Category — Wireframe Software

These apps are a quick and efficient communication method, and definitely lend themselves well to the objectives of social networking, not least due to their intuitive user interface designs, but naturally they engender questions about user privacy.  Making your location available to people seems intrusive and it is for this reason that these apps – a few notable exceptions aside – have seen more difficulties attracting conservative users than developers have hoped.  However, the fact that these apps have smartly coupled location information with other social desires—friendship, dating, discourse etc—makes them enticing and will likely lead to greater popularity.  Questions about security and intrusion should diminish given that users have a considerable amount of autonomy over the apps.  Users can choose who they disclose their information to and can control when they do it.  As long as users maintain a sense of jurisdiction over their information, then check-in apps are a harmless way for people to socialize and connect.

•    Natural Colors: Natural colors can provide comfort and familiarity for users.  They can also be used to underscore the theme of your user interface.  For example, if you are designing a travel website that has pages that profile different destinations, you can use natural colors that users will associate with each place: Greens for Ireland, browns for Arizona or the Grand Canyon, etc.  Using these color palettes in tandem with images and written content will engage your users and leave your website more memorable.

•    Unnatural Colors: Using bold and bright colors is also a good strategy for distinguishing your user interface from the rest, but be judicious about it.  Too much bold can turn users off or detract their attention from important content.  Bold colors are best used when you are trying to shock users or grab their attention.  For example, if you are designing a new website you may want to have the “breaking news” section in a neon color. Or you may be creating an avant garde art website that uses all vibrant colors because you know that your users will generally be people who are interested in being challenged aesthetically.  But be careful. Unlike natural colors, unnatural colors can affect your user interface as dramatically as their hues—for good and bad.  So tread the unnatural color spectrum carefully.

Understanding how and why to use natural or unnatural colors is an important part of designing a successful user interface.   Colors enable you to craft a pleasant experience and envelope users in your interface’s ambrosial essence—design is, after all, an art form.

Desirability and usability as a design team

According to John Soellner’s article “Design, Usability, Desirability, What’s The Difference?” desirability design is “about expanding on the idea of what human factors are” in order to better understand what drives users to employ interfaces based on their interest level and personal satisfaction.  It can be functional and emotional.  Functional desirability is almost interchangeable with usability in that it means users desire to use a site because it is usable and well organized.  Emotional desirability, although related to the subjective satisfaction which is a part of usability, breaks away from usability because it seeks to understand a user’s emotional reaction to the aesthetics of a user interface: the look, feel, and even the content.  Emotional desirability concerns itself with the intangibles and emotional human factors that Soellner refers to above.

Desirability works well in tandem with usability because it measures the intangible aspects of user experience such as fun and enjoyment, aspects that usability itself usually cannot address.  Desirability helps designers discern whether or not their user interface design is enticing enough for users to want to employ, reaching beyond whether or not it is easy and functional enough for users to want to use.  “Desirability design techniques supply the X Factor which motivates users to make usability matter” says Soellner.

This is the continuation of my blog post on the interface design of social networks. In this part I shall focus on layout and navigation.

The layout of the User Interface Design

A successful user Interface design should be as clean and contain as little “noise” as possible. This is not to say that an interface design of a social network should be featureless but it should be in a layout that doesn’t overwhelm users, in turn making them go elsewhere. Out of the social networks I decided to look at I found MySpace to have the noisiest interface design once logged in. The colors used (bright pink and baby blue flourishes) and the flashing colorful adverts were not just a slight distraction from my purposes compared to, say, Facebook’s more discreet advertisement offerings that fit and blend with the site’s interface design. I found the consistent color scheme of meinVZ’s interface design to be refreshing with the orange color being used in the design elements of the interface design as well as in the color of the fonts. I found Twitter’s interface design to be the most compact but that is understandable considering that, out of all the networks I am looking at, it has fewer features (i.e. pictures, videos etc.) to incorporate into it. Following interface design conventions allows a website to tap into “familiarity” benefits. This is why meinVZ modeled itself after Facebook and it shows how crucial interface design is in gaining and retaining customers.

Navigation of the User Interface design

Navigation is another crucial aspect of an interface design. Many social networks encourage people to upload and share a lot of information as well as use various apps. This naturally increases the complexity of a network, requiring interface designers to work even harder to ensure it is easy for users to navigate the matrix structure of social networks. The search bar is a crucial part of a social network. Users must be able to search and find their friends easily. The most common interface design convention is to have it right at the very top, usually in the middle or the right. meinVZ had it on the left below the logo but this is in keeping with their navigation which can all be found on the left of the page.  I was surprised that the Twitter search bar is not at the very top of the interface design as there is lots of space in between the logo on the left and the utilities on the right. As it is the search bar is on the right and further down but considering that users almost inevitably have to scroll down this might not be such a bad thing. As far as the layout of the interface design goes it is worth noting that users of MySpace can and nearly always change the default interface design which can make navigation problematic for some users. Of all the social networks I looked at, with the exception of meinVZ, the navigation took place at the very top along with utilities which are found at the very right. Facebook proved to be the most sparse with MySpace being the most busy. MySpace’s layout was also the most confusing without clear demarcations of the homepage. Everything was one giant hodgepodge unlike meinVZ which had thin but clear lines to keep sections separate. Another seeming interface design convention in social networks is the use of the left side of the layout for the navigation and other important links, the middle for activity streams and notification etc., and the right for less important notifications and adverts.

User Interface Design is crucial to get right in order for a website to succeed. The best way to ensure you get it right is to conduct usability testing to ensure the practicality, familiarity and ease of use before adding cosmetic flourishes. I speculate all the aforementioned social networks made use of wireframing tools, to create prototypes that were tested on average users to determine what works. Interestingly, they must have arrived at very different conclusions, since the interface designs of these social networks do differ quite a bit.

Common usability illnesses that weaken your user interface

There are hundreds of ailments that can attack your interface design and paralyze its usability.  Below are a few common pitfalls to watch out for as you attempt to keep your user interface healthy and usable:

•    Content difficulty:  Websites that require users to read about products and services must have content that is not only easy to read but also easy to scan since users often scan websites for the information that they need.  If your user interface has convoluted or complex information, users are likely to get frustrated and abandon it.  So even if you think your user interface has a lot to say and all of it is worth reading, your users may not agree. And that is why you need to infuse your site with information that is simple, easy to scan, and to the point.  If you feel like there is a breadth of information that users need to read, then provide links to detailed information—but don’t make that the focal point of your user interface design.
•    Contact difficulty:  A great site layout is nullified when users don’t have an easy method of engaging with it.   One example of this is contact information.  Maybe your users want to get in touch with you for more information about site services or they want to sign up for something you offer.  Either way, if you do not make this process explicit and easy on your website, chances are that users will never reach their original goal and leave your site in desperation.
•    Link difficulty: Linking is a crucial function of every website but if your links are difficult to locate or are too small (thus requiring too much effort to click on) then you need to make changes because users aren’t going to stick around if you aren’t able to take them anywhere.
•    Search difficulty:  Search boxes are one of the main features of a modern user interface design. Users look for them when they open a page.  Searches provide users with an avenue of finding exactly what they want in the quickest possible way.  Some user interfaces provide no search option or provide search options that are difficult to use or find.  If you want your users to get where they need to get to sign up, make a purchase or find the information they require, then you had better focus on functioning search boxes.

If you are developing a user interface make sure you are fighting usability related illnesses with usability tests, a type of computer science medicine that allows you to eradicate usability problems and invigorate your website’s popularity and success.  There is no perfect interface design—all user interfaces can be continually improved and changed.  If you keep fighting usability pitfalls at the forefront of your development process then you will find it easier to build a healthy site that will contribute to overall success and satisfaction.

One of the major problems that social networking sites have come up against relative to their interface designs is that of privacy and security. The Facebook hegemon recently took a brutal hit when users began complaining en masse that the security feartures user interface design was not only ambiguous, but also deceiving. If Google is developing a social networking website of their own, it would behoove them to make privacy and security the vanguard of their user interface design. In a cutthroat world, preying on the weaknesses of your competitors is often a good strategy, and Google can continue to assert their internet dominance by designing their site to be the antithesis to Facebook’s equivocal and complex privacy user interface. While many have criticized Google for not being able to crack the social networking egg, their late entrance to the party may just allow them to become the belle of the ball.

While Google has been at the forefront of nearly every internet market imaginable since its inception in 1997, one area in which the internet giant has been notably absent is the social media world. However, if the rumors are to be believed, then the social networking market might be in for a shock as Google is purportedly developing a social platform of their own: Google Me. While there is no concrete release date of the pending web application, former Facebook executive and Quora founder Adam D’Angelo confirms that Google Me „is not a rumor. There are a large number of people working on it.“

Google’s clandestine approach to cultivating its first social networking website is definitely a good marketing strategy, sure to make it enticing to those looking for something fresh and new in the world of social media. We can only speculate as to how the site will look and function and whether it will feature the familiar Google interface design, but one thing that is worth mentioning is how Google can use the faux pas of previous sites as a kind of massive social platform usability test, possibly helping them to avoid pitfalls of their own.

The bad interface design features…

The following features may trigger Vista flashbacks:

1.    Confusing names:  Some of the feature names are misleading or do not describe their functions properly.  For example, “User Account Control” doesn’t actually control the user account etc.
2.    Windows Update: The Windows update feature does not always follow your commands—if you tell it to download and install everything as Microsoft suggest, it still might reboot without your permission.  Thus it is inconsistent with what the interface design suggests.

The strange interface design features…

Microsoft may have gone through a minimalistic metamorphosis with Windows 7, but that doesn’t mean they have taken out all the fun.  Just take a look at one of their pre-installed background options. These will certainly enliven your desktop in unexpected ways… Apparently, Microsoft couldn’t resist giving us something to scratch our heads about. Literally.

After the disaster that was Vista (in the sense that so many seemed to find it less usable than desired) Microsoft needed to take a new approach when designing their new operating system.  Windows 7 is a clear back to the basics statement by Microsoft, cutting down on frivolous features and glitzy interface design, all of which made Vista so annoying to users.  Instead, Windows 7 has put its focus on utility and usability over flashiness, a concept that is not new to usability experts.  With Windows 7, Microsoft streamlines processes related to apps and tasks and has tried to create an operating system based on compatibility and integration with external and internal features. Windows 7 features a user interface design that barely wants you to recognize its presence, let alone have to think about it, only when you need to. Of course, just because Windows 7 is minimalist and the antithesis to Vista, doesn’t mean it is perfect.  Let’s look at the pros and cons of the new Microsoft user interface design.

The good interface design features…

The following are a few of the features that provide Vista haters with some relief:

1.    Cleaner Taskbar: The Windows 7 taskbar is less cluttered and users can switch between apps with more ease.
2.    Action Center Alerts: Windows alerts are now relegated to the “Action Center” which places the alerts in a queue rather than interrupting (as Vista did) you mid-internet search or any other action.  You can respond to alerts on your own schedule.
3.    New System Tray controls: The controls on the system tray disallow the overflow of unwanted apps that interrupt you with messages and updates.
4.    Jump Lists: These are context sensitive taskbar menus that allows you to work in apps before you even open them.

Both ways of user interface customization can be successful, but if you are thinking about implementing modification options, the personalization method is the lowest risk tactic in terms of complexity.  This approach does not require users to perform the customization act itself. That means that the site is easier to use because users have less to think about.  The less users have to think and the easier the site is to use, the more successful it will tend to be.  Although the personalization strategy provides lower risk in terms of ease of use, it does not mean the actual interface design will be easier to construct. It just means that it will require less effort on the part of the user.

Conversely, the customization method requires more effort on the part of the user.  This can be advantageous if enough users find this a beneficial feature and change their use or buying decisions based on it. Yet, if that is not the case, your effort will have been wasted, and, what is worse, the additional complexity may have adverse effects on user adoption, which is why this is a higher risk strategy.

Ultimately it is up to you whether or not you want to incorporate customization setting into your interface design.  Factors that need to be considered is the projected rate of use (the value you create) and the impact on usability of the user interface design through additional customization options (the usability barriers you may create) when deciding whether or how much effort you can risk to invest in customization. If you think the personal settings you have created will be popular and usable then take the risk of giving the user full autonomy to customize the interface design.  Otherwise, play it safe and let your system be in control.