions are that the organizers need to drink more of their own Kool-Aid.

This conference is about the leading edge of design and user experience in digital media. However, the conference website is anything but intuitive. Try finding the schedule of sessions there. Compliments to the organizers, though, for providing a nice interactive calendar app.

Registration just doesn’t make sense. Even if you’re pre-registered, you need to fill out a card to have your badge processed (why wasn’t this done in advance?). You fill out the card on the bottom level of the Austin Convention Center, then ride the escalator to the top level to get your badge, a process that requires having your picture taken (why is this necessary) and then waiting for a prinout. Then you have to go back to the floor level to get your schedule, then back to the top level to attend a session.

The show bag is being given out in an enormous first-level room that looks 90% empty. Why this wasn’t used for registration is unclear. For a conference designed by techies who pride themselves on efficiency, the whole thing is pretty chaotic.

Let’s hope the content is worth the aggravation!

Piper Jaffray analyst tells why Google is central

Here’s an interesting Q&A with Piper Jaffray’s lead Internet analyst Safa Rashtchy in which he talks about why Google is the most important company in the user revolution. This is because Google puts users at the center of everything and makes it possible for them to manage information the way they want. This is distinct from portals, which assumed a lower level of user knowledge and so organized everything for them.

He also talks about how kids communicate differently from adults. Sharing photos and videos is fun for them and they multitask when they communicate. I noticed this on a plane the other day. I was surrounded by teenagers and all of them were engaged with some kind of electronic device all the time. Yet they were chatting with each other without removing the earphones from their ears. Kids today are incredibly nimble in the way they manage technology. There is a huge difference between them and their parents in this respect.

Did JetBlue get it right?


Is this JetBlue video effective? This is a topic of debate here at New Communications Forum. Some people are saying this is a master stroke of corporate honesty and transparency, an effective use of social media to deliver a message that looks genuine and unscripted.

Other people are saying that the CEO looks panicked, scared and not in control. There’s also debate about whether the production value is right. Does this look like it’s been engineered to look “rough” and is rough right for a message like this? Would David Neeleman be more effective in a studio with a coat and tie and professional lighting?

These are the conundrums marketers face in using social media. What works on TV doesn’t necessarily work on YouTube.

There’s one thing JetBlue did right, though: it acted fast and it went direct to the customer. As Steve Crescenzo said in a panel discussion today, “It takes most companies three weeks to get an article about the United Way approved by HR. JetBlue got a Customer Bill of Rights through the legal department in a week. “

Weinberger NCF keynote: users take back power

Popular blogger and Cluetrain Manifesto co-author David Weinberger gave an enlightening and funny keynote presentation to the New Communications Forum in Las Vegas this morning. Here are my notes:

For the last 100 years, broadcast has dominated our communications and our democracy. Broadcast is now being put in its place. Many-to-many communications will become more important than broadcast.

It’s not about the content. We’re able to get past broadcast because we’re able to escape reality. Broadcast works because it’s constrained by the limitations of reality.

You can’t be in two places at the time, so everything has to have its own place. It’s a terrible limitation that the digital world escapes.

In mainstream media, there’s a limited amount of space. So only a few things get to appear and only a few people get to right. It’s the same order of information for everyone. Take away those constraints and now everybody can talk. We decide what’s interesting to us.

The authority system is changing. This goes back to the basic assumptions of our culture. The base assumption is that the larger the project, the more control you need. If you want to build something big, you need managers and managers to manage the managers.

The Web is the largest collection of human intellect we’ve ever built. It’s also the most usable and reliable. The Web is a permission-free zone.

Most of our institutions are built around the urge to control. But now the walls are down. A business isn’t the best sort of information about its products. You want to find other users. If you want to know how it is to drive a Mini Cooper in Boston in the winter, you’re not going to get the best information from the Mini Cooper website.

Broadcast gives the same message to everybody to drive down the cost of marketing. The only issue with this is that there’s no market for messages. Nobody likes being messaged. So we’re engaged in war with our customers, trying to make them listen to something they don’t want to hear.

Whole notion of markets has been affected by the notion of messages. Actual markets consist of customers and they’re talking all the time. We do it in discussion sites, mailing lists and consumer rating sites.

What is more boring than classified ads? They’re boring. But on Craigslist, we talk about what we’re posting in classified ads. And we do it through tags. We are so social that we even make bookmarks into a social activity.

Marketing, business and media are all about fake, phony voices. Conversations are open and honest.

What weblogs aren’t. They’re not about cats. They’re not about people in their pajamas writing about cats. They’re about things that we care about.

Encyclopedia Britannica has 65,000 important topics. Wikipedia has 1.5 million topics, including the deep-fried Mars bar and the heavy metal umlaut. Britannica is constrained by the physical because 65,000 topics fill 32 volumes.

Blogs aren’t journalism. They’re blank pieces of paper. The fact that they’ve been judged in the context of journalism is because the media can’t get past itself.

Journalists define their value in terms of their judgment. That has passed into the hands of readers. Since people first began exchanging news articles by e-mail, judgment passed into the hands of users. That’s our front page, what we recommend to each other. The Web is a recommendation engine and it has been since the beginning. A good example of how this plays out is Digg.

This week, USAToday introduced a bunch of conversational components, including Digg-like recommendations. But there’s only a thumbs-up, not a thumbs-down. This misses a key characteristic of readers, which is we want revenge. USAToday also introduced bloggers on its site. This is a titanic change, also links to things outside of USAToday.

We’ve been telling businesses for a couple of decades that information is important and businesses want to control important things. It turns out that NOT controlling the information actually makes it better.

Blogs aren’t professional. They are written sub-optimally. You don’t have time to ponder and polish. We give them pre-emptive forgiveness. There is an acknowledgement of human fallibility, the very thing that marketing messages don’t have. Marketing messages are perfect and we hate that. Humans are fallible. They make us human in ways that marketers won’t permit.

Bloggers with just a few people linking to them are little knots of community. Every blogroll link is a little act of selflessness. The Web was built out of these little acts of generosity.

Home page of NY Times: Every link on the home page links back to the New York Times, except those that link to ads. This is narcissism.

Blogs aren’t simple: Good marketing is supposed to be boiling things down to a few memorable words. But ideas aren’t simple. A Bush position paper 2,500 words long generated more than 2,500 links from bloggers. We take things that appear simple and make them complex. We’ve been living under this regime of broadcast simplicity. We’ve been spoken to as morons for years but we don’t speak to each other that way.

Blogs aren’t content – Content is really important, but it’s not just the content. If you go into a store and take a shopping cart and take all the clothing that fits you and nothing else and put it in a pile, they’ll throw you out. That’s because they own the organization. But if you put up a website where people can’t find what they want, they’ll throw you out. People want to own the organization.

You shouldn’t believe what you read in Wikipedia. That doesn’t mean it isn’t credible. If you read an article on something you know about, you’ll probably find errors. You look at how heavily it’s been edited. Look at the discussion pages, which have amazing learned discussions. What makes Wikipedia credible is that it puts up notices about articles that are suspect. There are more than 100 warnings available and you can create your own.

The presence of these warnings saying that this article isn’t perfect makes Wikipedia more credible. It’s more interested in informing us that speaking as the voice of God. It’s more interested in having us come to informed beliefs. You’ll never see these notices in the NY Times, Britannica or marketing materials.

The attempt to be infallible drives out credibility and makes us look like assholes.

Peer-to-peer is about us making the communication world ours again. Wikipedia is for us. It’s ours. It cares first and foremost about us. Craigslist is ours. People fall in love and get married on Craigslist.

YouTube is ours. It enables us to organize content the way that we want to, the way no TV channel ever could. It feels like ours. It exists for us.

Google feels like ours. That simple home page feels personal. If marketers saw that home page, they’d want to throw all kinds of ads around it.

Tap customer conversations for blog content

Lee Odden suggests that customer interaction can be great blog material.

It’s a good idea. Lots of businesses have customer service groups and many of them capture customer conversations in their databases. Why not take the best questions and answers, clean them up and expose them on a blog? So what if it’s the same as an FAQ? This approach is faster and it’ll probably do better on search results.

Add this to your list of successful approaches to blogging that don’t require a lot of time or money.

USA Today redesign continues reader involvement trend

USAToday debuts a new site design incorporating user comments on news stories, a recommendation engine, blogs from external sources and links to news on other sites. The most distinctive feature appears to be the inclusion of reader comments directly on news story pages. While this isn’t a new idea, USAToday is the largest mainstream media outlet that I’m aware of to take this approach.

The innovation I’m waiting for is when a major news site starts inviting readers to actually contribute to the reporting process. That doesn’t mean deputizing citizens as adjunct reporters, but could involve them contributing background and first-person sidebars. I still think mainstream media could learn something from Wikipedia.org and its much weaker companion Wikinews.org. Wikinews, in particular, is a fascinating idea, but the site doesn’t have enough traffic or contributors to really work. Could a site with USAToday’s throw weight make a companion news wiki successful? Somebody’s to figure it out one of these days.

MP3's perilous future

Wired News reports on a federal jury’s big legal judgment against Microsoft over licenses to MP3 technology and questions whether MP3 has a future if the patent claims by Alcatel-Lucent are upheld.

This rather important story has received only scant coverage in the media that I can see. If MP3 is abandoned by the software industry, it’ll inconvenience a lot of people, but probably leave us better off in the long term.

MP3 is not a terribly high-quality format and it doesn’t support some features, such as bookmarks, that would make podcasting more useful. It has triumphed in the market for the same reason that VHS video did: it was in the right place at the right time. The best standard doesn’t always win, and that’s certainly the case here.

If Alcatel-Lucent tries to wring every royalty it can out of this situation, it will score a short-term win but kill MP3 in the long term. The company will be better off accepting 10 cents on the dollar from a few big players and then putting MP3 under a creative commons-type license. It would get some good PR from such a move and could then position itself as a leader in developing digital audio formats.

PRSA panel gives insight into public relations priorities

I had the opportunity to be on a panel about social media put on by the Public Relations Society of America’s Boston Chapter last evening and it was a good opportunity to assess the current state of PR thinking about the topic. John Cass moderated. The sold-out session drew about 80 people, many of them owners or employees of small agencies. The questions indicated that people are past the tire-kicking stage and are beginning to ask substantive questions about how to participate in the blogosphere in particular. I was also surprised at some of the questions that weren’t asked, but more on that later. My take-aways:

There’s a lot of focus on tools – Many questions related to how bloggers can maximize traffic and visibility. Todd Van Hoosear, who’s practice leader for social media at Topaz Partners, gave an informative talk on how tagging can raise search engine visibility while I sang the praises of del.icio.us as a means to monitor conversation about companies and products. Attendees seemed somewhat taken aback by the amount of technical knowledge that’s needed to generate traffic, but I think the reality is that tagging and RSS are pretty easy to use once you get the hang of them.

People are worried about managing client expectations – Several questions related to whether businesses should be blogging/podcasting at all and how to set realistic expectations for those that want to engage in these activities. It sounds like there’s a bit of a gold rush going on right now, with businesses diving into social media without really understanding what they expect to get out of it. This is typical of any hot new trend and I think PR organizations play an important part in helping their clients to understand how – and whether – to blog.

There’s a lot of interest in a new approach to press releaseTodd Defren from Shift Communications was on the panel, talking about a new kind of press release his company developed last year. Three cheers for this new approach to media relations, which providies journalists with extensive background and multimedia commentary to use in their stories. The standard press release wore out its welcome long ago. The emerging class of social media press release offers much richer information and potentially positions the authors as valuable content sources. Todd said the template for the Shift Communications press release has been downloaded more than 50,000 times and I can see why.

I was also interested by the questions that weren’t asked:

The role of social media in mainstream media – one of the most important reasons for businesses to participate in social media, I believe, is to improve their visibility with mainstream reporters and editors. The mainstream media is relying on social media sources more and more for story ideas and background information. Mainstream media is also an important source of links and traffic to blogs and podcasts. In light of this fact, I found it curious that there were no questions about this developing relationship.

Questions of voice, topic and content – While there were a lot of questions about how to drive traffic to blogs, there was almost none about what blogs should say and how they should say it. It could be that I’m simply behind the times and PR organizations have already figured this out, but I don’t think that’s the case. In my opinion, you need to get straight what you want to talk about before you start talking. Judging from the questions I heard last night, though, this doesn’t seem to be a big issue with PR practitioners.

How to become a destination – There was some discussion of this, but not as much as I had expected. Social media presents a great opportunity for businesses to become content providers and destination sites for communities of customers. While there was some interest in this angle, there was relatively said about it. Perhaps it’s still too early.

I devote a chapter of my book to the role of public relations in social media. Judging by the discussion last night, it’s clear that there is broad awareness in the PR community that this is a big deal and that practitioners need to develop strategies. That’s a good thing.

Shady ethics in the blogosphere

Scott Kirsner, former Boston Globe writer, has a thoughtful piece on disclosure in the blogosphere. He points out the ethical dilemmas posed by business’ efforts to court bloggers with free stuff and even cash payments for positive coverage. There is no code of ethics in the blogosphere, of course, outside of perhaps the Cluetrain Manifesto, so it’s up to the readers to decide whom to believe.

Personally, I believe this issue will work itself out at the grass roots level. Look at Engadget and BoingBoing, which are two of the most popular and successful blogs. They need to uphold high standards or their audiences would quickly desert them. The same holds true at less-popular titles. The blogosphere is self-policing, and any popular blogger who tries to deceive his or her audience will be quickly smoked out. Once you get a reputation for shady ethics, it’s very difficult to recover. Any blogger who wants to build a long-term franchise will be very careful not to cross that line.

There will always be con men in social media, but their influence will be limited. The readers will see to that.