Posted On February 18th, 2009 Author Kyle Racki
Filed Under External Articles, Usability, 0
View the excellent post from Smashing Magazine showing 9 Common Usability Mistakes In Web Design.
Some of my favorite mentions in there are “Pagination used for the wrong purpose”. I hate it when articles are split up between multiple pages - it is just another barrier to reading the post. The point was made in the article that the only reason people still do it is when they want extra page views to count towards their impressions—a pretty selfish motive if you ask me.
“No way to get in touch” is another pet peeve of mine, especially for banking and government websites. Contact is one of the primary purposes of the average website, so making it difficult for users to find the information they need, be it an email form or phone number is inexcusable.
Two things I learned about are using google search forms on a website (I usually use one that is based on custom scripting) and using 301 redirects to point old links to current pages. Very useful stuff!
Posted On November 3rd, 2008 Author Kyle Racki
Filed Under Design, Business, Usability, 3
Usability, part of the long drawn out series,12 things you need to know before commissioning a website.
- Know your audience
- Content
- Content Management Systems
- Hosting and Domain
- Bandwidth
- Web standards
- Search Engine Optimization
- Browser Testing
- Accessibility
- Design/Usability
- Open Source or Proprietary?
- Flash or HTML?
In many cases, if you’re commissioning a website, it is not because you don’t have one, it’s because your current one isn’t working. Problem is, many don’t know specifically why they’re current website isn’t working. Perhaps it is just plain ugly or has outdated information. But what if you actually paid for a good website only a year ago, and it just isn’t helping your bottom line? That’s where usability testing just might come in handy.
Why the heck would I want my site just usable?
The term ‘usable’ generally doesn’t have great connotations, as if we’re content with merely being usable (eg: “How do you like that new Mercedes?” “It’s usable”). However in the context of websites, it is perhaps the most important element to get right, equally as important as branding, content and accessibility. So what is it? In a nutshell, it means that the people who use your site intuitively understand how to use it, enjoy using it, and it leads users to where you want them without forcing or frustrating them.
Achieving this goal is often easier said than done. While many sites we would typically refer to as having usability issues are old clunker sites done in 1999 by the proverbial basement-dwelling cousin, even some very high-profile, ultra-high-tech, insanely high-priced websites have equally poor usability.
Even sleek and sexy sites can stink when it comes to usability
For example, typical usability concerns that face websites are things like splash or welcome pages that have little to no content, poor navigation that makes you feel lost, hard-to-read text over gaudy backgrounds, you get the idea (visit user designed Myspace pages for examples).
But even very attractive, polished websites for fortune 500 companies can have crippling usability concerns. For plentiful examples, visit the FWA (Favorite Website Awards). It posts “cutting edge” websites on a daily basis. And by cutting edge, they mean sometimes innovative all Flash websites, with sound, video, motion-graphics, and rich vector graphics. Don’t get me wrong, there is beautiful stuff on here, but there is also consistently unusable, yet original interfaces.
Revolution vs Convention
This is where the great divide comes in. On one camp, you have Jacob Nielson, a usability advocate who preaches conformity to established rules (and you can tell by his website that design, creativity or originality isn’t a concern of his). In the other camp, you have design organizations like Communication Arts, and the aforementioned FWA, as well as prominent companies like Barbarian Group and Big Spaceship who seem to feel that conforming too closely to usability laws stifles creativity.
Usability testing
But let’s bring it back to you. Let’s say your website looks good, it’s on brand, and yet you notice that 80% of your users bounce off of the home page. There is a definite chance you have usability issues. Those could be visual (ie: layout confusing, nav too hidden, buttons not big enough etc.) or they could be copy-related (text doesn’t draw in users, there’s too much body copy not enough quick snappy callouts etc.).
One of the best ways to find out is by conducting a usability test. In the past usability tests were expensive, involving two-way mirrors, and demographically-chosen test users with tubes hooked up to the back of their heads (okay, I made that last part up). It doesn’t have to be that way however. With great tools like Silverback, usability testing can simply involve getting a handful of users together and observing their behavior as they navigate your website, noting where they have difficulty. Nowadays, small-medium sized companies can generally afford usability tests.
Conclusion
Hopefully, this information will prove useful to you as you commission a website redesign or rework. Keep in mind that usability is directly related to the mainstream consensus of web users, and as they evolve and adapt to interface conventions, so will the standards of usability.
Posted On June 4th, 2007 Author Kyle Racki
Filed Under Usability, 0
When you first decide to go through the drive-thru at your local fast food restaurant, what is it that motivates you? No doubt a number of things; TV or billboard advertising, past experiences eating there, or the dire need to eat something before you pass out. Maybe this particular spot is all there is close by. Either way, when you roll up to that plastic sign, and yell over the muffled speaker, the choice is yours. No one forced you to go there. And other than the usual promotional signs that are in front of you advertising the new mushroom-melt — very little “selling” is needed. Ronald’s already got you.
In a lot of ways websites are like fast-food drive-thrus. Visiting a website doesn’t take long and it should be equally fast to get what you want from it. Whether it’s information, downloads, or to sign up and become a member - you are at a site for a reason. Maybe you just want that Transformer that comes with the kids meal.
On the other hand, when you watch a television spot, or when you see a print ad - it’s mostly an unwelcome intrusion. Your mind was elsewhere, and now an advertiser is trying to vie for you attention. Don’t think of a website the same way.
When you visit a site, nine times out of ten, you’ve already been sold. You’ve clicked on a link, googled the name, or even entered the URL in the browser bar (do people still do that?). You’ve visited it because you wanted to. So why is it that some websites are still trying to sell you when you’re already there? Why are they trying to force you to view the site the way they want you to and not the way you want to?
One of the appeals of using the web is interactivity. Visiting a site when you want to visit it. Keeping your browser window the size you want it to be. Setting the body font to a size that is comfortable for you. In short, viewing content on your terms, not somebody else’s.
The following are some things to keep in mind when designing for the web to ensure your visitor’s stay is as comfortable, and customizable as possible:
Don’t misuse Flash
It happens a lot. People abuse Flash by getting it to do things it wasn’t meant for. Like creating ridiculously underwhelming intros that are meant to get the viewer interested in the site. The viewers are already there! There’s no need to sell them. All that intro is doing is stopping them from accessing the content they visited the site for in the first place.
Imagine the teenage employee of McDonald’s standing in front of your car before you can get to the intercom, saying (voice-cracking and all) “Welcome to McDonald’s, Here you’ll find Big Mac’s and other hamburgers. By the way if you want to skip this, just let me know.” Same goes with splash pages. There’s no need to create a barrier between the user and your content.
Another way Flash can be abused is by using it for navigation. If the site isn’t built in Flash, then the nav shouldn’t be. It’s inaccessible. It doesn’t allow people to use the contextual menu (ie: right-click and open the page in a new tab or window) and most of the time, it’s just plain annoying. Picture every time you looked at an item on the fast-food menu and it twirled.
Coming soon
Few things are as frustrating as trying to access something on a website only to find: “Still under construction. Coming soon”. If there is no content on a page, then don’t allow the user to waste precious time visiting it.
It doesn’t impress anyone to see that a page was initially conceived with the idea of content being in place. Rarely are we interested enough to keep checking back. No one likes ordering a food item and being told it ran out, but check back soon. There may be more eventually.
Taking away the control
It was stated at the outset that what separates the web from other media, is that users control it. So anything we do to try and strip them of that control is not going to make for an enjoyable experience. That means that even though we think our site looks really cool full-screen, and with no URL bar visible (hey, we don’t want them distracted by thinking about other sites they might want to visit) - it’s really intrusive to force upon them.
Kind of like if your sitting in your car placing an order and a big piece of chrome comes out of the side of the restaurant and closes in on your car so that the Wendy’s across the street isn’t visible. Just face it, people are there out of choice, and ultimately it’s up to them whether or not they want to stay.
This brings to mind the idea of pop-up windows. Generally it’s offensive to have a new window or tab open up in your browser unless you, the user, decided to open it. Sure, as creators of the site, we don’t want people leaving our site prematurely. But really if it’s made clear that the link is external, then they can be the ones to decide whether or not to see it in a new window.
Click here to read more. Click where? Oh right, here!
We see these kinds of contextual instructions, and for the most part, they’re a bad practice. It’s almost always better to visually identify what is a link, and make sure that what is identified is real, descriptive content. For example, “click here for more information” is silly and redundant. Why not link “More information”. The kid at the drive-thru intercom never says “Look here for more food choices”.
By keeping in mind that the websites we create are solely for the users that visit them, and not for ourselves, we can be sure that they’ll keep coming back for more online, tender, juicy goodness.