Don't Make Me Think
![]()
By:
Thankfully web interface design has come a long way since 97/98 (the last time I was actively researching the subject for a large project). At that time Jakob Nielsen was *the* authority on the subject. Nielsen's rules for web design were simple and to the point, but many times the rules on interface seemed to ignore the obvious need for compelling and attractive design.
Don't Make Me Think presents the latest rules and conventions. Steve Krug, the author, purposefully wrote the book to present need to know information and nothing else. This makes the book quite an efficient read and a good primer on current techniques and best practices. It has quickly become required reading amongst the current crop web designers pushing XHTML/CSS and standards based design.
The book moves quickly and is probably worth a second read to digest all the information. The book begins by discussing the various interface design standards and conventions. Steve Krug spends a good portion of the book reviewing how typical design meetings go... almost word-for-word. It was amusing to think just how close his examples hit home. I kept thinking, "I've been in *this* meeting myself". He also spends some chapters on the topic of office/redesign politics and how they play into the aspects of a design. The final third is devoted to guerilla style usability testing. The author reviews some simple test examples and then offers some additional test design advice. He offers some simplified methods to create cost effective tests that any company can afford (or NOT afford, as the case may be) to run.
What this book is not:
- information architecture & design
- details on designing w/ web standards
- web disability certification
- graphic design / layout
I'd definitely recommend this book to anyone that needs a refresher in web usability design. It is a quick and dirty guide to guerilla interface testing. I'd also recommend this as a primer to anyone new to web usability design.
Other points of interest:
Posted by ben at
01:00 PM
Comments (0)
Shattered Glass
Shattered Glass is based on the true story of "journalist" Stephen Glass, fired in 1998 from The New Republic, for fabricating facts or even entire stories. It was released in late 2003, months after the latest "journalist", Jayson Blair, joined ranks with Stephen Glass and others.
Since I was sick all weekend, Hol humored me and rented this one... Although I thought the story it was based on was interesting, I wasn't expecting too much from the actual film. I think both Hol and I were pleasantly surprised by the production quality and acting. The screenplay version of the real events was quite good and kept the watcher involved the entire time, even though you knew what was coming in the end.
Watching Glass' character getting caught in lie after lie, and returning to his routine self-effacing and apologetic mannerisms was perfectly done by Hayden Christensen. You could understand why Glass' peers at TNR were slow to turn on him, his fabricated personality was likable and his friends wanted to stand behind him despite how obvious his fabrications were in hindsight. In the end, the new TNR editor, Chuck Lane, wasn't able to continue supporting Glass, and fired him after re-reading his articles with a clearer understanding of how Steven's mind worked.
I'd definitely recommend this movie to anyone. As a bonus, the DVD contains the 60 Minutes interview with the real Stephen Glass (now Georgetown Law School graduate and author of a fiction novel). There isn't much back reading required to understand the story, but I'll leave you with a few interesting articles on the subject and related personalities:
Posted by ben at
03:00 PM
Comments (0)
GMail "scandal"
What's with the constant battering Google's getting in the press regarding its newest service offering (not yet widely available)?
I see daily op-ed pieces, like this one, with computer experts, privacy rights advocates, and lawmakers all in an uproar over the fact that GMail has potential privacy implications. Of course it does. So does all free or for-pay email services. What's different about Google? According to most of these articles, two main differences from other, similar services, concern them:
- 1GB of email storage
- Content specific ads based on text in your email
Update 4/16: Finally others are pointing out that the critics of GMail are a little off base: Matt Howie and Slate Magazine for starters.
The argument goes, since Google is offering you so much storage, the potential for someone getting at private data if your account is hacked is much higher. On top of that, generally people are afraid that the index of keywords used to build the content-specific ads will be archived and used later to track you (and your activities). Usually all the arguments dissolve into one main point; Because all this personal data (1GB of email is likely years of data) and this index of keywords (to build the personalized ads) is now on Google's servers, your chances of loosing your data to a) marketing companies, b) hackers, or c) a government subpoena are much greater.
Frankly, this argument could be used against ANY online email provider, even your private ISP -- it just seems everyone is complaining that Google is offering too much space. I suppose if I was concerned about that, I could set my own (arbitrary) limit on stored data just like Yahoo's or Hotmail's own limits, right? The same potential breach exists whether you store 1MB or 1GB -- it only take ones email.
What about the ad index data though? Well, EFF was curious too -- turns out Google (claims) they don't keep an index anyway. All that data is created (and thrown away) on the fly.
I bet the NSA and other law enforcement agencies only smirk when they read how all these privacy rights groups are up-in-arms on this one. They've got to be thinking to themselves, "Why would we risk the media attention by going to Google directly? We'll just pull anything we want off the wire." (which surely they can already do with applications like Carnivore and laws like the Patriot Act).
While, raising the issues that exist with GMail (and any other online service that store personal data) is an important one, it seems many experts simply find the subject of privacy rights and related issues the current hot topic. I don't understand why they go out of their way to condemn GMail before it's even publicly available. Hotmail and Yahoo have been around for years with the same issues plus a history of vulnerabilities that affected millions of users.
Just like much of life (both personal and professional), it comes down to an issue of trust. Who do you trust to keep your data? Who do you trust to handle the security of this data? Many companies have the potential to collect data on you and your activities (think about what your phone company, your ISP, your credit card / bank, or even your grocery store already know about you.) these days. Do you trust "them" to handle your data with the same level of care that you do? I suspect your answer is no.
On a related note. I played w/ GMail over the weekend. Some pretty neat features.
In particular, I like their concept of 'labels' to replace 'folders' for email storage. Quite convenient. The way it works is you create 'labels' for things you want to be able to find later (i.e. 2003 Taxes). You simply assign a label (actually you can assign multiple labels too!) to your emails and hit 'archive'. The email disappears from your inbox into your archive. To get back to it, simply click into the label you created.
It also groups emails into conversations, so a reply to an email that's already labeled inherits the same label(s) plus you can view them together more easily. In my limited use over the past couple days, this works pretty well.
Posted by ben at
03:00 PM
Comments (1)
Astrid's boots
Astrid was interested in my Treo600 in the car this morning. I pulled up a picture of her, taken last fourth of July, on the phone. She pointed and simply said, "baby". Yep, that's you. I pulled up a few more pics of the various babies at the party. "Baby, baby". I then showed her a picture of our smaller kitty, Perl. "Meeeeow, meoooww," she said. She seems to learn a new word everyday.
While David received a couple pairs of soccer themed socks from the UK, little Astrid got a pair of footie boots w/ the England emblem and a little soft soccer ball. She wore them to school today, so I grabbed a pic or two. Sources close to the little one stated "she really likes her soccer shoes". She's a smart one alright.
Posted by ben at
09:30 AM
Comments (0)
