[{"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": 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": 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": 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": 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