July 2007

Dell Expects Me To Know Its “Twin” Model Numbers

by Paul Sherman on July 30, 2007 · 0 comments

in Web


(Click picture to see full-sized)

I own a Dell Inspiron 640m laptop. Today I decided to check for driver or application updates for this machine. Once I got to the correct page (which was fairly quick and easy), I used the list-narrowing controls to get down to the individual model numbers…and was confused when I saw that the 640m was nowhere to be found.I thought I had made a mistake, so I took it from the top, then dove back down to the Inspiron model numbers. Still couldn’t find it.

Finally, in frustration I scrolled to the bottom of the list. I still didn’t see it. Then I scrolled back up to the top, and looked carefully at each batch of model numbers. I finally found the 640m…it was appended to model E1405 with a slash. At this point, I had spent about 3 or 4 minutes on a task that should take 5 or 10 seconds.

In other words, Dell expected me to know that my model laptop was released with another model number, and that I should look for “E1405″ when I wanted to access support for my 640m.

Give me a break. That’s just laziness. It would’ve been the easiest thing in the world to just put “640m” in the product model list, and have it lead to the same page as the E1405′s. Sigh.

{ 0 comments }

Mars Story Is… Not Down, Exactly…

by Paul Sherman on July 27, 2007 · 0 comments

in Web

A reader (omg I have those?) just pointed out that the Space.com story I critiqued is down. I checked; it’s not down, exactly…it just leads to a blank white page. No 404, no “the page you are trying to find doesn’t exist”, just…blankness.

OK, I guess that qualifies as “down”.

{ 0 comments }

Top Three Martian Usability Problems

by Paul Sherman on July 25, 2007 · 1 comment

in Web

One my regular reads – I think it was /. – pointed to a story on Space.com about the awe-inspiring discoveries made by the Mars Rovers, Spirit and Opportunity. The story is in the ever-popular “top 10″ format.

I’ll read anything about the space program, so I clicked on over to the story. And was bummed out to find some usability whoppers that seriously impaired my enjoyment of the story.

Here’s my “top three” list of usability issues I found. Follow this link or the one at bottom and see if you agree (or can find more).

Say it with me now…chromatic aberration and low contrast
The text in the story is rife with term-related hyperlinks. Nice of Space.com to define unfamiliar words, yes. But, the link color is blue and the background is (presumably a Mars-like) brick red. It’s nearly impossible to read the text links because there’s not enough foreground-background contrast.

Plus, the juxtaposition of blue and red causes your eye to attempt to simultaneously focus on short wavelengths (whose focus point falls short of your retina) and long wavelengths (which are most in focus at a point beyond your retina). This fatigues your eye because it’s trying to simultaneously accommodate to two disparate signals. As a result, the blue text appears jumpy or shimmery. Look at those links for a few minutes if you want to give yourself a headache.

Tiny aperture for reading the text
Why oh why did the designer choose to put the text of the story in a (yes I measured it) 440-by-100 pixel scrolling box? Well, I can guess; they were probably slavishly adhering the now-mostly-discredited “below the fold” decree. I wish they hadn’t done this. It’s like trying to read by looking through a keyhole.

Designers, I’m talking to you: it’s MUCH better to give the text room to breathe instead of stuffing it inside a tiny little box. If the content is interesting, people WILL scroll below the fold. Really, they will.

Small pix
This issue is not just about *strict* usability, it’s about enjoyability: the pictures accompanying this story are just too damn small! If we’re being asked to read a story about exciting findings from the Mars Rover missions, a key part of the story is showing us the wonderful pictures snapped by those intrepid little anthropomorphized vehicles. But the pictures are dinky little 240-by-170 thumbnails. Yes, I tried to click on them. It’s a no-op.

Sorry, Space.com, but poor design has put a big hurt on the user experience of this story. But please publish more articles…I just love ‘em.

Mars Rovers’ Top 10 Most Amazing Discoveries

Blogged with Flock

{ 1 comment }

Fantastic BizWeek Article By JJG of AP

by Paul Sherman on July 23, 2007 · 1 comment

in Everything Else

Lest anyone think I was too negative toward Todd the Adaptive Pathite the other day, I wanted to point to a fantastic article by Adaptive Path’s leader Jesse James Garrett.

It’s about peripherals manufacturer Kensington’s decision to focus on the total user experience as a means to differentiate themselves from their much larger competitors. Quoting Jesse:

Kensington has chosen to opt out of the technology arms race and turned to product experience as a competitive advantage. The result is Kensington’s Ci Lifestyle Collection, a new line of mice and keyboards for home and mobile users designed with extensive field research on customer experience in mind.

Jesse interviewed the product manager responsible for the line as well. Definitely worth a read.

Link to article is here.

{ 1 comment }

Maladaptive Path

by Paul Sherman on July 21, 2007 · 0 comments

A friend pointed me to a whiny screed from one of the normally smart-and-perceptive folks at Adaptive Path.

In “Why Usability Is A Path To Failure“, one Todd Wilkens makes some interesting claims. One suspects he had a bad client day, and just couldn’t take one more client asking whether their design was going to be usable. Here’s what he said:

So, why oh why do people in this day age still hold up “usability” as something laudable in product and service design? Praising usability is like giving me a gold star for remembering that I have to put each leg in a *different* place in my pants to put them on.

It touched off a poopstorm of comments (which I suspect is one of the other reasons he wrote such an inflammatory post), the best of which comes from Jared Spool:

Todd, I think you have a very narrow notion of what “usability” is…Usability, like all design when done well, becomes invisible. People don’t talk about the positive case. (Well, except for designers who constantly need to bring attention to their work.)

…

Usability is foundational, such as having good content and providing reliable uptime. It’s only *not* a differentiator when everyone has equal amounts of it. If yours is better than everyone else’s, it become a differentiator.

Usability can be measured on a scale of extremely frustrating to extremely delightful. Since different designs competing for the same audience can occupy different locations on the scale, you can differentiate one design from another using it. That’s the broader definition of usability that most of us tend to use.

Props to Jared who very articulately explained why the writer was wrong. Still worth a read to gawk at the mile-long trail of comments.

http://www.adaptivepath.com/blog/2007/07/17/why-usability-is-a-path-to-failure

{ 0 comments }

Signage From Hotel In Brazil

by Paul Sherman on July 16, 2007 · 2 comments

in Everything Else

Signage From Hotel In Brazil

I saw this sign on the baseboards in the hallways of my hotel in Sao Paulo Brazil this past week. It’s not a bad design; it’s fairly clear that it means “stairs are that way.” But my fevered imagination came up with some alternate meanings…

If attacked by a giant segmented worm, throw thick spears at it while running.

If your accordion expands uncontrollably, you should duck underneath it.

Caution: running underneath staircase may cause lengthening of the arm and loss of neck.

If you have any interpretations to share, comment away and I’ll update.

{ 2 comments }

How About a Little Pizzazz, Adobe?

by Paul Sherman on July 5, 2007 · 0 comments


How About a Little Pizzazz, Adobe?

I’m usually the first one in the room to whine about in-your-face marketing within my software applications. I just hate when some flashy, modal dialog gets all up in my grill, telling me to buy the bestest newest version.But this little screen errs wayy to far in the other direction. It’s so subtle and subdued it’s almost laughable.

I love that disclaimer asterisk, too. Of course I just had to find out what caveats they were issuing with that qualified speed claim, so I clicked the “More Info” button. Of course, the corresponding note was nowhere to be found.

So yes, someone actually went to the trouble of visually caveating a claim, but didn’t follow up with the disclaimer text. Nice.


{ 0 comments }

This Can Only Result In Failure

by Paul Sherman on July 5, 2007 · 0 comments

in Web

This Can Only Result In Failure

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a more depressing error message. Makes you kinda want to just give up and kill yourself, doesn’t it?

Can you say inappropriate verbiage?

And then there’s the little usability booboo’s, like the red/grey stereopsis, and the not showing me the field where I can correct my error. (Lazy coder, why should I have to press Back?)

{ 0 comments }