Software

This is an object lesson in how not to lay out a screen.

Background: While configuring a Linux PC, I found myself setting up Ubuntu One, Canonical’s cloud sync service. After I entered the confirmation code I received via email, I was taken to this screen.

My first reaction: Blargh! Where do I look first? What do I do?

Let’s break it down:

  1. None of the calls-to-action appear to be primary. Nothing screams “Start here! Click me first!” The most visually prominent calls just sort of step on each other.
  2. The layout is an eye-hurt. No really. I’m not exaggerating, it /actually/ hurts my eyes. I can’t recall the last time a screen layout actually made me go cross-eyed. Little thought seems to have been given to aligning the controls, text and links. I don’t mean to be too snarky…but it looks like the UI fairy barfed up links and controls onto the screen.
  3. When I was a wee UX lad, mama always told me “If you can’t choose one font size, might as well use them all.” Unfortunately, mama was wrong. On this screen it’s disorienting. It adds to the difficulty users will experience trying to find a “start here” call-to-action.
  4. Screenshots are helpful…in theory. But they have to illustrate something helpful to the user. This one falls short. The detail is too small to be of use. It just causes eyestrain. Or maybe I’m just getting old, and you youngsters have no problem with it. Well good for you. And get off my lawn.

I know I’ve ranked on Linux in the past, so I readily admit that Canonical has made great strides creating a better user experience for desktop Linux. Ubuntu 11.10 is by far the most usable Ubuntu release ever, and Ubuntu has always stood above other distros in ease of install, configuration and initial/ongoing use. But like any app or OS that comes from a legacy of “built by geeks for geeks”, there will always be areas of the user experience that don’t get the UX love and attention they deserve. This screen – even though it was probably created for more recent distributions – reminds us of Linux’s geeky origins.

One last thing, and this is a completely preference-driven personal peccadillo of mine…bevel-lowered grouping boxes must die. Hate ‘em. They’re /so/ Windows 3.11…

{ 0 comments }

I’m all for using friendly language in the user interface. But this first-person usage is quite frankly jarring.

Just who is it that’s referencing themselves? The programmer? The program? Am I to infer that QuickTime Player has passed the singularity rubric and is now sentient?

All hail QuickTime Player, our digital overlord. I for one welcome our…oh, never mind. :)

{ 3 comments }

Um, OK, whatever floats your digital boat. You require elevation, I need a face full of chocolate cookies, we all have our needs. Live and let elevate, I say. That’s my motto credo words to live by.

Elevation? Um, OK Whatever

<Colombo>There’s just one more thing…and you’ll have to forgive me, I’m slow with this kind of stuff…what exactly are you elevating? If ya don’t mind me asking of course. It’s just that I don’t understand exactly. </Columbo>

(Whoosh is the sound that last paragraph makes as it sails over the heads of the 20-somethings…)

Just kidding around here folks, I assume it’s referring to elevated permission levels. But still.

{ 2 comments }

Last week I gave a presentation at the Online Marketing Summit 2010 about website usability and conversion. I used the famous Ling’s Cars site as an example of conversion, arguing that “unique” (read: ugly) design coupled with “stealthy” usability can facilitate conversion.

You can check out the preso here, or go to Slideshare to see it in full-screen glory. Bonus points to anyone who reports back with the page number of my “Captain Obvious” reference. I hope you enjoy the presentation. Please feel free to email or comment with questions, refutations, counter-arguments, and the like. -Paul

Web Usability and Conversion (View more presentations from Paul Sherman)

{ 10 comments }