http://tympanus.net/Development/VerticalSlidingAccordion/example3.html (vertical scrolling)

http://flowplayer.org/tools/scrollable/ (horizontal scrolling)

they got me think of a new way of interaction on the web which is “scrolling with mice” , ( it’s needless to say we have already use mouse scroll, to scroll down in a web page but what i’m talking now is interacting with a part of a page, not the whole page).

using that sort of Jquery plug-in we can have a fun and and very fast and efficient way of interaction with a web page (or a part of that) in which user can use an “object” in a web page (instead of scrolling the whole page) and can give the user an experience as if she is flipping through a book, so I’m looking for ways to design web pages which can this plug-in can be used efficiently, and i would be happy to hear your idea about this.

it’s really not about being usable or not, it’s about how we think and how we look at things. the truth is that we don’t look at an artwork to USE it! we look at it to enjoy, right? and we don’t always enjoy of being clean and neat!

here is some of the pictures from Ursus Wehrli ’s book : Tidying Up Art (the photos are taken from  :  jeanniejeannie.com )

it seems that beauty is organizing things by putting them into groups but it’s wrong, because by organizing them ( at least in these cases) we are taking the Harmony out of them which makes thew things ugly, right?

finally after a few months I’m back!

I have been busy working on our new project  Dubsi.com which is a commenting tool on photos and enables users to comment on photos wherever the Dubsi Wordpress plugin is installed. ( Download the Wordpress plugin Here ).

There is a photo blog which uses Dubsi’s plugin, please check this blog to see how does Dubsi Wordpress plugin work ( http://www.thephotodaily.com )

please let me know what do you think about the new tool,

• defining a set of standards for UI / interaction styles (as touch screen devices make the interaction style more confusing sometimes) on mobile phones.
• making it easy to design Web sites for mobile devices ( the most important problem here is front end design as the back end could almost work as the same way as it works on desktop Web).

Thinking about tools like Microsoft FrontPage, when it initially launched in mid-90s, and could improve Wed designers work quality by let them focus more on design and layout rather than HTML tags, it made me also consider designing a tool to give momentum to mobile Web over iPhone/Android style Apps.

please let me know what do you think about that.

firstly I want to talk about one of the best-known mobile browsers in the market by Opera.
Maybe Opera mobile browser’s reputation comes from it’s availability for almost any type of handset but recently some new changes have made Opera a good choice for mobile users :

• New navigation bar and switching between “tabs” are one of the best features, however it still needs some other features like “sharing” on social networks.

• Its great design gives users a “touch experience” even without a touch screen mobile phone

• Opera is faster than many other mobile browsers because of their “server-side compression” technology (as they say)

• Thanks to the Java technology it’s available for almost any kind of cellphone.

• The users interfaces has been carefully adapted/custommised for smaller screens.

Usability of Opera mini (Opera.com)

• Support for Javascript/CSS3 has been highly improved in the latest version of Opera mini.

• In many cases users don’t need to use their mobile keyboard if it’s a touchscreen device

I can see a bright future for the Opera mini because of it’s “compatibility” with any handset device and  also the “good usability”, as those are the most important features for the users to choose a web browser for her mobile device.

in one of my last posts , I talked about the inconsistency of UI for iPad / iPhone application, but this issue is not limited to iPad/iPhone apps, almost in every mobile application UI (including Web sites when you browse them through a mobile phone) , you can see this inconsistency or confusion which makes the applications ( web sites) less usable and also, more importantly, sometimes it discourages users to use their mobile devices to work with web.

Why a new UI standard?

As you may know, Web experience on mobile devices is mostly different from “desktop Web experience” (in which users use a laptop/desktop computer to connect to the internet) , but still most of the UI conventions on mobile devices are the same as desktop UI (iPhone/iPad use Apple interaction style which can be confusing for users sometimes ), but because of many limitations on mobile devices (small screen, weak processor and …) mobile devices can NOT use the same conventions , which means mobile industry needs to create a  new UI standard for the “mobile Web” that enables users to surf different web sites with their mobile phones without having any trouble (or LESS trouble at least) in using the web sites.

Benefits

there are countless benefits for a standard UI, some of them are :

• developer can focus more on the logic of their applications instead of wasting time on designing problematic or confusing interfaces.

• Creating more usable and less confusing user interfaces for the applications

• No (or less) inconsistency in user interaction in different applications

• It’s very persuasive for users to use applications with the same conventions or interaction style, (I believe one of the big reasons, made the iPhone apps so popular and could change the game was that after many years, users could see something “beautiful & usable” on their mobile devices)

*Note: By “Online Operating System” I refer to an online platform that you can use it for collaboration, work/business related ( and probably leisure) activities.

What are the most important features of an online OS?

I believe the major characteristics are:

• Social features : as most of web users are using social web increasingly, and also because of the need for online collaboration with people who you are working or doing business with, it seems that the first characteristic of the “online OS” is being “Social”.

• File management (applications) : this is the major feature of an operating system, working with different kinds of files like documents , spreadsheets and …. needs different kinds of applications running (perfectly) on a platform, I haven’t seen any application suitable for collaboration or … on Facebook so far, except docs.com , which is a partnership between Microsoft & Facebook to give the ability of the collaboration with your Facebook friends to you Microsoft Office.

• Users : having a network of friends or acquaintances is what the future online operating system (if there is any) should have more than a tradition OS, in other words, future online operating system should enable users to do collaboration or business-related activities with a group of people online.
  it seems that friends in Facebook are not always the suitable people that you want to do collaboration or business-related activities.

In addition to all above mentioned features, Security & users’ privacy is one of the biggest concerns for users who put their information online and it becomes more and more serious when it comes to business/work related information, as you may know FB doesn’t have good reputation of respecting users’ privacy which makes it less favorable platform for online OS.

With above description of online OS characteristics, I believe if by “online OS” we mean a platform for keeping up with old friends or … then Facebook definitely is the No. 1 choice, but if online OS refers to something more serious like collaboration or … Facebook doesn’t seems to have anything to say.

• iPad apps are easier to use and also users can have “desktop web” (or similar) experience on it instead of “elegant but sometimes confusing apps”.
• Users have wider range of selections, NOT just a few apps they have on their iPad

Problems about iPad apps user interface

Reading Jakob Nielsen’s post about (read the complete post here) the iPad usability made me talk about it a bit although i’m not going to analyze the usability problem of iPad here.
Despite the increasing number of apps for iPad/iPhone, it seems that usability of iPhone and iPad apps hasn’t had a significant improvement yet.
the most important usability issues this study has found are :

• wacky interface : anything can happen when interacting with an iPad application, in other words : touching or clicking on a part of the iPad screen can cause UNEXPECTED results!
• Inconsistent interaction design : In many cases it’s almost impossible to transfer their skills from one app to another … this means that each app in iPad has it’s own behavior for example if touching a picture in one app means magnifying that picture, in another app could cause NOTHING!, this interaction style, as Jakob Nielsen says, takes us to mid-1990s “when users didn’t know where they can click”

Solution

One of the solutions that can help the apps get out of the inconsistency in interaction design and user confusion is to define a set of rules and standards to unify or standardize the interaction design in apps (I will talk more these rules, later in my future posts), Some solutions that I think, can make apps interface less confusing :

• Defining some standard “signs” to help users carry out their tasks :

in this case, user doesn’t wonder how to ZOOM or how to go to the next page or …

• Helping users figure out which part is click-able and which part is not, like: changing the color of the texts with link, (like desktop web) or putting a small icon on the photos which can be enlarged or …)

• Displaying the scroll bar for scrollable texts
• Following the conventions on the web (at least important ones), as nobody can figure out clicking on a web site logo can bring “options” ! (this happens in USA Today’s iPad app); we have already learned that clicking the logo would take us to the homepage .

Here is my point of view and a comparison between Text ads vs banner ads :

in the first view banner ads could be more attractive for users eyes and can even sometimes catch their eyes for a while , but according to my research (it’s NOT a scientific research).

Here are some benefits of text ads :

• Text ads are more informative (you can tell more in less space)

• Text ads are faster to load so they are not boring for users (mostly)

• Banner ads mostly need more time to be understood in other words unlike banner ads which highly use pictures, in text ads users don’t get confused by the picture(s) used in the banner and can get the meaning much faster

• Text ads are more flexible and the advertiser can tell more about their products/services in less space.

• “Banner Blindness” (see Jakob Nielsen’s Web site : useit.com ) is a common behavior among users which highly decreases the chance of the banner ads to be seen.

• Since in a text ad, “words” are the only way to connect to the users, there is almost no “misinterpretation” happens, when in a banner ad different users may have different interpretations of the same ad due to the presence of one or some pictures which can mean different things for different people.

• In some banner ads which made by advertisers (like Facebook ads) , the problem is more serious, as most of the advertisers are not professional desigers/ marketers , it makes the ads more nonstandard which results more confusion for the users.

• having a standard shape enables users to read the ads much faster

the reasons that Text ads attracted to the users more :

• The main reason, I think, is that for the first time on the web, Google started to display text ads (Adwords) next to the search results, ( the original idea was invented by Bill Gross from Idealab),  this happened when web users could only see the banner ads on the web sites (which some of them were definitly annoying and misleading), in other words at that time text ads were a great choice for users to experience CLEAN and well organized ads. I believe that :Google’s text ads changes users behavior toward “less image” and “more text” Web.

• Simplicity is always elegant if you know how to simplify!

My anticipation? … I believe that Facebook will change the way of making banner ads ( in order to make them CLEANER & MORE INFORMATIVE ADs ) , as they are not so efficient in my experience.