';\n\t\t\thtml+= '';\n\t\t\thtml+= ''+item.titleNoFormatting+' ';\n\t\t\thtml+= ' ';\n\t\t\thtml+= '';\n\t\t\thtml+= item.content;\n\t\t\thtml+= '
';\n\t\t\thtml+= '';\n\t\t}\n\t\tdocument.getElementById('newsresults').innerHTML = html;\n\t}\n};\n\nNow, I can call that function at the bottom of my document:\n\n\n\nIf I only want to run that search when there\u2019s room for a sidebar, I can wrap it in an if statement:\n\n\n\nIf the browser is wider than 640 pixels, that will fire off a search for news stories about cats and put the results into the newsresults element in my markup:\n\n\n \n
\n\nThis works pretty well but I\u2019m making an assumption that people with small-screen devices wouldn\u2019t be interested in seeing that nice-to-have content. You know what they say about assumptions: they make an ass out of you and umptions. I should really try to give everyone at least the option to get to that extra content:\n\n\n\nSee the result\n\nVisitors with small-screen devices will see that link to the search results; visitors with larger screens will get the search results directly.\n\nI\u2019ve been concentrating on HTML and JavaScript, but this technique has consequences for content strategy and information architecture. Instead of thinking about possible page content in a binary way as either \u2018on the page\u2019 or \u2018not on the page\u2019, conditional loading introduces a third \u2018it\u2019s complicated\u2019 option.\n\nThis was just a simple example but I hope it illustrates that conditional loading could become an important part of the content-first responsive design approach.", "year": "2011", "author": "Jeremy Keith", "author_slug": "jeremykeith", "published": "2011-12-02T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2011/conditional-loading-for-responsive-designs/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 284, "title": "Subliminal User Experience", "contents": "The term \u2018user experience\u2019 is often used vaguely to quantify common elements of the interaction design process: wireframing, sitemapping and so on. UX undoubtedly involves all of these principles to some degree, but there really is a lot more to it than that.\n\nGood UX is characterized by providing the user with constant feedback as they step through your interface. It means thinking about and providing fallbacks and error resolutions in even the rarest of scenarios. It\u2019s about omitting clutter to make way for the necessary, and using the most fundamental of design tools to influence a user\u2019s path. It means making no assumptions, designing right down to the most distinct details and going one step further every single time. In many cases, good UX is completely subliminal.\n\nThere are simple tools and subtleties we can build into our products to enhance the overall experience but, in order to do so, we really have to step beyond where we usually draw the line on what to design.\n\nThe purpose of this article is not to provide technical how-tos, as the functionality is, in most cases, quite simple and could be implemented in a myriad of ways. Rather, it will present a handful of ideas for enhancing the experience of an interface at a deeper level of design without relying on the container.\n\nWe\u2019ll cover three elements that should get you thinking in the right mindset:\n\n\n\tprogress activity and post-active states\n\tpseudo-class preloading\n\tbuttons and their (mis)behaviour\n\n\nProgress activity and the post-active state\n\nWe\u2019ve long established that we can\u2019t control the devices our products are viewed on, which browser they\u2019ll run in or what connection speed will be used to access them. We accept this all as factual, so why is it so often left to the browser to provide feedback to the user when an event is triggered or an error encountered? The browser isn\u2019t part of the interface \u2014 it\u2019s merely a container. A simple, visual recognition of your users\u2019 activity may be all it takes to make or break the product.\n\nLet\u2019s begin with a commonly overlooked case: progress activity.\n\nA user moves their cursor over a hyperlink or button, which is clearly defined as one by the visual language of your content. Upon doing so, they trigger the :hover state to confirm this element is indeed interactive. So far, so good. What happens next is where it starts to fall apart: the user hits this link, presumably triggering an :active state, which is then returned to the normal state upon release. And then what?\n\n\n\nFrom this point on, your user is in limbo. The link has fallen back to either its regular or :visited state. You\u2019ve effectively abandoned them and are relying entirely on the browser they\u2019re using to communicate that something is happening. This poses quite a few problems:\n\n\n\tThe user may lose focus of what they were doing.\n\tThere is little consistency between progress indication in browsers.\n\tThe user may not even notice that their action has been acknowledged.\n\n\nHow many times have one or more of these events happened to you due to a lack of communication from the interface?\n\nThink about the differences between Safari and Chrome in this area \u2014 two browsers that, when compared to each other, are relatively similar in nature, though this basic feature differs in execution.\n\n\n\nLike all aspects of designing the user experience, there is no one true way to fix this problem, but we can introduce details that many users will unconsciously appreciate.\n\nConsider the basic loading indicator. It\u2019s nothing new \u2014 in fact, some would argue it\u2019s quite a clich\u00e9. However, whether using a spinning wheel or a progress bar, a gif or JavaScript, or something more sophisticated, these simple tools create an illusion of movement, progress and activity. Depending on the implementation, progress indication graphics can significantly increase a user\u2019s perception of the speed in which an event is taking place. Combine this with a cursor change and a lock over the element to prevent double-clicking or reloading, and your chances of keeping your user\u2019s valuable attention have significantly increased.\n\nDemo: Progress activity and the post-active state\n\nThis same logic applies to all aspects of defaulting in a browser, from micro-elements like this up to something as simple as a 404 page. The difference in a user\u2019s reaction to hitting the default Apache 404 and a hand-crafted, branded page are phenomenal and there are no prizes for guessing which one they\u2019re more likely to exit from.\n\nPseudo-class preloading\n\nAnother detail that it pays well to look after is the use and abuse of the :hover element and, more importantly, the content revealed by it. Chances are you\u2019re using the :hover pseudo-class somewhere in almost every screen you create. If content is being revealed on :hover and that content takes some time to load, there will inevitably be a delay the first time it is initiated. It appears tacky and half-finished when a tooltip or drop-down loads instantly, only to have its background or supporting elements follow through a second or two later. So, let\u2019s preload the elements we know we\u2019ll need.\n\nA very simple application of this would be to load each file into the default state of a visible element and offset them by a large number. This ensures our elements have loaded and are ready if and when they need to be displayed.\n\nelement {\n background: url(path/to/image.jpg) -9999em -9999em no-repeat;\n }\nelement .tooltip {\n display: none;\n }\nelement:hover .tooltip {\n display: block;\n background: url(path/to/image.jpg) 0 0;\n }\n\nBackground images are just one example. Of course, the same logic can apply to any form of revealed content. Using a sprite graphic can also be a clever \u2014 albeit tedious \u2014 method for achieving the same goal, so if you\u2019re using a sprite, preloading in this way may not be necessary\n\nThe differences between preloading and not can only be visualized properly with an actual demonstration.\n\nDemo: Preloading revealed content\n\nButtons and their (mis)behaviour\n\nAlmost all of the time, a button serves just one purpose: to be clicked (or tapped). When a button\u2019s pressed, therefore, if anything other than triggering the desired event occurs, a user naturally becomes frustrated. I often get funny looks when talking about this, but designing the details of a button is something I consider essential.\n\nIt goes without saying that a button should always visually recognise :hover and :active states. We can take that one step further and disable some actions that get in the way of pressing the button.\n\nIt\u2019s rare that a user would ever want to select and use the text on a button, so let\u2019s cleanly disable it:\n\nelement {\n -moz-user-select: -moz-none;\n -webkit-user-select: none;\n user-select: none;\n }\n\nIf the button is image-based or contains an image, we could also disable user dragging to make sure the image element stays locked to the button:\n\nelement {\n -moz-user-drag: -moz-none;\n -webkit-user-drag: none;\n user-drag: none;\n }\n\nDemo: A more usable button\n\nDisabling global features like this should be done with utmost caution as it\u2019s very easy to cross the line between enhancement and friction. Cases where this is acceptable are very rare, but it\u2019s a good trick to keep in mind nevertheless. Both Apple\u2019s iCloud and Metalab\u2019s Flow applications use these tools appropriately and to great extent.\n\nYou could argue that the visual feedback of having the text selected or image dragged when a user mis-hits the button is actually a positive effect, informing the user that their desired action did not work. However, covering for human error should be a designer\u2019s job, not that of our users. We can (almost) ensure it does work for them by accommodating for errors like this in most cases.\n\nFinal thoughts\n\nDesigning to this level of detail can seem obsessive, but as a designer and user of many interfaces and applications, I believe it can be the difference between a good user experience and a great one.\n\nThe samples you\u2019ve just seen are only a fraction of the detail we can design for. Keep in mind that the demonstrations, code and methods above outline just one way to do this. You may not agree with all of these processes or have the time and desire to consider them, but one fact remains: it\u2019s not the technology, or the way it\u2019s done that\u2019s important \u2014 it\u2019s the logic and the concept of designing everything.", "year": "2011", "author": "Chris Sealey", "author_slug": "chrissealey", "published": "2011-12-03T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2011/subliminal-user-experience/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 274, "title": "Adaptive Images for Responsive Designs", "contents": "So you\u2019ve been building some responsive designs and you\u2019ve been working through your checklist of things to do:\n\n\n\tYou started with the content and designed around it, with mobile in mind first.\n\tYou\u2019ve gone liquid and there\u2019s nary a px value in sight; % is your weapon of choice now.\n\tYou\u2019ve baked in a few media queries to adapt your layout and tweak your design at different window widths.\n\tYou\u2019ve made your images scale to the container width using the fluid Image technique.\n\tYou\u2019ve even done the same for your videos using a nifty bit of JavaScript.\n\n\nYou\u2019ve done a good job so pat yourself on the back. But there\u2019s still a problem and it\u2019s as tricky as it is important: image resolutions.\n\nHTML has an !\n\n\n \n\nWhoa! First spacer GIFs and now ? This really is the future! The image above will only load for users without JavaScript support. Now all we need to do is send JavaScript in there to get the textContent of the element, then we can alter the image source before handing it to the DOM for parsing.\n\nHere\u2019s an example of that working \u2026 unless you\u2019re using Internet Explorer.\n\nInternet Explorer doesn\u2019t retain the content of elements. As soon as it\u2019s parsed, it considers it an empty element. FANKS INTERNET EXPLORER. This is why some solutions do this:\n\n\n \n\nso JavaScript can still get at the URL via the data-src attribute. However, repeating stuff isn\u2019t great. Surely we can do better than that.\n\nA dirty, dirty hack\n\nThankfully, I managed to come up with a solution, and by me, I mean someone cleverer than me. Pornel\u2019s solution uses , but surely we don\u2019t need that.\n\nNow, before we look at this, I can\u2019t stress how dirty it is. It\u2019s so dirty that if you\u2019ve seen it, schools will refuse to employ you.\n\n\n example above, we can get the text content of the comment pretty easily.\n\nHurrah! But wait\u2026 Some browsers are sometimes downloading the image, even with JavaScript enabled. Notably Firefox. Huh?\n\nImages are downloaded in comments now? What?\n\nNo. What we\u2019re seeing here is the effect of speculative parsing. Here\u2019s what\u2019s happening:\n\n\n\nWhile the browser is parsing the script, it parses the rest of the document. This is usually a good thing, as it can download subsequent images and scripts without waiting for the script to complete. The problem here is we create an unbalanced tree.\n\n An unbalanced tree, yesterday.\n\nIn this case, the browser must throw away its speculative parsing and reparse from the end of the \n \n\nAnd there we have it. We can now prevent images loading for users with JavaScript, but we can still get at the markup.\n\nWe\u2019re still creating an unbalanced tree and there\u2019s a performance impact in that. However, the parser won\u2019t have got far by the time our script executes, so the impact is small. Unbalanced trees are more of a concern for external scripts; a lot of parsing can happen by the time the script has downloaded and parsed.\n\nUsing dirtiness to create responsive images\n\nNow all we need to do is give each of our dirty scripts a class name, then JavaScript can pick them up, grab the markup from the comment and decide what to do with the images.\n\nThis technique isn\u2019t exclusively useful for responsive images. It could also be used to delay images loading until they\u2019ve scrolled into view. But to do that you\u2019ll need a bulletproof way of detecting when elements are in view. This involves getting the height of the viewport, which is extremely unreliable on mobile devices.\n\nHere\u2019s a hastily thrown together example showing how it can be used for responsive images.\n\nI adjust the end of the image URLs conditionally depending on the result of media queries. This is done on page load, and on resize.\n\nI\u2019m using regular expressions to alter the URLs. Using regex to deal with HTML is usually a sign of insanity, but parsing it with the browser\u2019s DOM parser would trigger the download of images before we change the URLs. My implementation currently requires double-quoted image URLs, because I\u2019m lazy. Wanna fight about it?\n\nMedia querying via JavaScript\n\nJeremy Keith used document.documentElement.clientWidth in his example, which is great as a proof of concept, but unfortunately is rather unreliable across mobile devices.\n\nThankfully, standards are coming to the rescue with window.matchMedia, which lets us provide a media query string and get a boolean result. There\u2019s even a great polyfill for browsers that don\u2019t support it (as long as they support media queries in CSS).\n\nI didn\u2019t go with that for three reasons:\n\n\n\tI\u2019d like to keep media queries in the CSS file, if possible.\n\tI wanted something a little lighter to keep things speedy while resizing.\n\tIt\u2019s just not dirty enough yet.\n\n\nTo make things ultra-dirty, I add a test element to the page with a specific class, let\u2019s say media-test. Then, I control the width of it using media queries in my CSS file:\n\n@media all and (min-width: 640px) {\n .media-test {\n width: 1px;\n }\n}\n@media all and (min-width: 926px) {\n .media-test {\n width: 2px;\n }\n}\n\nThe JavaScript part changes the URL suffix depending on the width of media-test. I\u2019m using a min-width media query, but you can use others such as pixel-ratio to detect high DPI displays. Basically, it\u2019s a hacky way for CSS to set a value that can be picked up by JavaScript. It means the bit that signals changes to the images sits with the rest of the responsive code, without duplication.\n\nAlso, phwoar, dirty!\n\nThe API\n\nI threw a script together to demonstrate the technique. I\u2019m not particularly attached to it, I\u2019m not even sure I like it, but here\u2019s the API:\n\nresponsiveGallery({\n // Class name of dirty script element(s) to target\n scriptClass: 'dirty-gallery-script',\n // Class name for our test element\n testClass: 'dirty-gallery-test',\n // The initial suffix of URLs, the bit that changes.\n initialSuffix: '-mobile.jpg',\n // A map of suffixes, for each width of 'dirty-gallery-test'\n suffixes: {\n '1': '-desktop.jpg',\n '2': '-large-desktop.jpg',\n '3': '-mobile-retina.jpg'\n }\n});\n\nThe API can cover individual images or multiple galleries at once. In the example I gave at the start of the article I make two calls to the API, one for both galleries, and one for the single image above the video reviews. They\u2019re separate calls because they respond slightly differently.\n\nThe future\n\nHopefully, we\u2019ll get a proper solution to this soon. My favourite suggestion is the element that Bruce Lawson covers.\n\n\n \n \n \n \n \n\nUnfortunately, we\u2019re nowhere near that yet, and I\u2019d still rather have my media queries stay in CSS. Perhaps the source elements could be skipped if they\u2019re display:none; then they could have class names and be controlled via CSS. Sigh.\n\nWell, I\u2019m tired of writing now and I\u2019m sure you\u2019re tired of reading. I realize what I\u2019ve presented is a yet another dirty hack to the responsive image problem (perhaps the dirtiest?) and may be completely unfeasible in professional situations. But isn\u2019t that the true spirit of Christmas?\n\nNo.", "year": "2011", "author": "Jake Archibald", "author_slug": "jakearchibald", "published": "2011-12-08T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2011/adaptive-images-for-responsive-designs-again/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 278, "title": "Going Both Ways", "contents": "It\u2019s that time of the year again: Santa is getting ready to travel the world. Up until now, girls and boys from all over have sent in letters asking for what they want. I hope that Santa and his elves have\u2014unlike me\u2014learned more than just English.\n\nOn the Internet, those girls and boys want to participate in sharing their stories and videos of opening presents and of being with friends and family. Ah, yes, the wonders of user generated content. But more than that, people also want to be able to use sites in the language they know.\n\nWhile you and I might expect the text to read from left to right, not all languages do. Some go from right to left, such as Arabic and Hebrew. (Some also go from top to bottom, but for now, let\u2019s just worry about those first two directions!)\n\nIf we were building a site for girls and boys to send their letters to Santa, we need to consider having the interface in the language and direction that they prefer. On the elves\u2019 side, they may be viewing the site in one direction but reading the user generated content in the other direction. We need to build a site that supports bidirectional (or bidi) text.\n\nLet\u2019s take a look at some things to be aware of when it comes to building bidi interfaces.\n\nSetting the direction of the interface\n\nRight off the bat, we need to tell the browser what direction the text should be going in. To do this, we add the dir attribute to an HTML element and set it to either LTR (for left to right) or RTL (for right to left).\n\n\n\nYou can add the dir attribute to any element and it will set or change the direction for the content within that element. \n\n\n Here is English Content.\n \u0627\u0644\u0645\u0648\u0636\u0648\u0639
\n\n\nYou can also set the direction via CSS.\n\n.rtl {\n direction: rtl;\n }\n\nIt\u2019s generally recommended that you don\u2019t use CSS to set the direction of the text. Text direction is an important part of the content that should be retained even in environments where the CSS may not be available or fails to load.\n\nHow things change with the direction attribute\n\nJust adding the dir attribute tells the browser to render the content within it differently. \n\n\n\nThe text aligns to the right of the page and, interestingly, punctuation appears at the left of the sentence. (We\u2019ll get to that in a little bit.) \n\nScrollbars in most browsers will appear on the left instead of the right. Webkit is the notable exception here which always shows the scrollbar on the right, no matter what the text direction is. Avoid having a design that has an expectation that the scrollbar will be in a specific place (and a specific size).\n\nChanging the order of text mid-way\n\nAs we saw in that previous example, the punctuation appeared at the beginning of the sentence instead of the end, even though the text was English. At Yahoo!, we have an interesting dilemma where the company name has punctuation in it. Therefore, when the name appears in the middle of (for example) Arabic text, the exclamation mark appears at the beginning of the word instead of the end.\n\n\n\nThere are two ways in which this problem can be solved:\n\n1. Use HTML around the left-to-right content, or\n\nTo solve the problem of the Yahoo! name in the midst of Arabic text, we can wrap a span around it and change the direction on that element.\n\n\n\n2. Use a text direction mark in the content.\n\nUnicode has two marks, U+200E and U+200F, that tell the browser that the text is in a particular direction. Placing this right after the punctuation will correct the placement.\n\nUsing the HTML entity:\nYahoo!\u200e\n\nTables\n\nThankfully, the cells of a data table also get reordered from right to left. Equally as nice, if you\u2019re using display:table, the content will still get reordered.\n\n\n\nCSS\n\nSo far, we\u2019ve seen that the dir attribute does a pretty decent job of getting content flowing in the direction that we need it. Unfortunately, there are huge swaths of design that is handled by CSS that the handy dir attribute has zero effect over.\n\nMany properties, like float or absolute positioning with left and right values, are unaffected and must be handled manually. Elements that were floated left must now by floated right. Left margins and paddings must now move to the right and the right margins and paddings must now move to the left.\n\nSince the browser won\u2019t handle this for us, we have a couple approaches that we can use:\n\nCSS Only\n\nWe can take advantage of the attribute selector to target CSS to apply in one direction or another.\n\n[dir=ltr] .module {\n\tfloat: left;\n\tmargin: 0 0 0 20px;\n}\n\n[dir=rtl] .module {\n\tfloat: right;\n\tmargin: 0 20px 0 0;\n}\n\nAs you can see from this example, both of the properties have been modified for the flipped interface. If your interface is rather complicated, you will have to create a lot of duplicate rules to have the site looking good in both directions while serving up a single stylesheet.\n\nCSSJanus\n\nGoogle has a tool called CSSJanus. It\u2019s a Python script that runs over the LTR versions of your CSS files and generates RTL versions. For the RTL version of the site, just serve up those CSS files instead of the LTR versions.\n\nThe script looks for keywords and value combinations and automatically swaps them so you don\u2019t have to. \n\nAt Yahoo!, CSSJanus was a huge help in speeding up our development of a bidi interface. We\u2019ve also made a number of improvements to the script to better handle border radius, background positioning, and gradients. We will be pushing those changes back into the CSSJanus project. \n\n\n\nBackground Images\n\nBackground images, especially for things like CSS sprites, also raise an interesting dilemma. Background images are positioned relative to the left of the element. In a flipped interface, however, we need to position it relative to the right. An icon that would be to the left of some text will now need to appear on the right.\n\n\n\nIf the x position of the background is percentage-based, then it\u2019s fairly easy to swap the values. 0 becomes 100%, 10% becomes 90% and so on. If the x position is pixel-based, then we\u2019re in a bit of a pickle. There\u2019s no way to say that the image should be a certain number of pixels from the right.\n\nTherefore, you\u2019ll need to ensure that any background image that needs to be swapped should be percentage-based. (99.9% of the the time, the background position will need to be 0 so that it can be changed to 100% for RTL.)\n\nIf you\u2019re taking an existing implementation, background positioning will likely be the biggest hurdle you\u2019ll have to overcome in swapping your interface around. If you make sure your x position is always percentage-based from the beginning, you\u2019ll have a much smoother process ahead of you!\n\nFlipping Images\n\nThis is a more subtle point and one where you\u2019ll really want an expert with the region to weigh in on. In RTL interfaces, users may expect certain icons to also be flipped. Pencil icons that skew to the right in LTR interfaces might need to be swapped to skew to the left, instead. Chat bubbles that come from the left will need to come from the right.\n\nThe easiest way to handle this is to create new images. Name the LTR versions with -ltr in the name and name the RTL versions with -rtl in the name. CSSJanus will automatically rename all file references from -ltr to -rtl.\n\nThe Future\n\nThankfully, those within the W3C recognize that CSS should be more agnostic. As a result, they\u2019ve begun introducing new properties that allow the browser to manage the swapping from left to right for us.\n\nThe CSS3 specification for backgrounds allows for the background-position to be relative to other corners other than the top left by specifying keywords before each position.\n\nThis will position the background 5px from the bottom right of the element.\n\nbackground-position: right 5px bottom 5px;\n\nOpera 11.60 is currently the only browser that supports this syntax.\n\nFor margin and padding, we have margin-start and margin-end. In LTR interfaces, margin-start would be the same as margin-left and in RTL interfaces, margin-start would be the same as margin-right. \n\nFirefox and Webkit support these but with vendor prefixes right now:\n\n-webkit-margin-start: 20px;\n-moz-margin-start: 20px;\n\nIn the CSS3 Images working draft specification, there\u2019s an image() property that allows us to specify image fallbacks and whether those fallbacks are for LTR or RTL interfaces.\n\nbackground: image('sprite.png' ltr, 'sprite-rtl.png' rtl);\n\nUnfortunately, no browser supports this yet but it\u2019s nice to be able to dream of how much easier this will be in the future!\n\nHo Ho Ho\n\nHopefully, after all of this, you\u2019re full of cheer knowing that you\u2019re well on your way to creating interfaces that can go both ways!", "year": "2011", "author": "Jonathan Snook", "author_slug": "jonathansnook", "published": "2011-12-19T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2011/going-both-ways/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 267, "title": "Taming Complexity", "contents": "I\u2019m going to step into my UX trousers for this one. I wouldn\u2019t usually wear them in public, but it\u2019s Christmas, so there\u2019s nothing wrong with looking silly.\n\nAnyway, to business. Wherever I roam, I hear the familiar call for simplicity and the denouncement of complexity. I read often that the simpler something is, the more usable it will be. We understand that simple is hard to achieve, but we push for it nonetheless, convinced it will make what we build easier to use. Simple is better, right?\n\nWell, I\u2019ll try to explore that. Much of what follows will not be revelatory to some but, like all good lessons, I think this serves as a welcome reminder that as we live in a complex world it\u2019s OK to sometimes reflect that complexity in the products we build.\n\nMyths and legends\n\nLess is more, we\u2019ve been told, ever since master of poetic verse Robert Browning used the phrase in 1855. Well, I\u2019ve conducted some research, and it appears he knew nothing of web design. Neither did modernist architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, a later pedlar of this worthy yet contradictory notion. Broad is narrow. Tall is short. Eggs are chips. See: anyone can come up with this stuff.\n\nTo paraphrase Einstein, simple doesn\u2019t have to be simpler. In other words, simple doesn\u2019t dictate that we remove the complexity. Complex doesn\u2019t have to be confusing; it can be beautiful and elegant. On the web, complex can be necessary and powerful. A website that simplifies the lives of its users by offering them everything they need in one site or screen is powerful. For some, the greater the density of information, the more useful the site.\n\nIn our decision-making process, principles such as Occam\u2019s razor\u2019s_razor (in a nutshell: simple is better than complex) are useful, but simple is for the user to determine through their initial impression and subsequent engagement. What appears simple to me or you might appear very complex to someone else, based on their own mental model or needs. We can aim to deliver simple, but they\u2019ll be the judge.\n\nAs a designer, developer, content alchemist, user experience discombobulator, or whatever you call yourself, you\u2019re often wrestling with a wealth of material, a huge number of features, and numerous objectives. In many cases, much of that stuff is extraneous, and goes in the dustbin. However, it can be just as likely that there\u2019s a truckload of suggested features and content because it all needs to be there. Don\u2019t be afraid of that weight.\n\nIn the right hands, less can indeed mean more, but it\u2019s just as likely that less can very often lead to, well\u2026 less.\n\nComplexity is powerful\n\nSimple is the ability to offer a powerful experience without overwhelming the audience or inducing information anxiety. Giving them everything they need, without having them ferret off all over a site to get things done, is important.\n\nIt\u2019s useful to ask throughout a site\u2019s lifespan, \u201cdoes the user have everything they need?\u201d It\u2019s so easy to let our designer egos get in the way and chop stuff out, reduce down to only the things we want to see. That benefits us in the short term, but compromises the audience long-term.\n\nThe trick is not to be afraid of complexity in itself, but to avoid creating the perception of complexity. Give a user a flight simulator and they\u2019ll crash the plane or jump out. Give them everything they need and more, but make it feel simple, and you\u2019re building a relationship, empowering people.\n\nThis can be achieved carefully with what some call gradual engagement, and often the sensible thing might be to unleash complexity in carefully orchestrated phases, initially setting manageable levels of engagement and interaction, gradually increasing the inherent power of the product and fostering an empowered community.\n\nThe design aesthetic\n\nHere\u2019s a familiar scenario: the client or project lead gets overexcited and skips most of the important decision-making, instead barrelling straight into a bout of creative direction Tourette\u2019s. Visually, the design needs to be minimal, white, crisp, full of white space, have big buttons, and quite likely be \u201cclean\u201d. Of course, we all like our websites to be clean as that\u2019s more hygienic.\n\nBut what do these words even mean, really? Early in a project they\u2019re abstract distractions, unnecessary constraints. This premature narrowing forces us to think much more about throwing stuff out rather than acknowledging that what we\u2019re building is complex, and many of the components perhaps necessary.\n\nSimple is not a formula. It cannot be achieved just by using a white background, by throwing things away, or by breathing a bellowsful of air in between every element and having it all float around in space. Simple is not a design treatment. Simple is hard. Simple requires deep investigation, a thorough understanding of every aspect of a project, in line with the needs and expectations of the audience.\n\nRecognizing this helps us empathize a little more with those most vocal of UX practitioners. They usually appreciate that our successes depend on a thorough understanding of the user\u2019s mental models and expected outcomes. I personally still consider UX people to be web designers like the rest of us (mainly to wind them up), but they\u2019re web designers that design every decision, and by putting the user experience at the heart of their process, they have a greater chance of finding simplicity in complexity. The visual design aesthetic \u2014 the fa\u00e7ade \u2014 is only a part of that.\n\nDivide and conquer\n\nI\u2019m currently working on an app that\u2019s complex in architecture, and complex in ambition. We\u2019ll be releasing in carefully orchestrated private phases, gradually introducing more complexity in line with the unavoidably complex nature of the objective, but my job is to design the whole, the complete system as it will be when it\u2019s out of beta and beyond.\n\nI\u2019ve noticed that I\u2019m not throwing much out; most of it needs to be there. Therefore, my responsibility is to consider interesting and appropriate methods of navigation and bring everything together logically.\n\nI\u2019m using things like smart defaults, graphical timelines and colour keys to make sense of the complexity, techniques that are sympathetic to the content. They act as familiar points of navigation and reference, yet are malleable enough to change subtly to remain relevant to the information they connect. It\u2019s really OK to have a lot of stuff, so long as we make each component work smartly.\n\nIt\u2019s a divide and conquer approach. By finding simplicity and logic in each content bucket, I\u2019ve made more sense of the whole, allowing me to create key layouts where most of the simplified buckets are collated and sometimes combined, providing everything the user needs and expects in the appropriate places.\n\nI\u2019m also making sure I don\u2019t reduce the app\u2019s power. I need to reflect the scale of opportunity, and provide access to or knowledge of the more advanced tools and features for everyone: a window into what they can do and how they can help. I know it\u2019s the minority who will be actively building the content, but the power is in providing those opportunities for all.\n\nMuch of this will be familiar to the responsible practitioners who build websites for government, local authorities, utility companies, newspapers, magazines, banking, and we-sell-everything-ever-made online shops. Across the web, there are sites and tools that thrive on complexity.\n\nAlas, the majority of such sites have done little to make navigation intuitive, or empower audiences. Where we can make a difference is by striving to make our UIs feel simple, look wonderful, not intimidating \u2014 even if they\u2019re mind-meltingly complex behind that fa\u00e7ade.\n\nEmbrace, empathize and tame\n\nSo, there are loads of ways to exploit complexity, and make it seem simple. I\u2019ve hinted at some methods above, and we\u2019ve already looked at gradual engagement as a way to make sense of complexity, so that\u2019s a big thumbs-up for a release cycle that increases audience power.\n\nPrior to each and every release, it\u2019s also useful to rest on the finished thing for a while and use it yourself, even if you\u2019re itching to release. \u2018Ready\u2019 often isn\u2019t, and \u2018finished\u2019 never is, and the more time you spend browsing around the sites you build, the more you learn what to question, where to add, or subtract. It\u2019s definitely worth building in some contingency time for sitting on your work, so to speak.\n\nOne thing I always do is squint at my layouts. By squinting, I get a sort of abstract idea of the overall composition, and general feel for the thing. It makes my face look stupid, but helps me see how various buckets fit together, and how simple or complex the site feels overall.\n\nI mentioned the need to put our design egos to one side and not throw out anything useful, and I think that\u2019s vital. I\u2019m a big believer in economy, reduction, and removing the extraneous, but I\u2019m usually referring to decoration, bells and whistles, and fluff. I wouldn\u2019t ever advocate the complete removal of powerful content from a project roadmap.\n\nAbove all, don\u2019t fear complexity. Embrace and tame it. Work hard to empathize with audience needs, and you can create elegant, playful, risky, surprising, emotive, delightful, and ultimately simple things.", "year": "2011", "author": "Simon Collison", "author_slug": "simoncollison", "published": "2011-12-21T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2011/taming-complexity/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 273, "title": "There\u2019s No Formula for Great Designs", "contents": "Before he combined them with fluid images and CSS3 media queries to coin responsive design, Ethan Marcotte described fluid grids \u2014 one of the most enjoyable parts of responsive design. Enjoyable that is, if you like working with math(s). But fluid grids aren\u2019t perfect and, unless we\u2019re careful when applying them, they can sometimes result in a design that feels disconnected.\n\nRecapping fluid grids\n\nIf you haven\u2019t read Ethan\u2019s Fluid Grids, now would be a good time to do that. It centres around a simple formula for converting pixel widths to percentages:\n\n(target \u00f7 context) \u00d7 100 = result\n\nHow does that work in practice? Well, take that Fireworks or Photoshop comp you\u2019re working on (I call them static design visuals, or just visuals.) Of course, everything on that visual \u2014 column divisions, inline images, navigation elements, everything \u2014 is measured in pixels. Now:\n\n\n\tPick something in the visual and measure its width. That\u2019s our target.\n\tTake that target measurement and divide it by the width of its parent (context).\n\tMultiply what you\u2019ve got by 100 (shift two decimal places).\n\tWhat you\u2019re left with is a percentage width to drop into your style sheets.\n\n\nFor example, divide this 300px wide sidebar division by its 948px parent and then multiply by 100: your original 300px is neatly converted to 31.646%.\n\n.content-sub {\nwidth : 31.646%; /* 300px \u00f7 948px = .31646 */ }\n\nThat formula makes it surprisingly simple for even die-hard fixed width aficionados to convert their visuals to percentage-based, fluid layouts.\n\nIt\u2019s a handy formula for those who still design using static visuals, and downright essential for those situations where one person in an organization designs in Fireworks or Photoshop and another develops with CSS. Why?\n\nWell, although I think that designing in a browser makes the best sense \u2014 particularly when designing for multiple devices \u2014 I\u2019ll wager most designers still make visuals in Fireworks or Photoshop and use them for demonstrations and get feedback and sign-off. That\u2019s OK. If you haven\u2019t made the transition to content-out designing in a browser yet, the fluid grids formula helps you carry on pushing pixels a while longer.\n\nYou can carry on moving pixel width measurements from your visuals to your style sheets, too, in the same way you always have. You can be precise to the pixel and even apply a grid image as a CSS background to help you keep everything lined up perfectly.\n\nOnce you\u2019re done, and the fixed width layout in the browser matches your visual, loop back through your style sheets and convert those pixels to percentages using the fluid grids formula. With very little extra work, you\u2019ll have a fluid implementation of your fixed width layout.\n\nThe fluid grids formula is simple and incredibly effective, but not long after I started working responsively I realized that the formula shouldn\u2019t (always) be a one-fix, set-and-forget calculation. I noticed that unless we compensate for problems it sometimes creates, the result can be a disconnected design.\n\nStaying connected\n\nGood design relies on connectedness, a feeling of natural balance between elements and the grid they\u2019re placed on. Give an element greater prominence or position in a visual hierarchy and you can fundamentally alter the balance and sometimes the meaning of a design.\n\nDifferent from a browser\u2019s page zooming feature \u2014 where images, text and overall layout change size by the same ratio \u2014 fluid grids flex a layout in response to a window or device width. Columns expand and contract, and within them fluid media (images and videos) can also change size. This can be one of the most impressive demonstrations of responsive design.\n\nBut not every element within a fluid grid can change size along with the window or device width. For example, type size and leading won\u2019t change along with a column\u2019s width.\n\nWhen columns and elements within them change width, all too easily a visual hierarchy can be broken and along with it the relationship between element sizes and the outer window or viewport. This can happen quickly if you make just one set of fluid grid calculations and use those percentages across every screen width, from smartphones through tablets and up to large desktops.\n\nThe answer? Make several sets of fluid grids calculations, each one at a significant window or device width breakpoint. Then apply those new percentages, when needed, to help keep elements in proportion and maintain balance and connectedness. Here\u2019s how I work.\n\nAvoiding disconnection\n\nI\u2019ve never been entirely happy with grid frameworks such as the 960 Grid System, so I start almost every project by creating a custom grid to inform my layout decisions. Here\u2019s a plain version of a grid from a recent project that I\u2019ll use as an illustration.\n\nThis project\u2019s grid comprises 84px columns and 24px gutters. This creates an odd number of columns at common tablet and desktop widths, and allows for 300px fixed width assets \u2014 useful when I need to fit advertising into a desktop layout\u2019s sidebar.\n\n Showing common advertising sizes (Larger image)\n\nFor this project I chose three 320 and Up breakpoints above 320px and, after placing as many columns as would fit those breakpoint widths, I derived three content widths:\n\n\n\t\t\n\t\t\tBreakpoint \n\t\t\tColumns \n\t\t\tContent width \n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t768px \n\t\t\t 7 \n\t\t\t 732px \n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t992px \n\t\t\t 9 \n\t\t\t 948px \n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\t1,382px \n\t\t\t 13 \n\t\t\t 1,380px \n\t\t\n\n\nHere\u2019s my grid again, this time with pixel measurements and breakpoints overlaid.\n\n Showing pixel measurements and breakpoints (Larger image)\n\nNow cast your mind back to the fluid grids calculation I made earlier. I divided a 300px element by 948px and arrived at 31.646%. For some elements it\u2019s possible to use that percentage across all screen widths, but others will feel too small in relation to a narrower 768px and too large inside 1,380px.\n\nTo help maintain connectedness, I make a set of fluid grids calculations based on each of the content widths I established earlier. Now I can shift an element\u2019s percentage width up or down when I switch to a new breakpoint and content width. For example:\n\n\n\t300px is 40.984% of 732px\n\t300px is 31.646% of 948px\n\t300px is 21.739% of 1,380px\n\n\nI\u2019ll add all those fluid grid percentages to my grid image and save it for quick reference.\n\n Showing percentages at all breakpoints (Larger image)\n\nThen I can apply those different percentage widths to elements at each breakpoint using CSS3 media queries. For example, that sidebar division again:\n\n/* 732px, 7-column width */\n\n@media only screen and (min-width: 768px) {\n\n .content-sub {\n width : 40.983%; /* 300px \u00f7 732px = .40983 */ }\n\n}\n\n/* 948px, 9-column width */\n@media only screen and (min-width: 992px) {\n\n .content-sub {\n width : 31.645%; /* 300px \u00f7 948px = .31645 */ }\n\n}\n\n/* 1380px, 13-column width */\n@media only screen and (min-width: 1382px) {\n\n .content-sub {\n width : 21.739%; /* 300px \u00f7 1380px = .21739 */ }\n\n}\n\nThe number of changes you make to a layout at different breakpoints will, of course, depend on the specifics of the design you\u2019re working on. Yes, this is additional work, but the result will be a layout that feels better balanced and within which elements remain in harmony with each other while they respond to new screen or device widths.\n\nPutting the design in responsive web design\n\nUntil now, many of the conversations around responsive web design have been about aspects of technical implementation, rather than design. I believe we\u2019re only beginning to understand what\u2019s involved in designing responsively. In future, we\u2019ll likely be making design decisions not just about proportions but also about responsive typography. We\u2019ll also need to learn how to adapt our designs to device characteristics such as touch targets and more.\n\nSometimes we\u2019ll make decisions to improve function, other times because they make a design \u2018feel\u2019 right. You\u2019ll know when you\u2019ve made a right decision. You\u2019ll feel it.\n\nAfter all, there really is no formula for making great designs.", "year": "2011", "author": "Andy Clarke", "author_slug": "andyclarke", "published": "2011-12-23T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2011/theres-no-formula-for-great-designs/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 78, "title": "Fluent Design through Early Prototyping", "contents": "There\u2019s a small problem with wireframes. They\u2019re not good for showing the kind of interactions we now take for granted \u2013 transitions and animations on the web, in Android, iOS, and other platforms. There\u2019s a belief that early prototyping requires a large amount of time and effort, and isn\u2019t worth an early investment. But it\u2019s not true!\n\nIt\u2019s still normal to spend a significant proportion of time working in wireframes. Given that wireframes are high-level and don\u2019t show much detail, it\u2019s tempting to give up control and responsibility for things like transitions and other things sidelined as visual considerations. These things aren\u2019t expressed well, and perhaps not expressed at all, in wireframes, yet they critically influence the quality of a product. Rapid prototyping early helps to bring sidelined but significant design considerations into focus.\n\nSpeaking fluent design\n\nFluency in a language means being able to speak it confidently and accurately. The Latin root means flow.\n\nBy design fluency, I mean using a set of skills in order to express or communicate an idea. Prototyping is a kind of fluency. It takes designers beyond the domain of grey and white boxes to consider all the elements that make up really good product design.\n\nDesigners shouldn\u2019t be afraid of speaking fluent design. They should think thoroughly about product decisions beyond their immediate role \u2014 not for the sake of becoming some kind of power-hungry design demigod, but because it will lead to better, more carefully considered product design.\n\nWireframes are incomplete sentences\n\nWireframes, once they\u2019ve served their purpose, are a kind of self-imposed restriction.\n\nMostly made out of grey and white boxes, they deliberately express the minimum. Important details \u2014 visuals, nuanced transitions, sounds \u2014 are missing. Their appearance bears little resemblance to the final thing. Responsibility for things that traditionally didn\u2019t matter (or exist) is relinquished. Animations and transitions in particular are increasingly relevant to the mobile designer\u2019s methods. And rather than being fanciful and superfluous visual additions to a product, they help to clarify designs and provide information about context.\n\nWireframes are useful in the early stages. As a designer trying to persuade stakeholders, clients, or peers, sometimes it will be in your interests to only tell half the story. They\u2019re ideal for gauging whether a design is taking the right direction, and they\u2019re the right medium for deciding core things, such as the overall structure and information architecture.\n\nBut spending a long time in wireframes means delaying details to a later stage in the project, or to the end, when the priority is shifted to getting designs out of the door. This leaves little time to test, finesse and perfect things which initially seemed to be less important. I think designers should move away from using wireframes as primary documentation once the design has reached a certain level of maturity.\n\nA prototype is multiple complete sentences\n\nParagraphs, even.\n\nUnlike a wireframe, a prototype is a persuasive storyteller. It can reveal the depth and range of design decisions, not just the layout, but also motion: animations and transitions. If it\u2019s a super-high-fidelity prototype, it\u2019s a perfect vessel for showing the visual design as well. It\u2019s all of these things that contribute to the impression that a product is good\u2026 and useful, and engaging, and something you\u2019d like to use.\n\nA prototype is impressive. A good prototype can help to convince stakeholders and persuade clients. With a compelling demo, people can more easily imagine that this thing could actually exist. \u201cHey\u201d, they\u2019re thinking. \u201cThis might actually be pretty good!\u201d\n\nHow to make a prototype in no time and with no effort\n\nNow, it does take time and effort to make a prototype. However, good news! It used to require a lot more effort. There are tools that make prototyping much quicker and easier.\n\nIf you\u2019re making a mobile prototype (this seems quite likely), you will want to test and show this on the actual device. This sounds like it could be a pain, but there are a few ways to do this that are quite easy.\n\nKeynote, Apple\u2019s presentation software, is an unlikely candidate for a prototyping tool, but surprisingly great and easy for creating prototypes with transitions that can be shown on different devices.\n\nKeynote enables you to do a few useful, excellent things. You can make each screen in your design a slide, which can be linked together to allow you to click through the prototype. You can add customisable transitions between screens. If you want to show a panel that can slide open or closed on your iPad mockup, for example, transitions can also be added to individual elements on the screen. The design can be shown on tablet and mobile devices, and interacted with like it\u2019s a real app. Another cool feature is that you can export the prototype as a video, which works as another effective format for demoing a design.\n\nOverall, Keynote offers a very quick, lightweight way to prototype a design. Once you\u2019ve learned the basics, it shouldn\u2019t take longer than a few hours \u2013 at most \u2013 to put together a respectable clickable prototype with transitions.\n\nDownload the interactive MOV example\n\nHolly icon by Megan Sheehan from The Noun Project\n\nThis is a Quicktime movie exported from Keynote. This version is animated for demonstration purposes, but download the interactive original and you can click the screen to move through the prototype. It demonstrates the basic interactivity of an iPhone app. This anonymised example was used on a project at Fjord to create a master example of an app\u2019s transitions.\n\nPrototyping drawbacks, and perceived drawbacks\n\nIf prototyping is so great, then why do we leave it to the end, or not bother with it at all? There are multiple misconceptions about prototyping: they\u2019re too difficult to make; they take too much time; or they\u2019re inaccurate (and dangerous) documentation.\n\nA prototype is a preliminary model. There should always be a disclaimer that it\u2019s not the real thing to avoid setting up false expectations.\n\nA prototype doesn\u2019t have to be the main deliverable. It can be a key one that\u2019s supported by visual and interaction specifications. And a prototype is a lightweight means of managing and reflecting changes and requirements in a project.\n\nAn actual drawback of prototyping is that to make one too early could mean being gung-ho with what you thought a client or stakeholder wanted, and delivering something inappropriate. To avoid this, communicate, iterate, and keep things simple until you\u2019re confident that the client or other stakeholders are happy with your chosen direction.\n\nThe key throughout any design project is iteration. Designers build iterative models, starting simple and becoming increasingly sophisticated. It\u2019s a process of iterative craft and evolution. There\u2019s no perfect methodology, no magic recipe to follow.\n\nWhat to do next\n\nMake a prototype! It\u2019s the perfect way to impress your friends.\n\nIt can help to advance a brilliant idea with a fraction of the effort of complete development. Sketches and wireframes are perfect early on in a project, but once they\u2019ve served their purpose, prototypes enable the design to advance, and push thinking towards clarifying other important details including transitions.\n\nFor Keynote tutorials, Keynotopia is a great resource. Axure is standard and popular prototyping software many UX designers will already be familiar with; it\u2019s possible to create transitions in Axure. POP is an iPhone app that allows you to design apps on paper, take photos with your phone, and turn them into interactive prototypes. Ratchet is an elegant iPhone prototyping tool aimed at web developers.\n\nThere are perhaps hundreds of different prototyping tools and methods. My final advice is not to get bogged down in (or limited by) any particular tool, but to remember you\u2019re making quick and iterative models. Experiment and play!\n\nPrototyping will push you and your designs to a scary place without limitations. No more grey and white boxes, just possibilities!", "year": "2012", "author": "Rebecca Cottrell", "author_slug": "rebeccacottrell", "published": "2012-12-10T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2012/fluent-design-through-early-prototyping/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 96, "title": "Unwrapping the Wii U Browser", "contents": "The Wii U was released on 18 November 2012 in the US, and 30 November in the UK. It\u2019s the first eighth generation home console, the first mainstream second-screen device, and it has some really impressive browser specs.\n\nConsoles are not just for games now: they\u2019re marketed as complete entertainment solutions. Internet connectivity and browser functionality have gone from a nice-to-have feature in game consoles to a selling point. In Nintendo\u2019s case, they see it as a challenge to design an experience that\u2019s better than browsing on a desktop.\n\n\n\tLet\u2019s make a browser that users can use on a daily basis, something that can really handle everything we\u2019ve come to expect from a browser and do it more naturally.\nSasaki \u2013 Iwata Asks on Nintendo.com\n\n\nWith 11% of people using console browsers to visit websites, it\u2019s important to consider these devices right from the start of projects. Browsing the web on a TV or handheld console is a very different experience to browsing on a desktop or a mobile phone, and has many usability implications.\n\nConsole browser testing\n\nWhen I\u2019m testing a console browser, one of the first things I do is run Niels Leenheer\u2019s HTML5 test and Lea Verou\u2019s CSS3 test. I use these benchmarks as a rough comparison of the standards each browser supports.\n\nIn October, IE9 came out for the Xbox 360, scoring 120/500 in the HTML5 test and 32% in the CSS3 test. The PS Vita also had an update to its browser in recent weeks, jumping from 58/500 to 243/500 in the HTML5 test, and 32% to 55% in the CSS3 test. Manufacturers have been stepping up their game, trying to make their browsing experiences better.\n\nTo give you an idea of how the Wii U currently compares to other devices, here are the test results of the other TV consoles I\u2019ve tested. I\u2019ve written more in-depth notes on TV and portable console browsers separately.\n\n\nYear of releaseHTML5 scoreCSS3 scoreNotes\nWii U2012258/50048%Runs a Netfront browser (WebKit).\nWii200689/500Wouldn\u2019t runRuns an Opera browser.\nPS3200668/50038%Runs a Netfront browser (WebKit).\nXbox 3602005120/50032%A browser for the Xbox (IE9) was only recently released in October 2012. The Kinect provides voice and gesture support. There\u2019s also SmartGlass, a second-screen app for platforms including Android and iOS.\n\n\nThe Wii U browser is Nintendo\u2019s fifth attempt at a console browser. Based on these tests, it\u2019s already looking promising.\n\nWhy console browsers used to suck\n\nIt takes a lot of system memory to run a good browser, and the problem of older consoles is that they don\u2019t have much memory available. The original Nintendo DS needs a memory expansion pack just to run the browser, because the 4MB it has on board isn\u2019t enough. I noticed that even on newer devices, some sites fail to load because the system runs out of memory.\n\nThe Wii came out six years ago with an Opera browser. Still being used today and with such low resources available, the latest browser features can\u2019t reasonably be supported. There\u2019s also pressure to add features such as tabs, and enable gamers to use the browser while a game is paused. Nintendo\u2019s browser team have the advantage of higher specs to play with on their new console (1GB of memory dedicated to games, 1GB for the system), which makes it easier to support the latest standards. But it\u2019s still a challenge to fit everything in.\n\n\n\t\u2026even though we have more memory, the amount of memory we can use for the browser is limited compared to a PC, so we\u2019ve worked in ways that efficiently allocates the available memory per tab. To work on this, the experience working on the browser for the Nintendo 3DS system under a limited memory constraint helped us greatly.\nSasaki \u2013 Iwata Asks on Nintendo.com\n\n\nIn the box\n\nThe Wii U consists of a console unit which plugs into a TV (the first to support HD), and a wireless controller known as a gamepad. The gamepad is a lot bigger than typical TV console controllers, and it has a touchscreen on the front. The touchscreen is resistive, responding to pressure rather than electrical current. It\u2019s intended to be used with a stylus (provided) but fingers can be used.\n\nIt might look a bit like one, but the gamepad isn\u2019t a portable console designed to be taken out like the PS Vita. The gamepad can be used as a standalone screen with the TV switched off, as long as it\u2019s within range of the console unit \u2013 it basically piggybacks off it.\n\n\n\nIt\u2019s surprisingly lightweight for its size. It has a wealth of detectors including 9-axis control. Sensors wake the device from sleep when it\u2019s picked up. There\u2019s also a camera on the front, and a headphone port and speakers, with audio coming through both the TV and the gamepad giving a surround sound feel.\n\nUp to six tabs can be opened at once, and the browser can be used while games are paused. There\u2019s a really nice little feature here \u2013 the current game\u2019s name is saved as a search option, so it\u2019s really quick to look up contextual content such as walk-throughs.\n\nControls\n\nOnly one gamepad can be used to control the browser, but if there are Wiimotes connected, they can be used as pointers. This doesn\u2019t let the user do anything except point (they each get a little hand icon with a number on it displayed on the screen), but it\u2019s interesting that multiple people can be interacting with a site at once.\n\n\n\nSee a bigger version\n\nThe gamepad can also be used as a simple TV remote control, with basic functions such as bringing up the programme guide, adjusting volume and changing channel. I found the simplified interface much more usable than a full-featured remote control.\n\n\n\nI\u2019m used to scrolling being sluggish on consoles, but the Wii U feels almost as snappy as a desktop browser. Sites load considerably faster compared with others I\u2019ve tested.\n\nTilt-scroll\n\nHolding down ZL and ZR while tilting the screen activates an Instapaper-style tilt to scroll for going up and down the page quickly, useful for navigating very long pages.\n\nSecond screen\n\nThe TV mirrors most of what\u2019s on the gamepad, although the TV screen just displays the contents of the browser window, while the gamepad displays the site along with the browser toolbar.\n\nWhen the user with the gamepad is typing, the keyboard is hidden from the TV screen \u2013 there\u2019s just a bit of text at the top indicating what\u2019s happening on the gamepad.\n\nPressing X draws an on-screen curtain over the TV, hiding the content that\u2019s on the gamepad from the TV. Pressing X again opens the curtains, revealing what\u2019s on the gamepad. Holding the button down plays a drumroll before it\u2019s released and the curtains are opened. I can imagine this being used in meetings as a fun presentation tool.\n\n\n\n\n\tIn a sense, browsing is a personal activity, but you get the idea that people will be coming and going through the room. When I first saw the curtain function, it made a huge impression on me. I walked around with it all over the company saying, \u201cThey\u2019ve really come up with something amazing!\u201d\nIwata \u2013 Iwata Asks on Nintendo.com\n\n\nText\n\nWriting text\n\nUnlike the capacitive screens on smartphones, the Wii U\u2019s resistive screen needs to be pressed harder than you\u2019re probably used to for registering a touch event. The gamepad screen is big, which makes it much easier to type on this device than other handheld consoles, even without the stylus. It\u2019s still more fiddly than a full-sized keyboard though. When you\u2019re designing forms, consider the extra difficulty console users experience.\n\n\n\nAlthough TV screens are physically big, they are typically viewed from further away than desktop screens. This makes readability an issue, so Nintendo have provided not one, but four ways to zoom in and out:\n\n\n\tDouble-tapping on the screen.\n\tTapping the on-screen zoom icons in the browser toolbar.\n\tPressing the + and - buttons on the device.\n\tMoving the right analogue stick up and down.\n\n\nAs well as making it easy to zoom in and out, Nintendo have done a few other things to improve the reading experience on the TV.\n\nSystem font\n\nOne thing you\u2019ll notice pretty quickly is that the browser lacks all the fonts we\u2019re used to falling back to. Serif fonts are replaced with the system\u2019s sans-serif font. I couldn\u2019t get Typekit\u2019s font loading method to work but Fontdeck, which works slightly differently, does display custom fonts.\n\n The system font has been optimised for reading at a distance and is easy to distinguish because the lowercase e has a quirky little tilt.\n\nDon\u2019t lose :focus\n\nUsing the D-pad to navigate is similar to using a keyboard. Individual links are focused on, with a blue outline drawn around them.\n\nThe recently redesigned An Event Apart site is an example that improves the experience for keyboard and D-pad users. They\u2019ve added a yellow background colour to links on focus. It feels nicer than the default blue outline on its own.\n\n\n\nMedia\n\nThis year, television overtook PCs as the primary way to watch online video content. TV is the natural environment for video, and 42% of online TVs in the US are connected to the internet via a console. Unfortunately, the tag isn\u2019t supported in most console browsers, and those that have Flash installed often have such an old version that the video won\u2019t play.\n\nI suspect this has been a big driver in getting console browsers to support web standards. The Wii U is designed with video content in mind. It doesn\u2019t support Flash but it does support the HTML5 tag.\n\nSome video formats can\u2019t be played, but those that are supported bring up an optimised interface with a custom scrub bar. This is where the device switches from mirroring the TV to being a second screen. The full-screen video is displayed on the TV, and the interface on the gamepad.\n\nThe really clever bit is that while a video is playing, the gamepad user can keep the video playing on the TV screen while searching for another video or browsing the web. This is the same for images too.\n\nOn the left, the video is being shown full-screen on the TV and gamepad. Only the gamepad gets the scrub bar. Clicking the slide up/down button (circled) lets the gamepad user browse the web while the video on the TV continues to play full-screen, as shown in the image on the right.\n\nThere\u2019s support for SVG images, and they look great on a high-definition TV screen. However, there\u2019s currently no way to save or download files.\n\nPreparing for console users\n\nI wasn\u2019t expecting to be quite as impressed as I am by this browser. It\u2019s encouraging to see console makers investing time into improving the experience as well as the standards support. In the same way there was an explosion in mobile browser use as the experience got better, I\u2019m sure we\u2019ll see the same with console browsers as the experience improves.\n\nThe value of detection\n\nConsoles offer a range of inputs including gesture, voice and controller buttons. That means we have to think about more diverse methods of input than just touch and click.\n\nThis is where I could tell you to add some detection methods such as user agent string sniffing to target a different experience for console users. But the majority of the time, that really isn\u2019t necessary. TV console browsers are getting a lot better at compensating for the living room environment, and they\u2019re designed to work with websites that haven\u2019t been optimised for this context.\n\nRather than tighten our grip on optimising experiences for every device out there, we\u2019ve got to be pragmatic. There are so many new devices coming out every week, our designs need to be future-proof rather than fixed to a particular device in time.\n\nEven fuzzy device detection isn\u2019t reliable \u2013 the PS Vita declares itself to be mobile, a mobile device and a Kindle Fire tablet, while the two DS devices state they\u2019re neither mobile nor mobile phones nor tablets, but computers. They\u2019re weird outliers, but they\u2019re still important devices to consider.\n\nThinking broadly about how our designs will be interacted with and viewed on a TV screen can help improve that experience for everyone. This is about accessibility. Considering how someone uses a site with a D-pad, we can improve the experience for keyboard users. When we think about colour contrast and text legibility on TV screens, we can apply that for anyone who reads content on the web. So why just offer this to the TV users?\n\nPlaying with the browser\n\n\n\t\u2026we want to prove to them through this Wii U Internet Browser that browsing itself can be an entertainment.\nIwata \u2013 Iwata Asks on Nintendo.com\n\n\nAlthough I\u2019m cautious about designing experiences for specific devices, it\u2019s fun to experiment with the technology available. Nintendo have promised web developers access to the Wii U\u2019s buttons and sensors. There\u2019s already some JavaScript documentation, and a demo for you to try.\n\nIf you\u2019re interested in making your own games, thanks to web standards, a lot of HTML5 games work already on the device. Matt Hackett wrote up his experience of testing the game he built, and he talks about some of features the browser lacks. There\u2019s certainly an incentive there for console manufacturers to improve their HTML5 support so more games can be played in their browser.\n\nWhat excites me about consoles is that it\u2019s like looking at what might be available to us in future browsers. As well as thinking about how our sites work on small screens, we should also consider big screens. We\u2019re already figuring out how images should work at different screen widths and connection speeds, but we\u2019ve also got some interesting challenges ahead of us catering for second screen experiences and 3D-enabled devices. \n\nSo, this Christmas, if you\u2019re huddled round the game console or a smart TV, give the browser in it a try.", "year": "2012", "author": "Anna Debenham", "author_slug": "annadebenham", "published": "2012-12-22T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2012/unwrapping-the-wii-u-browser/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 17, "title": "Bringing Design and Research Closer Together", "contents": "The \u2018should designers be able to code\u2019 debate has raged for some time, but I\u2019m interested in another debate: should designers be able to research? \n\nAre you a designer who can do research? Good research and the insights you uncover inspire fresh ways of thinking and get your creative juices flowing. Good research brings clarity to a woolly brief. Audience insight helps sharpen your focus on what\u2019s really important. Experimentation through research and design brings a sense of playfulness and curiosity to your work. Good research helps you do good design.\n\nBeing a web designer today is pretty tough, particularly if you\u2019re a freelancer and work on your own. There are so many new ideas, approaches to workflow and trends and tools to keep up with. How do you decide which things to do and which to ignore? A modern web designer needs to be able to consider the needs of the audience, design appropriate IAs and layouts, choose colour palettes, pick appropriate typefaces and type layouts, wrangle with content, style, code, dabble in SEO, and the list goes on and on. Not only that, but today\u2019s web designer also has to keep up with the latest talking points in the industry: responsive design, Agile, accessibility, Sass, Git, lean UX, content first, mobile first, blah blah blah. Any good web designer doesn\u2019t need to be persuaded about the merits of including research in their toolkit, but do you really have time to include research too? \n\nWho is responsible for research?\n\nGenerally, research in the web industry forms part of other disciplines and isn\u2019t so much a discipline in its own right. It\u2019s very often thought of as part of UX, or activities that make up a process such as IA or content strategy. Research is often undertaken by UX designers, information architects or content strategists and isn\u2019t something designers or developers get that involved in. Some people lump all of these activities together and label it design research and have design researchers to do it. Some companies, such as the one I run with my husband Mark, are lucky enough to have someone with specialist research knowledge (yup, that would be me folks) who can lead all or most of the research work undertaken by the company. See also Mule Design, GOV.UK, the BBC, Mailchimp, Facebook and Twitter. \n\nWhat if you\u2019re not lucky enough to have your own researcher or team of researchers? Often research is the kind of thing that\u2019s nice to have, or it can be cut from scope when doing the budget dance with a client. It often forms part of the discovery phase of a project and sometimes just becomes a tick-box exercise. But research isn\u2019t just user testing and it shouldn\u2019t just live in a report on Basecamp that no one reads. I would argue that research and experimentation is a way of working or an approach to how you design. Research can be used during the whole design process and must be a vital part of a designer\u2019s workflow on every project. Even if you work in a small studio, you can still create a culture of audience insight. Even if you work on your own, you can still absorb yourself in as much audience data as you can throughout the project life cycle. Here\u2019s how.\n\nResearch is everyone\u2019s job\n\nThere is a subtle difference between writing a research report and delivering it to a client, and them actually using it and applying the insights to their thought process. In my experience of working in the audiences team at the BBC, research was most effective when the role was embedded in the production team and insights were used as part of the editorial process.\n\nIn this section I\u2019ll talk through some common problems you might encounter in a typical project life cycle and show you ways you can use research to help you. For the sake of this article, let\u2019s imagine that we\u2019re talking about a particular project here and not ongoing product development. The same principles can of course be applied then, but even if you work in-house rather than on the agency side, you\u2019re probably used to working on distinct projects or phases of work.\n\n1. Problem: I want to come up with a new product idea. \n\nSolution: Inspiration through insights.\n\nBefore you begin a new project, a good way of quickly absorbing all the existing knowledge that there maybe about a theme, product type or website is to literally surround yourself with it. This is especially relevant for new ideas or product development. Create an incident room if you can: fill the walls of your meeting room, the walls near your desk, or even just use a pinboard or online pinboard if space is tight or you\u2019re working with a dispersed team. The same process can be used throughout a project\u2019s or product life cycle \u2014 read about how MailChimp has applied this idea. \n\nLet\u2019s take a new product idea as an example. Say you wanted to develop a responsive tool for web designers but you weren\u2019t sure what aspect of responsive design to focus on. First of all, you should pose a hypothesis or problem statement to gather ideas around. For example: \u201cHow to speed up a designer\u2019s responsive workflow.\u201d You would then need to gather insights around this topic. You could run some interviews with freelance designers about how they work responsively. You could shadow a development team for the day to understand their processes. You could observe conversations on Twitter or IRC or wherever your target audience interact to see what people talk about. You could search out industry data and articles currently available.\n\nThe next stage is to comb through this data and extract insights from it. You can use good old Post-it notes and a sharpie: capture one insight or thought per Post-it. If one insight leads into another, use two Post-its. The objective is volume. Try to ensure clarity in each Post-it so you don\u2019t have to go back and reference material again (maybe you could use a key if you think it\u2019ll get confusing).\n\n\n\nAfter this, stick them all up and synthesise the same way you would for any kind of cluster or affinity sort. Organise into broad themes. These themes then become springboards for further exploration and idea generation. You might see a gap or opportunity in one particular area, both from a workflow perspective but also from a business perspective. Bingo. Your insights then become the fuel for ideas generation.\n\nThis method doesn\u2019t just have to be used for new products \u2014 it works particularly well in a discovery phase for new projects or for new features in an existing product. We\u2019re doing something similar for our own responsive tool, Gridset at the moment.\n\nResources:\n\n\n\tSticky Wisdom by Dave Allan, Matt Kingdon, Kris Murrin, Daz Rudkin\n\tThe Science of Serendipity by Matt Kingdon\n\tThe Art of Innovation by Tom Kelley\n\n\n2. Problem: You\u2019re starting a new project and need to know the basics before you get headlong into designing or building. \n\nSolution: Quantitative survey.\n\nCommon questions might be:\n\n\n\tWho are the users?\n\tHow many are there?\n\tWhat are they like?\n\tWhy do they use the site?\n\tWhat do they need from the site?\n\tWhat are their goals?\n\n\nPrint out and stick up what you already know and have in your project space or \u2018incident room\u2019: any reports you have found or been given, analytics graphs, personas, pen portraits, as well as screengrabs of the current website, product or branding. Spend time looking through it all and identify the gaps. \n\nIf you have very little existing audience data, a quick and easy way to get some baseline information is to run a quick user survey on a current website. You can establish basic demographic information, appreciation and views of the website as it stands, as well as delve a little deeper into needs and wants. This is also vital if you want some kind of trackable measures to go back to once you have designed and built your shiny new website for your client \u2014 read more in my article for 24 ways last year.)\n\n\n\nWe use surveys a lot at Mark Boulton Design for our client work. Here\u2019s a screen grab of one we ran in March on http://info.cern.ch before we redesigned the site and did the work on the First Website Project. We repeated the survey after the new website went live and were able to compare the results. Both surveys were a great source of insight to the project team as well as for the project stakeholders who needed to pitch the idea of the hack days and fundraise for them.\n\n\n\nOnce you\u2019ve run your survey, you should always write up a short summary for yourself and your client to refer to. If you\u2019re not a trained researcher, you should try to read up on analysis techniques or data visualisation. It can be easy to misinterpret data and make it bend to the story you are trying to tell. You should be looking for the story in the data and present it without bias. \n\nIf you\u2019re using the \u2018incident room\u2019 method I mentioned earlier on, you can also extract the insights onto post it notes and add them to your growing body of knowledge.\n\nResources: \n\n\n\tUsing Questionnaires for Design Research by Emma Boulton\n\tData-driven Design with an Annual Survey by Aarron Walter\n\tResearch Methods for Product Design by Alex Milton and Paul Rodgers\n\tA Practical Guide to Designing with Data by Brian Suda\n\n\n3. Problem: You have a prototype of a new design and you need some feedback from real users. \n\nSolution: User interviews and task based testing.\n\nInterviewing is a staple research method that every designer should master as it can be used throughout a project life cycle. Erika Hall recently wrote a great article on the basics for A List Apart. From stakeholder interviews in a discovery phase, to initial user research, right through to task based testing and iteration, interviews can be enormously helpful. They are very time-consuming, however, and although speaking to someone is better than speaking to no one, it\u2019s always better to plan to do a few interviews at once, rather than one or two. I generally find that patterns only start to emerge after I\u2019ve spoken to 4 or 5 people. Interviews are another thing we do a lot of at Mark Boulton Design. Most of the interviews we do are remote due to the location of our clients and their users. \n\n\n\nRigour is an important consideration in all research activities and especially if you\u2019re a non-researcher. Interviews particularly can be easily skewed by an inexperienced facilitator, which is why pairing can be a good approach. Building rapport, questioning, time keeping, note taking and thinking on your feet can be difficult to do all at once, so having a colleague take notes while you concentrate on leading the conversation can work really well. It\u2019s important for the note taker to sit in on more than one interview so that they get a more rounded view of the feedback. The same person should also be involved in the analysis of the data. \n\n\n\nInterviews can be analysed and written up in a report or summary as with other types of research. I often use the same kind of collaborative process detailed earlier for deciding on themes, particularly if multiple members of the team have been involved in interviewing. \n\nInterviews are particularly useful for our incident room and can provide much colour and insight to an exploratory process. I often find verbatim quotes to be the most insightful type of data. You might find that an inexperienced researcher (or designer who is used to solving problems) will jump to interpretation too soon and forget to just listen to what the interviewee is saying. Capturing the exact form of words a person uses can help get away from this.\n\nResources: \n\n\n\tInterviewing Humans by Erika Hall\n\tA Pocket Guide to Interviewing for Research by Andrew Travers\n\tInterviewing Users by Steve Portigal\n\n\n4. Problem: How successful have I been with this new design? \n\nSolution: Key performance indicators\n\nOnce your new design has been realised, it\u2019s important to evaluate it. What works, what doesn\u2019t work so well? As well as a straightforward design crit, don\u2019t forget to introduce audience insights into a review meeting or project wash up. \n\n\n\nWork out what your KPIs \u2014 your key performance indicators \u2014 will be beforehand and then you can start to track them over time. For example, number of visits, appreciation of the site, willingness to recommend the site to a friend, number of sales, and number of conversions are all sensible measures to track. Interviews can again be helpful but cold, hard numbers are often better here. Read Corey Vilhauer\u2019s take on this on A List Apart.\n\nConsistency is key here. If you have looked at your analytics and done a survey beforehand, you will have a baseline to start from. Don\u2019t keep changing your measures and questions, or your data will not be comparable. Pick a few key questions or a set of measures, create a survey and then run it once a month, once a quarter, every six months or annually. You\u2019ll start to see changes over time as the design beds in. You may see seasonal trends and spot patterns in the data related to other activities like marketing, promotion and so on. Keeping a record of all of this will increase your understanding of your audience. We\u2019ve created a satisfaction survey for Gridset with a number of measures that we track on an ongoing basis. MailChimp has also created an annual survey with the aim of tracking their audience measures over time\n\nResources:\n\n\n\tSearch Analytics by Louis Rosenfeld\n\tA Primer on A/B Testing by Lara Swanson\n\tLean UX by Jeff Gothelf\n\n\nAnyone can do research\n\nResearch can be brought into the project life cycle at any stage. And of course, anyone can do research \u2014 you don\u2019t need to be a researcher. Some of the main skills most designers possess are also key research skills: inquisitive nature, problem solving, playfulness, empathy, and so on.\n\nWe have a small team at Mark Boulton Design. Most of the team are designers and the rest of us focus on supporting the team and clients both in terms of billable work (research, content strategy, project management) as well as the non-billable things like finance and studio management.\n\nDespite my best intentions, in the past I\u2019ve undertaken research for clients in isolation \u2014 first being briefed by the design lead, carrying out the research and then delivering the findings back, trusting the design team to take the findings on board. This was often due to time and availability of resources.\n\nWe\u2019ve been trying hard to join up our processes and collaborate even more across the team. Undertaking heuristic or design reviews collaboratively; taking part in frequent critiques of our work and the work of others together; pairing a researcher and a designer to run interviews; workshopping results from interviews to come up with recommendations; working closely together on questionnaire design; shadowing each other on tasks that don\u2019t fall within our core skills. A little thing like moving our desks around has also helped us have more conversations that we can all be a part of.\n\n\n\nI\u2019ve come to the conclusion that my role as the research director at Mark Boulton Design is actually a facilitator of research. As well as carrying out research, I am responsible for ensuring that research happens consistently across the team. I am responsible for empowering and training our designers so they feel confident in carrying out their own user, audience or design research for clients. So they know what to look for, when to listen, when to probe and when to take note of something. So they know how to look for themes, how to synthesise insights from research and how to apply them to their work.\n\nBetter research leads to better design\n\nSo, are you a designer who can do research? Are you a researcher who can design? The best designers are a lucky combination of researcher and designer. If you\u2019re not one of those, look at ways of enhancing the skills you lack. Because there\u2019s no doubt in my mind, that becoming a better researcher will make you a better designer.\n\nGeneral resources: \n\n\n\tSeeing the Elephant by Louis Rosenfeld\n\tConnected UX by Aarron Walter\n\tBeyond Usability Testing by Devan Goldstein\n\tJust Enough Research by Erika Hall\n\tThe User Experience Team of One by Leah Buley\n\tUndercover User Experience Design by Cennydd Bowles and James Box\n\tA Pocket Guide to Psychology for Designers by Joe Leech\n\tA Pocket Guide to International User Research by Chui Chui Tan\n\tRemote Research by Nate Bolt and Tony Tulathimutte\n\tA Pocket Guide to Experiments for Designers by Colin McFarland", "year": "2013", "author": "Emma Boulton", "author_slug": "emmaboulton", "published": "2013-12-22T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2013/bringing-design-and-research-closer-together/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 33, "title": "Five Ways to Animate Responsibly", "contents": "It\u2019s been two years since I wrote about \u201cFlashless Animation\u201d on this very site. Since then, animation has steadily begun popping up on websites, from sleek app-like user interfaces to interactive magazine-like spreads. It\u2019s an exciting time for web animation wonks, interaction developers, UXers, UI designers and a host of other acronyms! \n\nBut in our rush to experiment with animation it seems that we\u2019re having fewer conversations about whether or not we should use it, and more discussions about what we can do with it. We spend more time fretting over how to animate all the things at 60fps than we do devising ways to avoid incapacitating users with vestibular disorders.\n\nI love web animation. I live it. And I make adorably silly things with it that have no place on a self-respecting production website. I know it can be abused. We\u2019ve all made fun of Flash-turbation. But how quickly we forget the lessons we learned from that period of web design. Parallax scrolling effects may be the skip intro of this generation. Surely we have learned better in the sobering up period between Flash and the web animation API.\n\nSo here are five bits of advice we can use to pull back from the edge of animation abuse. With these thoughts in mind, we can make 2015 the year web animation came into its own. \n\nAnimate deliberately\n\nSadly, animation is considered decorative by the bulk of the web development community. UI designers and interaction developers know better, of course. But when I\u2019m teaching a workshop on animation for interaction, I know that my students face an uphill battle against decision makers who consider it nice to have, and tack it on at the end of a project, if at all. \n\nThis stigma is hard to shake. But it starts with us using animation deliberately or not at all. Poorly considered, tacked-on animation will often cause more harm than good. Users may complain that it\u2019s too slow or too fast, or that they have no idea what just happened.\n\nWhen I was at Chrome Dev Summit this year, I had the privilege to speak with Roma Sha, the UX lead behind Polymer\u2019s material design (with the wonderful animation documentation). I asked her what advice she\u2019d give to people using animation and transitions in their own designs. She responded simply: animate deliberately. If you cannot afford to slow down to think about animation and make well-informed and well-articulated decisions on behalf of the user, it is better that you not attempt it at all. Animation takes energy to perform, and a bad animation is worse than none at all. \n\nIt takes more than twelve principles\n\nWe always try to draw correlations between disparate things that spark our interest. Recently it feels like more and more people are putting the The Illusion of Life on their reading shelf next to Understanding Comics. These books give us so many useful insights from other industries. However, we should never mistake a website for a comic book or an animated feature film. Some of these concepts, while they help us see our work in a new light, can be more or less relevant to producing said work. \n\n\nThe illusion of life from cento lodigiani on Vimeo.\n\nI am specifically thinking of the twelve principles of animation put forth by Disney studio veterans in that great tome The Illusion of Life. These principles are very useful for making engaging, lifelike animation, like a ball bouncing or a squirrel scampering, or the physics behind how a lightbox should feel transitioning off a page. But they provide no direction at all for when or how something should be animated as part of a greater interactive experience, like how long a drop-down should take to fully extend or if a group of manipulable objects should be animated sequentially or as a whole.\n\nThe twelve principles are a great place to start, but we have so much more to learn. I\u2019ve documented at least six more functions of interactive animation that apply to web and app design. When thinking about animation, we should consider why and how, not just what, the physics. Beautiful physics mean nothing if the animation is superfluous or confusing.\n\nUseful and necessary, then beautiful\n\nThere is a Shaker saying: \u201cDon\u2019t make something unless it is both necessary and useful; but if it is both necessary and useful, don\u2019t hesitate to make it beautiful.\u201d When it comes to animation and the web, currently there is very little documentation about what makes it useful or necessary. We tend to focus more on the beautiful, the delightful, the aesthetic. And while aesthetics are important, they take a back seat to the user\u2019s overall experience. \n\n\n\nThe first time I saw the load screen for Pokemon Yellow on my Game Boy, I was enthralled. By the sixth time, I was mashing the start button as soon as Game Freak\u2019s logo hit the screen. What\u2019s delightful and meaningful to us while working on a project is not always so for our users. And even when a purely delightful animation is favorably received, as with Pokemon Yellow\u2019s adorable opening screen, too many repetitions of the cutest but ultimately useless animation, and users start to resent it as a hindrance.\n\n \n\nIf an animation doesn\u2019t help the user in some way, by showing them where they are or how two elements on a page relate to each other, then it\u2019s using up battery juice and processing cycles solely for the purpose of delight. Hardly the best use of resources.\n\nRather than animating solely for the sake of delight, we should first be able to articulate two things the animation does for the user. As an example, take this menu icon from Finethought.com (found via Use Your Interface). The menu icon does two things when clicked: \n\n\n\tIt gives the user feedback by animating, letting the user know its been clicked.\n\tIt demonstrates its changed relationship to the page\u2019s content by morphing into a close button.\n\n\n\n\nAssuming we have two good reasons to animate something, there is no reason our third cannot be to delight the user. \n\nGo four times faster\n\nThere is a rule of thumb in the world of traditional animation which is applicable to web animation: however long you think your animation should last, take that time and halve it. Then halve it again! When we work on an animation for hours, our sense of time dilates. What seems fast to us is actually unbearably slow for most users. In fact, the most recent criticism from users of animated interfaces on websites seems to be, \u201cIt\u2019s so slow!\u201d A good animation is unobtrusive, and that often means running fast.\n\nWhen getting your animations ready for prime time, reduce those durations to 25% of their original speed: a four-second fade out should be over in one. \n\nInstall a kill switch\n\nNo matter how thoughtful and necessary an animation, there will be people who become physically sick from seeing it. For these people, we must add a way to turn off animations on the website. \n\nFortunately, web designers are already thinking of ways to empower users to make their own decisions about how they experience the web. As an example, this site for the animated film Little from the Fish Shop allows users to turn off most of the parallax effects. While it doesn\u2019t remove the animation entirely, this website does reduce the most nauseating of the animations. \t\n\n\n\n\n\nAnimation is a powerful tool in our web design arsenal. But we must take care: if we abuse animation it might get a bad reputation; if we underestimate it, it won\u2019t be prioritized. But if we wield it thoughtfully, use it where it is both necessary and useful, and empower users to turn it off, animation is a tool that will help us build things that are easier to use and more delightful for years to come.\n\nLet\u2019s make 2015 the year web animation went to work for users.", "year": "2014", "author": "Rachel Nabors", "author_slug": "rachelnabors", "published": "2014-12-14T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2014/five-ways-to-animate-responsibly/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 48, "title": "A Holiday Wish", "contents": "A friend and I were talking the other day about why clients spend more on toilet cleaning than design, and how the industry has changed since the mid-1990s, when we got our starts. Early in his career, my friend wrote a fine CSS book, but for years he has called himself a UX designer. And our conversation got me thinking about how I reacted to that title back when I first started hearing it.\n\n\u201cJust what this business needs,\u201d I said to myself, \u201canother phony expert.\u201d\n\nOkay, so I was wrong about UX, but my touchiness was not altogether unfounded. In the beginning, our industry was divided between freelance jack-of-all-trade punks, who designed and built and coded and hosted and Photoshopped and even wrote the copy when the client couldn\u2019t come up with any, and snot-slick dot-com mega-agencies that blew up like Alice and handed out titles like impoverished nobles in the years between the world wars. \n\nI was the former kind of designer, a guy who, having failed or just coasted along at a cluster of other careers, had suddenly, out of nowhere, blossomed into a web designer\u2014an immensely curious designer slash coder slash writer with a near-insatiable lust to shave just one more byte from every image. We had modems back then, and I dreamed in sixteen colors. My source code was as pretty as my layouts (arguably prettier) and I hoovered up facts and opinions from newsgroups and bulletin boards as fast as any loudmouth geek could throw them. It was a beautiful life.\n\nBut soon, too soon, the professional digital agencies arose, buying loft buildings downtown, jacking in at T1 speeds, charging a hundred times what I did, and communicating with their clients in person, in large artfully bedecked rooms, wearing hand-tailored Barney\u2019s suits and bringing back the big city bullshit I thought I\u2019d left behind when I quit advertising to become a web designer. \n\nJust like the big bad ad agencies of my early career, the new digital agencies stocked every meeting with a totem pole worth of ranks and titles. If the client brought five upper middle managers to the meeting, the agency did likewise. If fifteen stakeholders got to ask for a bigger logo, fifteen agency personnel showed up to take notes on the percentage of enlargement required.\n\nBut my biggest gripe was with the titles.\n\nThe bigger and more expensive the agency, the lousier it ran with newly invented titles. Nobody was a designer any more. Oh, no. Designer, apparently, wasn\u2019t good enough. Designer was not what you called someone you threw that much money at.\n\nInstead of designers, there were user interaction leads and consulting middleware integrators and bilabial experience park rangers and you name it. At an AIGA Miami event where I was asked to speak in the 1990s, I once watched the executive creative director of the biggest dot-com agency of the day make a presentation where he spent half his time bragging that the agency had recently shaved down the number of titles for people who basically did design stuff from forty-six to just twenty-three\u2014he presented this as though it were an Einsteinian coup\u2014and the other half of his time showing a film about the agency\u2019s newly opened branch in Oslo. The Oslo footage was shot in December. I kept wondering which designer in the audience who lived in the constant breezy balminess of Miami they hoped to entice to move to dark, wintry Norway. But I digress.\n\nShortly after I viewed this presentation, the dot-com world imploded, brought about largely by the euphoric excess of the agencies and their clients. But people still needed websites, and my practice flourished\u2014to the point where, in 1999, I made the terrifying transition from guy in his underwear working freelance out of his apartment to head of a fledgling design studio. (Note: you never stop working on that change.)\n\nI had heard about experience design in the 1990s, but assumed it was a gig for people who only knew one font. \n\nBut sometime around 2004 or 2005, among my freelance and small-studio colleagues, like a hobbit in the Shire, I began hearing whispers in the trees of a new evil stirring. The fires of Mordor were burning. Web designers were turning in their HTML editing tools and calling themselves UXers.\n\nI wasn\u2019t sure if they pronounced it \u201cuck-sir,\u201d or \u201cyou-ex-er,\u201d but I trusted their claims to authenticity about as far as I trusted the actors in a Doctor Pepper commercial when they claimed to be Peppers. I\u2019m an UXer, you\u2019re an UXer, wouldn\u2019t you like to be an UXer too? No thanks, said I. I still make things. With my hands.\n\nSuch was my thinking. I may have earned an MFA at the end of some long-past period of soul confusion, but I have working-class roots and am profoundly suspicious of, well, everything, but especially of anything that smacks of pretense. I got exporting GIFs. I didn\u2019t get how white papers and bullet points helped anybody do anything.\n\nI was wrong. And gradually I came to know I was wrong. And before other members of my tribe embraced UX, and research, and content strategy, and the other airier consultant services, I was on board. It helped that my wife of the time was a librarian from Michigan, so I\u2019d already bought into the cult of information architecture. And if I wasn\u2019t exactly the seer who first understood how borderline academic practices related to UX could become as important to our medium and industry as our craft skills, at least I was down a lot faster than Judd Apatow got with feminism. But I digress.\n\nI love the web and all the people in it. Today I understand design as a strategic practice above all. The promise of the web, to make all knowledge accessible to all people, won\u2019t be won by HTML5, WCAG 2, and responsive web design alone. \n\nWe are all designers. You may call yourself a front-end developer, but if you spend hours shaving half-seconds off an interaction, that\u2019s user experience and you, my friend, are a designer. If the client asks, \u201cCan you migrate all my old content to the new CMS?\u201d and you answer, \u201cOf course we can, but should we?\u201d, you are a designer. Even our users are designers. Think about it. \n\nOnce again, as in the dim dumb dot-com past, we seem to be divided by our titles. But, O, my friends, our varied titles are only differing facets of the same bright gem. Sisters, brothers, we are all designers. Love on! Love on!\n\nAnd may all your web pages, cards, clusters, clumps, asides, articles, and relational databases be bright.", "year": "2014", "author": "Jeffrey Zeldman", "author_slug": "jeffreyzeldman", "published": "2014-12-18T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2014/a-holiday-wish/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 32, "title": "Cohesive UX", "contents": "With Yosemite, Apple users can answer iPhone calls on their MacBooks. This is weird. And yet it\u2019s representative of a greater trend toward cohesion.\n\nShortly after upgrading to Yosemite, a call came in on my iPhone and my MacBook \u201crang\u201d in parallel. And I was all, like, \u201cWut?\u201d This was a new feature in Yosemite, and honestly it was a little bizarre at first.\n\n Apple promotional image showing a phone call ringing simultaneously on multiple devices.\n\nHowever, I had just spoken at a conference on the very topic you\u2019re reading about now, and therefore I appreciated the underlying concept: the cohesion of user experience, the cohesion of screens.\n\nThis is just one of many examples I\u2019ve encountered since beginning to speak about this topic months ago. But before we get ahead of ourselves, let\u2019s look back at the past few years, specifically the role of responsive web design.\n\nRWD != cohesive experience\n\nI needn\u2019t expound on the virtues of responsive web design (RWD). You\u2019ve likely already encountered more than a career\u2019s worth on the topic. This is a good thing. Count me in as one of its biggest fans.\n\nHowever, if we are to sing the praises of RWD, we must also acknowledge its shortcomings. One of these is that RWD ends where the browser ends. For all its goodness, RWD really has no bearing on native apps or any other experiences that take place outside the browser. This makes it challenging, therefore, to create cohesion for multi-screen users if RWD is the only response to \u201clet\u2019s make it work everywhere.\u201d\n\nWe need something that incorporates the spirit of RWD while unifying all touchpoints for the entire user experience\u2014single device or several devices, in browser or sans browser, native app or otherwise.\n\nI call this cohesive UX, and I believe it\u2019s the next era of successful user experiences.\n\nToward a unified whole\n\nSimply put, the goal of cohesive UX is to deliver a consistent, unified user experience regardless of where the experience begins, continues, and ends.\n\nTwo facets are vital to cohesive UX:\n\n\n\tFunction and form\n\tData symmetry\n\n\nLet\u2019s examine each of these.\n\nFunction AND form\n\nFunction over form, of course. Right? Not so fast, kiddo.\n\nConsider Bruce Lawson\u2019s dad. After receiving an Android phone for Christmas and thumbing through his favorite sites, he was puzzled why some looked different from their counterparts on the desktop. \u201cWhen a site looked radically different,\u201d Bruce observed, \u201che\u2019d check the URL bar to ensure that he\u2019d typed in the right address. In short, he found RWD to be confusing and it meant he didn\u2019t trust the site.\u201d A lack of cohesive form led to a jarring experience for Bruce\u2019s dad.\n\nNow, if I appear to be suggesting websites must look the same in every browser\u2014you already learned they needn\u2019t\u2014know that I recognize the importance of context, especially in regards to mobile. I made a case for this more than seven years ago.\n\nRather, cohesive UX suggests that form deserves the same respect as function when crafting user experiences that span multiple screens or devices. And users are increasingly comfortable traversing media. For example, more than 40% of adults in the U.S. owning more than one device start an activity on one screen and finish it on another, according to a study commissioned by Facebook. I suspect that percentage will only increase in 2015, and I suspect the tech-affluent readers of 24 ways are among the 40%.\n\nThere are countless examples of cohesive form and function. Consider Gmail, which displays email conversations visually as a stack that can be expanded and collapsed like the bellows of an accordion. This visual metaphor has been consistent in virtually any instance of Gmail\u2014website or app\u2014since at least 2007 when I captured this screenshot on my Nokia 6680:\n\n Screenshot captured while authoring Mobile Web Design (2007). Back then we didn\u2019t call this an app, but rather a \u2018smart client\u2019.\n\nWhen the holistic experience is cohesive as it is with Gmail, users\u2019 mental models and even muscle memory are preserved.1 Functionality and aesthetics align with the expectations users have for how things should function and what they should look like. In other words, the experience is roughly the same across screens.\n\nBut don\u2019t be ridiculous, peoples. Note that I said \u201croughly.\u201d It\u2019s important to avoid mindless replication of aesthetics and functionality for the sake of cohesion. Again, the goal is a unified whole, not a carbon copy. Affordances and concessions should be made as context and intuition require. For example, while Facebook users are accustomed to top-aligned navigation in the browser, they encounter bottom-aligned navigation in the iOS app as justified by user testing:\n\nThe iOS app model has held up despite many attempts to better it: http://t.co/rSMSAqeh9m pic.twitter.com/mBp36lAEgc\u2014 Luke Wroblewski (@lukew) December 10, 2014\n\n\nDespite the (rather minor) lack of consistency in navigation placement, other elements such as icons, labels, and color theme work in tandem to produce a unified, holistic whole.\n\nData symmetry\n\nData symmetry involves the repetition, continuity, or synchronicity of data across screens, devices, and platforms. As regards cohesive UX, data includes not just the material (such as an article you\u2019re writing on Medium) but also the actions that can be performed on or with that material (such as Medium\u2019s authoring tools). That is to say, \u201csync verbs, not just nouns\u201d (Josh Clark).\n\nIn my estimation, Amazon is an archetype of data symmetry, as is Rdio. When logged in, data is shared across virtually any device of any kind, irrespective of using a browser or native app. Add a product to your Amazon cart from your phone during the morning commute, and finish the transaction at work on your laptop. Easy peasy.\n\nAmazon\u2019s aesthetics are crazy cohesive, to boot:\n\n Amazon web (left) and native app (right).\n\nWith Rdio, not only are playlists and listening history synced across screens as you would expect, but the cohesion goes even further. Rdio\u2019s remote control feature allows you to control music playing on one device using another device, all in real time.\n\n Rdio\u2019s remote control feature, as viewed on my MacBook while music plays on my iMac.\n\nAt my office I often work from my couch using my MacBook, but my speakers are connected to my iMac. When signed in to Rdio on both devices, my MacBook serves as proxy for controlling Rdio on my iMac, much the same as any Yosemite-enabled device can serve as proxy for an incoming iPhone call.\n\n Me, in my office. Note the iMac and speakers at far right.\n\nThis is a brilliant example of cohesive design, and it\u2019s executed entirely via the cloud.\n\nThings to consider\n\nConsider the following when crafting cohesive experiences:\n\n\n\tInventory the elements that comprise your product experience, and cohesify them.2\nConsider things such as copy, tone, typography, iconography, imagery, flow, placement, brand identification, account data, session data, user preferences, and so on. Then, create cohesion among these elements to the greatest extent possible, while adapting to context as needed.\n\tStore session data in the cloud rather than locally.\nFor example, avoid using browser cookies to store shopping cart data, as cookies are specific to a single browser on a single device. Instead, store this data in the cloud so it can be accessed from other devices, as well as beyond the browser.\n\tConsider using web views when developing your native app.\n\u201cYou\u2019re already using web apps in native wrappers without even noticing it,\u201d Lukas Mathis contends. \u201cThe fact that nobody even notices, the fact that this isn\u2019t a story, shows that, when it comes to user experience, web vs. native doesn\u2019t matter anymore.\u201d Web views essentially allow you to display HTML content inside a native wrapper. This can reduce the time and effort needed to make the overall experience cohesive. So whereas the navigation bar may be rendered by the app, for example, the remaining page display may be rendered via the web. There\u2019s readily accessible documentation for using web views in C++, iOS, Android, and so forth.\n\n\nNature is calling\n\nReturning to the example of Yosemite and sychronized phone calls, is it really that bizarre in light of cohesive UX? Perhaps at first. But I suspect that, over time, Yosemite\u2019s cohesiveness \u2014 and the cohesiveness of other examples like the ones we\u2019ve discussed here \u2014 will become not only more natural but more commonplace, too.\n\n\n\n1 I browse Flipboard on my iPad nearly every morning as part of my breakfast routine. Swiping horizontally advances to the next page. Countless times I\u2019ve done the same gesture in Flipboard for iPhone only to have it do nothing. This is because the gesture for advancing is vertical on phones. I\u2019m so conditioned to the horizontal swipe that I often fail to make the switch to vertical swipe, and apparently others suffer from the same muscle memory, too.\n\n2 Cohesify isn\u2019t a thing. But chances are you understood what I meant. Yay neologism!", "year": "2014", "author": "Cameron Moll", "author_slug": "cameronmoll", "published": "2014-12-24T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2014/cohesive-ux/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 69, "title": "How to Do a UX Review", "contents": "A UX review is where an expert goes through a website looking for usability and experience problems and makes recommendations on how to fix them. \nI\u2019ve completed a number of UX reviews over my twelve years working as a user experience consultant and I thought I\u2019d share my approach. \nI\u2019ll be talking about reviewing websites here; you can adapt the approach for web apps, or mobile or desktop apps. \nWhy conduct a review\nTypically, a client asks for a review to be undertaken by a trusted and, ideally, detached third party who either works for an agency or is a freelancer. Often they may ask a new member of the UX team to complete one, or even set it as a task for a job interview. This indicates the client is looking for an objective view, seen from the outside as a user would see the website. \nI always suggest conducting some user research rather than a review. Users know their goals and watching them make (what you might think of as) mistakes on the website is invaluable. Conducting research with six users can give you six hours\u2019 worth of review material from six viewpoints. In short, user research can identify more problems and show how common those problems might be. \nThere are three reasons, though, why a review might better suit client needs than user research: \n\nQuick results: user research and analysis takes at least three weeks.\nLimited budget: the \u00a36\u201310,000 cost to run user research is about twice the cost of a UX review. \nUsers are hard to reach: in the business-to-business world, reaching users is difficult, especially if your users hold senior positions in their organisations. Working with consumers is much easier as there are often more of them. \n\nThere is some debate about the benefits of user research over UX review. In my experience you learn far more from research, but opinions differ. \nBe objective\nThe number one mistake many UX reviewers make is reporting back the issues they identify as their opinion. This can cause credibility problems because you have to keep justifying why your opinion is correct. \nI\u2019ve had the most success when giving bad news in a UX review and then finally getting things fixed when I have been as objective as possible, offering evidence for why something may be a problem. \nTo be objective we need two sources of data: numbers from analytics to appeal to reason; and stories from users in the form of personas to speak to emotions. Highlighting issues with dispassionate numerical data helps show the extent of the problem. Making the problems more human using personas can make the problem feel more real. \nNumbers from analytics\nThe majority of clients I work with use Google Analytics, but if you use a different analytics package the same concepts apply. I use analytics to find two sets of things.\n1. Landing pages and search terms\nLanding pages are the pages users see first when they visit a website \u2013 more often than not via a Google search. Landing pages reveal user goals. If a user landed on a page called \u2018Yellow shoes\u2019 their goal may well be to find out about or buy some yellow shoes. \nIt would be great to see all the search terms bringing people to the website but in 2011 Google stopped providing search term data to (rightly!) protect users\u2019 privacy. You can get some search term data from Google Webmaster tools, but we must rely on landing pages as a clue to our users\u2019 goals. \nThe thing to look for is high-traffic landing pages with a high bounce rate. Bounce rate is the percentage of visitors to a website who navigate away from the site after viewing only one page. A high bounce rate (over 50%) isn\u2019t good; above 70% is bad.\nTo get a list of high-traffic landing pages with a high bounce rate install this bespoke report.\nGoogle Analytics showing landing pages ordered by popularity and the bounce rate for each.\nThis is the list of pages with high demand and that have real problems as the bounce rate is high. This is the main focus of the UX review. \n2. User flows\nWe have the beginnings of the user journey: search terms and initial landing pages. Now we can tap into the really useful bit of Google Analytics. Called behaviour flows, they show the most common order of pages visited. \nBehaviour flows from Google Analytics, showing the routes users took through the website.\nHere we can see the second and third (and so on) pages users visited. Importantly, we can also see the drop-outs at each step. \nIf your client has it set up, you can also set goal pages (for example, a post-checkout contact us and thank you page). You can then see a similar view that tracks back from the goal pages. If your client doesn\u2019t have this, suggest they set up goal tracking. It\u2019s easy to do. \nWe now have the remainder of the user journey. \nA user journey\nExpect the work in analytics to take up to a day. \nWe may well identify more than one user journey, starting from different landing pages and going to different second- and third-level pages. That\u2019s a good thing and shows we have different user types. Talking of user types, we need to define who our users are. \nPersonas\nWe have some user journeys and now we need to understand more about our users\u2019 motivations and goals. \nI have a love-hate relationship with personas, but used properly these portraits of users can help bring a human touch to our UX review. \nI suggest using a very cut-down view of a persona. My old friends Steve Cable and Richard Caddick at cxpartners have a great free template for personas from their book Communicating the User Experience.\nThe first thing to do is find a picture that represents that persona. Don\u2019t use crappy stock photography \u2013 it\u2019s sometimes hard to relate to perfect-looking people) \u2013 use authentic-looking people. Here\u2019s a good collection of persona photos. \nAn example persona.\nThe personas have three basic attributes:\n\nGoals: we can complete these drawing on the analytics data we have (see example).\nMusts: things we have to do to meet the persona\u2019s needs.\nMust nots: a list of things we really shouldn\u2019t do. \n\nCompleting points 2 and 3 can often be done during the writing of the report. \nLet\u2019s take an example. We know that the search term \u2018yellow shoes\u2019 takes the user to the landing page for yellow shoes. We also know this page has a high bounce rate, meaning it doesn\u2019t provide a good experience. \nWith our expert hat on we can review the page. We will find two types of problem: \n\nUsability issues: ineffective button placement or incorrect wording, links not looking like links, and so on. \nExperience issues: for example, if a product is out of stock we have to contact the business to ask them to restock. \n\nThat link is very small and hard to see.\nWe could identify that the contact button isn\u2019t easy to find (a usability issue) but that\u2019s not the real problem here. That the user has to ask the business to restock the item is a bad user experience. We add this to our personas\u2019 must nots. The big experience problems with the site form the musts and must nots for our personas. \nWe now have a story around our user journey that highlights what is going wrong. \nIf we\u2019ve identified a number of user journeys, multiple landing pages and differing second and third pages visited, we can create more personas to match. A good rule of thumb is no more than three personas. Any more and they lose impact, watering down your results. \nExpect persona creation to take up to a day to complete. \nLet\u2019s start the review\nWe take the user journeys and we follow them step by step, working through the website looking for the reasons why users drop out at each step. Using Keynote or PowerPoint, I structure the final report around the user journey with separate sections for each step.\nFor each step we\u2019ll find both usability and experience problems. Split the results into those two groups. \nUsability problems are fairly easy to fix as they\u2019re often quick design changes. As you go along, note the usability problems in one place: we\u2019ll call this \u2018quick wins\u2019. Simple quick fixes are a reassuring thing for a client to see and mean they can get started on stuff right away. You can mark the severity of usability issues. Use a scale from 1 to 3 (if you use 1 to 5 everything ends up being a 3!) where 1 is minor and 3 is serious. \nReview the website on the device you\u2019d expect your persona to use. Are they using the site on a smartphone? Review it on a smartphone. \nI allow one page or slide per problem, which allows me to explain what is going wrong. For a usability problem I\u2019ll often make a quick wireframe or sketch to explain how to address it. \nA UX review slide displaying all the elements to be addressed. These slides may be viewed from across the room on a screen so zoom into areas of discussion.\n(Quick tip: if you use Google Chrome, try Awesome Screenshot to capture screens.)\nWhen it comes to the more severe experience problems \u2013 things like an online shop not offering next day delivery, or a business that needs to promise to get back to new customers within a few hours \u2013 these will take more than a tweak to the UI to fix. \nCall these something different. I use the terms like business challenges and customer experience issues as they show that it will take changes to the organisation and its processes to address them. It\u2019s often beyond the remit of a humble UX consultant to recommend how to fix organisational issues, so don\u2019t try. \nAgain, create a page within your document to collect all of the business challenges together. \nExpect the review to take between one and three days to complete. \nThe final report should follow this structure:\n\nThe approach\nOverview of usability quick wins\nOverview of experience issues\nOverview of Google Analytics findings\nThe user journeys \nThe personas\nDetailed page-by-page review (broken down by steps on the user journey)\n\nThere are two academic theories to help with the review. \nHeuristic evaluation is a set of criteria to organise the issues you find. They\u2019re great for categorising the usability issues you identify but in practice they can be quite cumbersome to apply. \nI prefer the more scientific and much simpler cognitive walkthrough that is focused on goals and actions.\nA workshop to go through the findings\nThe most important part of the UX review process is to talk through the issues with your client and their team. \nA document can only communicate a certain amount. Conversations about the findings will help the team understand the severity of the issues you\u2019ve uncovered and give them a chance to discuss what to do about them. \nExpect the workshop to last around three hours.\nWhen presenting the report, explain the method you used to conduct the review, the data sources, personas and the reasoning behind the issues you found. Start by going through the usability issues. Often these won\u2019t be contentious and you can build trust and improve your credibility by making simple, easy to implement changes. \nThe most valuable part of the workshop is conversation around each issue, especially the experience problems. The workshop should include time to talk through each experience issue and how the team will address it. \nI collect actions on index cards throughout the workshop and make a note of who will take what action with each problem. \nIndex cards showing the problem and who is responsible.\nWhen talking through the issues, the person who designed the site is probably in the room \u2013 they may well feel threatened. So be nice.\nWhen I talk through the report I try to have strong ideas, weakly held.\nAt the end of the workshop you\u2019ll have talked through each of the issues and identified who is responsible for addressing them. To close the workshop I hand out the cards to the relevant people, giving them a physical reminder of the next steps they have to take. \nThat\u2019s my process for conducting a review. I\u2019d love to hear any tips you have in the comments.", "year": "2015", "author": "Joe Leech", "author_slug": "joeleech", "published": "2015-12-03T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2015/how-to-do-a-ux-review/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 290, "title": "Creating a Weekly Research Cadence", "contents": "Working on a product team, it\u2019s easy to get hyper-focused on building features and lose sight of your users and their daily challenges. User research can be time-consuming to set up, so it often becomes ad-hoc and irregular, only performed in response to a particular question or concern. But without frequent touch points and opportunities for discovery, your product will stagnate and become less and less relevant. Setting up an efficient cadence of weekly research conversations will re-focus your team on user problems and provide a steady stream of insights for product development.\nAs my team transitioned into a Lean process earlier this year, we needed a way to get more feedback from users in a short amount of time. Our users are internet marketers\u2014always busy and often difficult to reach. Scheduling research took days of emailing back and forth to find mutually agreeable times, and juggling one-off conversations made it difficult to connect with more than one or two people per week. The slow pace of research was allowing additional risk to creep into our product development.\nI wanted to find a way for our team to test ideas and validate assumptions sooner and more often\u2014but without increasing the administrative burden of scheduling. The solution: creating a regular cadence of research and testing that required a minimum of effort to coordinate. \nSetting up a weekly user research cadence accelerated our learning and built momentum behind strategic experiments. By dedicating time every week to talk to a few users, we made ongoing research a painless part of every weekly sprint. But increasing the frequency of our research had other benefits as well. With only five working days between sessions, a weekly cadence forced us to keep our work small and iterative. Committing to testing something every week meant showing work earlier and more often than we might have preferred\u2014pushing us out of your comfort zone into a process of more rapid experimentation.\nBest of all, frequent conversations with users helped us become more customer-focused. After just a few weeks in a consistent research cadence, I noticed user feedback weaving itself through our planning and strategy sessions. Comments like \u201cRemember what Jenna said last week, about not being able to customize her lists?\u201d would pop up as frequent reference points to guide our decisions. As discussions become less about subjective opinions and more about responding to user needs, we saw immediate improvement in the quality of our solutions.\nEstablishing an efficient recruitment process\nThe key to creating a regular cadence of ongoing user research is an efficient recruitment and scheduling process\u2014along with a commitment to prioritize the time needed for research conversations. This is an invaluable tool for product teams (whether or not they follow a Lean process), but could easily be adapted for content strategy teams, agency teams, a UX team of one, or any other project that would benefit from short, frequent conversations with users. \nThe process I use requires a few hours of setup time at the beginning, but pays off in better learning and better releases over the long run. Almost any team could use this as a starting point and adapt it to their own needs.\nPick a dedicated time each week for research\nIn order to make research a priority, we started by choosing a time each week when everyone on the product team was available. Between stand-ups, grooming sessions, and roadmap reviews, it wasn\u2019t easy to do! Nevertheless, it\u2019s important to include as many people as possible in conversations with your users. Getting a second-hand summary of research results doesn\u2019t have the same impact as hearing someone describe their frustrations and concerns first-hand. The more people in the room to hear those concerns, the more likely they are to become priorities for your team.\nI blocked off 2 hours for research conversations every Thursday afternoon. We make this time sacred, and never schedule other meetings or work across those hours. \nDivide your time into several research slots\nAfter my weekly cadence was set, I divided the time into four 20-minute time slots. Twenty minutes is long enough for us to ask several open-ended questions or get feedback on a prototype, without being a burden on our users\u2019 busy schedules. Depending on your work, you may need schedule longer sessions\u2014but beware the urge to create blocks that last an hour or more. A weekly research cadence is designed to facilitate rapid, ongoing feedback and testing; it should force you to talk to users often and to keep your work small and iterative. Projects that require longer, more in-depth testing will probably need a dedicated research project of their own.\nI used the scheduling software Calendly to create interview appointments on a calendar that I can share with users, and customized the confirmation and reminder emails with information about how to access our video conferencing software. (Most of our research is done remotely, but this could be set up with details for in-person meetings as well.) Automating these emails and reminders took a little bit of time to set up, but was worth it for how much faster it made the process overall.\n\n\nInvite users to sign up for a time that\u2019s convenient for them\nWith a calendar set up and follow-up emails automated, it becomes incredibly easy to schedule research conversations. Each week, I send a short email out to a small group of users inviting them to participate, explaining that this is a chance to provide feedback that will improve our product or occasionally promoting the opportunity to get a sneak peek at new features we\u2019re working on. The email includes a link to the Calendly appointments, allowing users who are interested to opt in to a time that fits their schedule.\nSetting up appointments the first go around involved a bit of educated guessing. How many invitations would it take to fill all four of my weekly slots? How far in advance did I need to recruit users? But after a few weeks of trial and error, I found that sending 12-16 invitations usually allows me to fill all four interview slots. Our users often have meetings pop up at short notice, so we get the best results when I send the recruiting email on Tuesday, two days before my research block.\nIt may take a bit of experimentation to fine tune your process, but it\u2019s worth the effort to get it right. (The worst thing that\u2019s happened since I began recruiting this way was receiving emails from users complaining that there were no open slots available!) I can now fill most of an afternoon with back-to-back user research sessions just by sending just one or two emails each week, increasing our research pace while leaving plenty time to focus on discovery and design.\nGetting the most out of your research sessions\nAs you get comfortable with the rhythm of talking to users each week, you\u2019ll find more and more ways to get value out of your conversations. At first, you may prefer to just show work in progress\u2014such as mockups or a simple prototype\u2014and ask open-ended questions to measure user reaction. When you begin new projects, you may want to use this time to research behavior on existing features\u2014either watching participants as they use part of your product or asking them to give an account of a recent experience in your app. You may even want to run more abstracted Lean experiments, if that\u2019s the best way to validate the assumptions your team is working from.\nWhatever you do, plan some time a day or two later to come back together and review what you\u2019ve learned each week. Synthesizing research outcomes as a group will help keep your team in alignment and allow each person to highlight what they took away from each conversation. \nOver time, you may find that the pace of weekly user research becomes more exhausting than energizing, especially if the responsibility for scheduling and planning falls on just one person. Don\u2019t allow yourself to get burned out; a healthy research cadence should also include time to rest and reflect if the pace becomes too rapid to sustain. Take breaks as needed, then pick up the pace again as soon as you\u2019re ready.", "year": "2016", "author": "Wren Lanier", "author_slug": "wrenlanier", "published": "2016-12-02T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2016/creating-a-weekly-research-cadence/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 203, "title": "Jobs-to-Be-Done in Your UX Toolbox", "contents": "Part 1: What is JTBD?\nThe concept of a \u201cjob\u201d in \u201cJobs-To-Be-Done\u201d is neatly encapsulated by a oft-quoted line from Theodore Levitt:\n\n\u201cPeople want a quarter-inch hole, not a quarter inch drill\u201d.\n\nEven so, Don Norman pointed out that perhaps Levitt \u201cstopped too soon\u201d at what the real customer goal might be. In the \u201cThe Design of Everyday Things\u201d, he wrote:\n\n\u201cLevitt\u2019s example of the drill implying that the goal is really a hole is only partially correct, however. When people go to a store to buy a drill, that is not their real goal. But why would anyone want a quarter-inch hole? Clearly that is an intermediate goal. Perhaps they wanted to hang shelves on the wall. Levitt stopped too soon. Once you realize that they don\u2019t really want the drill, you realize that perhaps they don\u2019t really want the hole, either: they want to install their bookshelves. Why not develop methods that don\u2019t require holes? Or perhaps books that don\u2019t require bookshelves.\u201d\n\nIn other words, a \u201cjob\u201d in JTBD lingo is a way to express a user need or provide a customer-centric problem frame that\u2019s independent of a solution. As Tony Ulwick says:\n\n\u201cA job is stable, it doesn\u2019t change over time.\u201d\n\nAn example of a job is \u201ctiding you over from breakfast to lunch.\u201d You could hire a donut, a flapjack or a banana for that mid-morning snack\u2014whatever does the job. If you can arrive at a clearly identified primary job (and likely some secondary ones too), you can be more creative in how you come up with an effective solution while keeping the customer problem in focus.\nThe team at Intercom wrote a book on their application of JTBD. In it, Des Traynor cleverly characterised how JTBD provides a different way to think about solutions that compete for the same job: \n\n\u201cEconomy travel and business travel are both capable candidates applying for [the job: Get me face-to-face with my colleague in San Francisco], though they\u2019re looking for significantly different salaries. Video conferencing isn\u2019t as capable, but is willing to work for a far smaller salary. I\u2019ve a hiring choice to make.\u201d\n\nSo far so good: it\u2019s relatively simple to understand what a job is, once you understand how it\u2019s different from a \u201ctask\u201d. Business consultant and Harvard professor Clay Christensen talks about the concept of \u201chiring\u201d a product to do a \u201cjob\u201d, and firing it when something better comes along. If you\u2019re a company that focuses solutions on the customer job, you\u2019re more likely to succeed. You\u2019ll find these concepts often referred to as \u201cJobs-to-be-Done theory\u201d. But the application of Jobs-to-Be-Done theory is a little more complicated; it comprises several related approaches.\nI particularly like Jim Kalbach\u2019s description of how JTBD is a \u201clens through which to understand value creation\u201d. But it is also more. In my view, it\u2019s a family of frameworks and methods\u2014and perhaps even a philosophy.\nDifferent facets in a family of frameworks\nJTBD has its roots in market research and business strategy, and so it comes to the research table from a slightly different place compared to traditional UX or design research\u2014we have our roots in human-computer interaction and ergonomics. I\u2019ve found it helpful to keep in mind is that the application of JTBD theory is an evolving beast, so it\u2019s common to find contradictions across different resources. My own use of it has varied from project to project. In speaking to others who have adopted it in different measures, it seems that we have all applied it in somewhat multifarious ways. As we like to often say in interviews: there are no wrong answers.\nOutcome Driven Innovation\nTony Ulwick\u2019s version of the JTBD history began with Outcome Driven Innovation (ODI), and this approach is best outlined in his seminal article published in the Harvard Business Review in 2002. To understand his more current JTBD approach in his new book \u201cJobs to Be Done: Theory to Practice\u201d, I actually found it beneficial to read his approach in the original 2002 article for a clearer reference point.\nIn the earlier article, Ulwick presented a rigorous approach that combines interviews, surveys and an \u201copportunity\u201d algorithm\u2014a sequence of steps to determine the business opportunity. ODI centres around working with \u201cdesired outcome statements\u201d that you unearth through interviews, followed by a means to quantify the gap between importance and satisfaction in a survey to different types of customers. \nSince 2008, Ulwick has written about using job maps to make sense of what the customer may be trying to achieve. In a recent article, he describes the aim of the activity is \u201cto discover what the customer is trying to get done at different points in executing a job and what must happen at each juncture in order for the job to be carried out successfully.\u201d\nA job map is not strictly a journey map, however tempting it is to see it that way. From a UX perspective, is one of many models we can use\u2014and as our research team at Clearleft have found, how we use model can depend on the nature of the jobs we\u2019ve uncovered in interviews and the characteristics of the problem we\u2019re attempting to solve.\nFigure 1. Universal job map\nUlwick\u2019s current methodology is outlined in his new book, where he describes a complete end-to-end process: from customer and competitor research to framing market and product strategy.\nThe Jobs-To-Be-Done Interview\nBack in 2013, I attended a workshop by Chris Spiek and Bob Moesta from the ReWired Group on JTBD at the behest of a then-MailChimp colleague, and I came away excited about their approach to product research. It felt different from anything I\u2019d done before and for the first time in years, I felt that I was genuinely adding something new to my research toolbox.\nA key idea is that if you focus on the stories of those who switched to you, and those who switch away from you, you can uncover the core jobs through looking at these opposite ends of engagement.\nThis framework centres around the JTBD interview method, which harnesses the power of a narrative framework to elicit the real reasons why someone \u201chired\u201d something to do a job\u2014be it something physical like a new coffee maker, or a digital service, such as a to-do list app. As you interview, you are trying to unearth the context around the key moments on the JTBD timeline (Figure 2). A common approach is to begin from the point the customer might have purchased something, back to the point where the thought of buying this thing first occurred to them.\nFigure 2. JTBD Timeline\nFigure 3. The Four Forces\nThe Forces Diagram (Figure 3) is a post-interview analysis tool where you can map out what causes customers to switch to something new and what holds them back.\nThe JTBD interview is effective at identifying core and secondary jobs, as well as some context around the user need. Because this method is designed to extract the story from the interviewee, it\u2019s a powerful way to facilitate recall. Having done many such interviews, I\u2019ve noticed one interesting side effect: participants often remember more details later on after the conversation has formally ended. It is worth scheduling a follow-up phone call or keep the channels open.\nStrengths aside, it\u2019s good to keep in mind that the JTBD interview is still primarily an interview technique, so you are relying on the context from the interviewee\u2019s self-reported perspective. For example, a stronger research methodology combines JTBD interviews with contextual research and quantitative methods. \nJob Stories\nAlan Klement is credited for coming up with the term \u201cjob story\u201d to describe the framing of jobs for product design by the team at Intercom:\n\n\u201cWhen \u2026 I want to \u2026 so I can \u2026.\u201d\n\nFigure 4. Anatomy of a Job Story\nUnlike a user story that traditionally frames a requirement around personas, job stories frame the user need based on the situation and context. Paul Adams, the VP of Product at Intercom, wrote:\n\n\u201cWe frame every design problem in a Job, focusing on the triggering event or situation, the motivation and goal, and the intended outcome. [\u2026] We can map this Job to the mission and prioritise it appropriately. It ensures that we are constantly thinking about all four layers of design. We can see what components in our system are part of this Job and the necessary relationships and interactions required to facilitate it. We can design from the top down, moving through outcome, system, interactions, before getting to visual design.\u201d\n\nSystems of Progress\nApart from advocating using job stories, Klement believes that a core tenet of applying JTBD revolves around our desire for \u201cself-betterment\u201d\u2014and that focusing on everyone\u2019s desire for self-betterment is core to a successful strategy.\nIn his book, Klement takes JTBD further to being a tool for change through applying systems thinking. There, he introduces the systems of progress and how it can help focus product strategy approach to be more innovative.\nCoincidentally, I applied similar thinking on mapping systemic change when we were looking to improve users\u2019 trust with a local government forum earlier this year. It\u2019s not just about capturing and satisfying the immediate job-to-be-done, it\u2019s about framing the job so that you can a clear vision forward on how you can help your users improve their lives in the ways they want to.\nThis is really the point where JTBD becomes a philosophy of practice.\nPart 2: Mixing It Up\nThere has been some misunderstanding about how adopting JTBD means ditching personas or some of our existing design tools or research techniques. This couldn\u2019t have been more wrong.\nFigure 5: Jim Kalbach\u2019s JTBD model\nJim Kalbach has used Outcome-Driven Innovation for around 10 years. In a 2016 article, he presents a synthesised model of how to think about that has key elements from ODI, Christensen\u2019s theories and the structure of the job story.\nMore interestingly, Kalbach has also combined the use of mental models with JTBD.\nClaire Menke of UDemy has written a comprehensive article about using personas, JTBD and customer journey maps together in order to communicate more complete story from the users\u2019 perspective. Claire highlights an especially interesting point in her article as she described her challenges:\n\u201cAfter much trial and error, I arrived at a foundational research framework to suit every team\u2019s needs \u2014 allowing everyone to share the same holistic understanding, but extract the type of information most applicable to their work.\u201d\nIn other words, the organisational context you are in likely can dictate what works best\u2014after all the goal is to arrive at the best user experience for your audiences. Intercom can afford to go full-on on applying JTBD theory as a dominant approach because they are a start-up, but a large company or organisation with multiple business units may require a mix of tools, outputs and outcomes.\nJTBD is an immensely powerful approach on many fronts\u2014you\u2019ll find many different references that lists the ways you can apply JTBD. However, in the context of this discussion, it might also be useful to we examine where it lies in our models of how we think about our UX and product processes.\nJTBD in the UX ecosystem\nFigure 6. The Elements of User Experience (source)\nThere are many ways we have tried to explain the UX discipline but I think Jesse James Garrett\u2019s Elements of User Experience is a good place to begin.\nI sometimes also use little diagram to help me describe the different levels you might work at when you work through the complexity of designing and developing a product. A holistic UX strategy needs to address all the different levels for a comprehensive experience: your individual product UI, product features, product propositions and brand need to have a cohesive definition.\nFigure 7. Which level of product focus?\nWe could, of course, also think about where it fits best within the double diamond.\nAgain, bearing in mind that JTBD has its roots in business strategy and market research, it is excellent at clarifying user needs, defining high-level specifications and content requirements. It is excellent for validating brand perception and value proposition \u2014all the way down to your feature set. In other words, it can be extremely powerful all the way through to halfway of the second diamond. You could quite readily combine the different JTBD approaches because they have differences as much as overlaps. However, JTBD generally starts getting a little difficult to apply once we get to the details of UI design.\nThe clue lies in JTBD\u2019s raison d\u2019\u00eatre: a job statement is solution independent. Hence, once we get to designing solutions, we potentially fall into a existential black hole.\nThat said, Jim Kalbach has a quick case study on applying JTBD to content design tucked inside the main article on a synthesised JTBD model. Alan Klement has a great example of how you could use UI to resolve job stories. You\u2019ll notice that the available language of \u201cjobs\u201d drops off at around that point.\nJob statements and outcome statements provide excellent \u201cmini north-stars\u201d as customer-oriented focal points, but purely satisfying these statements would not necessarily guarantee that you have created a seamless and painless user experience.\nPlaying well with others\nYou will find that JTBD plays well with Lean, and other strategy tools like the Value Proposition Canvas. With every new project, there is potential to harness the power of JTBD alongside our established toolbox.\nWhen we need to understand complex contexts where cultural or socioeconomic considerations have to be taken into account, we are better placed with combining JTBD with more anthropological approaches. And while we might be able to evaluate if our product, website or app satisfies the customer jobs through interviews or surveys, without good old-fashioned usability testing we are unlikely to be able to truly validate why the job isn\u2019t being represented as it should. In this case, individual jobs solved on the UI can be set up as hypotheses to be proven right or wrong. \nThe application of Jobs-to-be-Done is still evolving. I\u2019ve found it to be very powerful and I struggle to remember what my UX professional life was like before I encountered it\u2014it has completely changed my approach to research and design.\nThe fact JTBD is still evolving as a practice means we need to be watchful of dogma\u2014there\u2019s no right way to get a UX job done after all, it nearly always depends. At the end of the day, isn\u2019t it about having the right tool for the right job?", "year": "2017", "author": "Steph Troeth", "author_slug": "stephtroeth", "published": "2017-12-04T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2017/jobs-to-be-done-in-your-ux-toolbox/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 197, "title": "Designing for Mobile Performance", "contents": "Last year, some colleagues at Google ran a research study titled \u201cThe Need for Mobile Speed\u201d to find out what the impact of performance and perception of speed had on the way people use the web on their mobile devices. \nThat\u2019s not a trivial distinction; when considering performance, how fast something feels is often more important than how fast it actually is. When dealing with sometimes underpowered mobile devices and slow mobile networks, designing experiences that feel fast is exceptionally important.\nOne of the most startling numbers we found in the study was that 53% of mobile site visits are abandoned if pages take longer than 3 seconds to load.\nWe wanted to find out more, so following on from this study, we conducted research to define what the crucial elements of speed are. We took into consideration the user experience (UX), overall perception of speed, and how differing contexts the user finds themselves in can alter how fast a user thinks something loaded.\nTo understand speed and load times first we must understand that user mobile web behaviour is broken down into three buckets;\n\nIntention\nLocation\nState of mind\n\nLet\u2019s look at each of those in turn.\nIntention\nUsers browse sites on a mobile device for many different reasons. To be able to effectively design a performant user experience for them, it\u2019s important to understand what those reasons might be. When asked to describe their reason for visiting a site, approximately 30% of people asked by the study claimed that they were simply browsing without a particular purpose in mind. Looking deeper, we found that this number increased slightly (34%) for retail sites. 30% said they were just there to find out some information for a future task or action, such as booking a flight.\nInterestingly, the research shows that users are actually window shopping using their mobile browser. Only 29% actually said they had a specific goal or intent in mind, and this number increases significantly for financial services like banking sites (57%). This goes against a traditionally held view of users wanting to perform simple actions efficiently on their mobile device. Sure, some users are absolutely doing that, but many are just browsing around without a goal in mind, just like they would on a desktop browser.\nThis gives great insight into the user\u2019s intentions. It tells us that users are actively using sites on their mobile, but a large majority do not intend to do anything instantly. There\u2019s no goal they\u2019re under pressure to achieve. If a site\u2019s performance is lousy or janky, this will only reaffirm to the user to that they can hold off on completing a task, so they might just give up. \nHowever, if a site is quick to load, sophisticated in expressing its value proposition quickly, and enables the user to perform their actions seamlessly, then turning that \u201cbrowsing user\u201d into a \u201cbuying user\u201d becomes all that much easier. When the user has no goal, there\u2019s more opportunity to convert, and you stand a greater chance of doing that if the performance is good enough so they stick around.\nLocation\nObviously, mobile devices by their nature can be used in many different locations. This is an interesting consideration, because it\u2019s not something we traditionally need to take into account designing experiences for static platforms like desktop computers.\nThe in the study, we found that 82% of users browse the web on their mobile phone while in their home. In contrast, only 7% do the same while at work. This might come across as a bit of a shock, but when you look at mobile usage \u2013 in particular app usage \u2013 most of the apps being used are either a social network or some sort of entertainment or media app. Due to the unreliability of network connections, users will often alternate between these two types of apps.\nThe consequence being that if a site doesn\u2019t work offline, or otherwise compensate for bad network connectivity in some way by providing opportunities to allow users to browse their site, then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy as to why users mostly view the mobile web from the comfort of their homes where there is a strong WiFi connection. They\u2019re using mobile devices, but they\u2019re not actually mobile themselves.\nAnother thing to bear in mind is how users alternate between devices, a study by comScore found that 80% of transactions take place on desktop while 69% of the browsing takes place on mobile. Any given user might access from more than one location - they might visit one day from a bus queue on their phone, and then next day from a laptop at home.\nState of mind\nOne more thing we need to take into consideration is the user\u2019s state of mind. Whilst browsing at home, users tend to be more relaxed, and in the research 76% stated they were generally calmer at home. The user\u2019s state of mind can have quite a big impact on how they perceive things. The calmer they are, the quicker a site might appear to load. If the user is anxious and impatiently drumming their fingers on the table, things seem to take longer, and even a small wait can feel like an eternity.\nThis is quite key. Over 40% of sites take longer than 4 seconds to load for users who are are out and about and using a mobile data connection. Coupled with our perception, and amplified by a potentially less-than-calm state of mind, this can seem like an age.\nWhat does this all mean?\nI think we can all agree that users prefer strong, steady connections and comfort when completing transactions. It seems like common sense when we say it out loud. Recreating these feelings and sensations of comfort and predictability under all circumstances therefore becomes paramount. Equally, when asked in the study, users all claimed that speed was the most important factor impacting their mobile web usage. Over 40%, in fact, said it was the most important UX feature of a site, and nobody asked considered it to be of no importance at all.\n\nThe meaning of speed\nWhen it comes to performance, speed is measured in two ways \u2013 real speed; as measured on a clock, and perceived speed; how responsive an interaction feels. We can, of course, improve how quickly a site loads by simply making files smaller. Even then, the study showed that 32% of users felt a site can feel slow even when it loads in less than 4 seconds. This gets even worse when you look at it by age group, with 50% if young people (18-24 year olds) thinking a site was slower than it actually was. When you add to the mix that users think a site loaded faster when they are sitting compared to when they are standing up, then you are in a world of trouble if your site doesn\u2019t have any clear indicators to let the user know the loading state of you website or app.\nSo what can we do about this to improve our designs?\nHow to fix / hack user perception\nThere are some golden rules of speed, the first thing is hacking response time. If a page takes more than 3 seconds to load, you will certainly start to lose your users. However, if that slowness is part of a UX flow such as processing information, the user understands it might take a little time. Under those circumstances, a load time of under 5 seconds is acceptable, but even then, you should take caution. Anything above 8 seconds and you are in very real danger of losing your audience completely. \n\n\n\nLoad time\nUser impression\n\n\n\n\n200 ms\nFeels instant\n\n\n1 s\nFeels it is performing smoothly\n\n\n5 s\nPart of user flow\n\n\n8 s\nLose attention\n\n\n\nRemove the tap delay\nMobile browsers often use a 300-350ms delay between the triggering of the touchend and click events. This delay was added so the browser could determine if there was going to be a double-tap triggered or not, since double-tap is a common gesture used to zoom into text. This delay can have the side effect of making interactions feel laggy, and therefore giving the user the impression that the site is slow, even if it\u2019s their own browser causing the problem.\nFortunately there\u2019s a way to remove the delay. Add following in the of your page, and the delay no longer takes effect:\n ![\"\"](\"http://www.gravatar.com/avatar.php?gravatar_id=13734b0cb20708f79e730809c29c3c48&size=100\")
\n Drew McLellan\n\t![\"\"](\"http://www.gravatar.com/avatar.php?size=100&gravatar_id='){kind=avatar}
'\n\t})\n})\n\nThis code waits until everything on the page is loaded, then uses jQuery.prepend to insert an image into every link containing a data-gravatar-hash attribute. It\u2019s short and relatively simple, but in tests it reduced the rendering time of a sample page from over three seconds to well under one.\n\nFinishing touches\n\nWe still need to consider the appearance of the page before the avatars have loaded. When our script adds extra content to the page it will cause a browser reflow, which is visually annoying. We can avoid this by using CSS to reserve some space for each image before it\u2019s inserted into the HTML:\n\n#comments div {\n\tpadding-left: 110px;\n\tmin-height: 100px;\n\tposition: relative;\n}\n#comments div h4 img {\n\tdisplay: block;\n\tposition: absolute;\n\ttop: 0;\n\tleft: 0;\n}\n\nIn a real world example, we\u2019ll also find that the HTML for a comment is more varied as many users don\u2019t provide a web page link. We can make small changes to our JavaScript and CSS to handle this case.\n\nPut this all together and you get this example.\n\nTaking this idea further\n\nThere\u2019s no reason to limit this technique to sites using Gravatar; we can use similar code to delay loading any images that don\u2019t need to be present immediately. For example, this year\u2019s redesigned Flickr photo page uses a \u201cdata-defer-src\u201d attribute to describe any image that doesn\u2019t need to be loaded straight away, including avatars and map tiles.\n\nYou also don\u2019t have to limit yourself to loading the extra resources once the page loads. You can get further bandwidth savings by waiting until the user takes an action before downloading extra assets. Amazon has taken this tactic to the extreme on its product pages \u2013 extra content is loaded as you scroll down the page.\n\nSo next time you\u2019re building a page, take a few minutes to think about which elements are peripheral and could be delayed to allow more important content to appear as quickly as possible.", "year": "2010", "author": "Paul Hammond", "author_slug": "paulhammond", "published": "2010-12-18T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2010/speed-up-your-site-with-delayed-content/", "topic": "ux"}
{"rowid": 280, "title": "Conditional Loading for Responsive Designs", "contents": "On the eighteenth day of last year\u2019s 24 ways, Paul Hammond wrote a great article called Speed Up Your Site with Delayed Content. He outlined a technique for loading some content \u2014 like profile avatars \u2014 after the initial page load. This gives you a nice performance boost.\n\nThere\u2019s another situation where this kind of delayed loading could be really handy: mobile-first responsive design.\n\nResponsive design combines three techniques:\n\n\n\ta fluid grid\n\tflexible images\n\tmedia queries\n\n\nAt first, responsive design was applied to existing desktop-centric websites to allow the layout to adapt to smaller screen sizes. But more recently it has been combined with another innovative approach called mobile first.\n\nRather then starting with the big, bloated desktop site and then scaling down for smaller devices, it makes more sense to start with the constraints of the small screen and then scale up for larger viewports. Using this approach, your layout grid, your large images and your media queries are applied on top of the pre-existing small-screen design. It\u2019s taking progressive enhancement to the next level.\n\nOne of the great advantages of the mobile-first approach is that it forces you to really focus on the core content of your page. It might be more accurate to think of this as a content-first approach. You don\u2019t have the luxury of sidebars or multiple columns to fill up with content that\u2019s just nice to have rather than essential.\n\nBut what happens when you apply your media queries for larger viewports and you do have sidebars and multiple columns? Well, you can load in that nice-to-have content using the same kind of Ajax functionality that Paul described in his article last year. The difference is that you first run a quick test to see if the viewport is wide enough to accommodate the subsidiary content. This is conditional delayed loading.\n\nConsider this situation: I\u2019ve published an article about cats and I\u2019d like to include relevant cat-related news items in the sidebar \u2026but only if there\u2019s enough room on the screen for a sidebar.\n\nI\u2019m going to use Google\u2019s News API to return the search results. This is the ideal time to use delayed loading: I don\u2019t want a third-party service slowing down the rendering of my page so I\u2019m going to fire off the request after my document has loaded.\n\nHere\u2019s an example of the kind of Ajax function that I would write:\n\nvar searchNews = function(searchterm) {\n\tvar elem = document.createElement('script');\n\telem.src = 'http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/services/search/news?v=1.0&q='+searchterm+'&callback=displayNews';\n\tdocument.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(elem);\n};\n\nI\u2019ve provided a callback function called displayNews that takes the JSON result of that Ajax request and adds it an element on the page with the ID newsresults:\n\nvar displayNews = function(news) {\n\tvar html = '',\n\titems = news.responseData.results,\n\ttotal = items.length;\n\tif (total>0) {\n\t\tfor (var i=0; i![](\"real-image.jpg\")
\n\nwhere t.gif is a 1\u00d71px tiny transparent GIF.\n\nThis results in no images if JavaScript isn\u2019t available. Dealing with the absence of JavaScript is still important, even on mobile. I was recently asked to make a website work on an old Blackberry 9000. I was able to get most of the way there by preventing that OS parsing any JavaScript, and that was only possible because the site didn\u2019t depend on it.\n\nWe need to delay loading images for JavaScript users, but ensure they load for users without JavaScript. How can we conditionally parse markup depending on JavaScript support?\n\nOh yeah!