Ask Eric: Questions & Answers

December 10, 2007 – submitted by Bo Chen of Switzerland

Eric's response: Medical doctors have too many books and theories of how to live longer. It's the same with interface design. It's a HUGE field and you can't expect to deal with it using a list of 10 principles!

Windows and Mac have somewhat different underlying approaches to GUI design. Windows was built more for the expert user, with more power features and visibility of the (messy) internals. As such it is harder for a novice to use. The Mac approach is simpler. It successfully insulates users from the entrails of the software code; which is good unless things start to go wrong, or you have a power user that WANTS to play with the deeper aspects of the system.

Windows also has a rather long list of amazing usability flaws. Just think of having to explain to everyone that you select the START button to STOP! (uh, you "start to stop there?") It also is a remarkable example of "feature creep" (who do you know who uses more than 2% of its functions) and repeated patches of usability problems (e.g., Drop downs are two clicks. So icons make it one click. But icons are not obvious. So we make tool tips that explain the icon).

I think conventional wisdom is that Windows won the GUI wars in spite of its design philosophy and problems. The win was more a function of VERY savvy marketing and business practices.

July 24, 2007 – submitted by Alaeddin Hallak of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

Question: I just finished attending the HFI 4-part training series. Since my company currently employs a standard software development lifecycle based on Microsoft Solutions Framework and UML, I'm curious as to how can I integrate the Schaffer-Weinschenk Method into our SDLC. When I asked one of our instructors, he said he had some sort of a mapping diagram to illustrate how the Schaffer-Weinschenk method fits into a standard SDLC based on RUP (Rational Unified Process) or MSF (Microsoft Solutions Framework). However, he didn't get a chance to provide me this diagram.

Can you help me in this regard?

Eric's response: There are a lot of nuances to the proper integration. But just consider doing the structural design at least, and maybe the detailed design BEFORE the technical work states. That is actually the meaning of User-Centered Design. UCD is not about "worrying about the user," it is CENTERED on the users. Which means the usability designers go FIRST.

We also have this chart on our Web site which shows some aspects of this integration.

March 21, 2007 – submitted by Jim O'Brien of GA, USA

Question: We know that with 5-10 users in iterative usability testing varying degrees of issues will be found; and we can expect opportunities for improvements to fall out of that testing.

However, the one thing we do not know is what does having a dedicated User Experience, Human Factors, User Interface Design, or Usability team do for a product in general terms of improvement or producing a better product for a company.

Has there been any research done to show what having a dedicated group of professional, experienced user interface designers and/or usability experts does or can do for a product as far as its quality of user experience is concerned? It seems this would be priceless information (a.k.a. ammunition) to have when trying to promote or sell the idea of such a group or even in establishing the group's value to the powers that be.

Thanks in advance.

Eric's response: No one has run that study, and yes it would be interesting. But the greatest value of this will still be in the future. We are trying to set up such operations and doing so worldwide. But the processes are not yet in place that will allow us to really leverage a dedicated usability team over time. Right now most teams basically run a series of projects (which we know have a good ROI). But any accumulation of knowledge is a bit random and dependent on individuals for the most part. So with THOSE processes in place I expect a quantum jump in value and a reduction in cost.

February 12, 2007 – submitted by Steven Hide of Toronto, ON

Question: If I develop a Web application that looks exactly the same as Outlook (left navigation bar, colors, icons, etc.) but that does something different (inventory) am I infringing copyright? Can I be sued?

Eric's response: There are some domains were we have seen an amazing number of patents and copyright restrictions (e.g., interactive television set top boxes). That said I have NOT seen a suit for copying typical left navigation schemes. I would certainly avoid direct duplication of icons and other graphic images. I have not seen copying of a general interface structure become an issue in the environment you are describing. Check with your legal department.

January 2, 2007 – submitted by Ken Douglas of United Kingdom

Question: I would like to have your views on how I can integrate UCD into other design methodologies such as OOA/OOD to the Waterfall approach. I believe it compliments the other. What's your view?

Eric's response: There is a direct disconnect between true UCD and other methods. In true UCD the user-centered design work (mostly) goes FIRST. Once it is clear what the user needs and the interface is designed, the technical process can ensure that it functions. So true UCD does not really integrate that well, because the other methods tend to start from a different perspective. At the same time, you can integrate usability work with most processes. You can even start at the wrong time (usually late). This takes a bit more skill, as the integration can be tricky. Mostly we try to get the interface design right as early as possible. If that is not possible, then we try to patch the design (which is SAD).