Scanning through the rather gorgeous Gdgt redesign this week, I was impressed with its change in typography. The site uses Proxima Nova for its paragraph text, almost uniformly well above 12px, making reading comments and reactions on the site?s many gadgets easier to browse through. A bump in size also opens more opportunities for sizing variety within a single page, ranging from smaller 10px text for secondary sidebar information to large 16px text reserved for primary questions and notices. Overall, the typographic changes should deliver better usability and most likely generate far higher traffic.
Gdgt?s typographic change illustrates an important web design lesson: To improve the impact and readability of a text or information heavy web site, experiment with increasing the body text slightly. Try to move up from the common 10 to 12 pixel range to something larger, like 14 or 16px. It?s a practice many well designed sites are latching onto, especially in light of higher resolution displays and custom web fonts.
With the relentless pace of news online where any one story is often covered by thousands if not millions of news sites, many of us are drowning in information. It?s a phenomenon that rang especially true during a lunch break this week: I was jumping between the New Yorker on my iPad, real time updates on the Google I/O conference from Twitter and video news clips on the BBC?s web site. After an hour of multitasking I felt over saturated; ironically it felt like I was taking a break from my lunch ?break? by returning back to project work.
To combat news overload, I like to stick with one simple rule: Get your news and information from as few sources as possible. Not using that news magazine app lately? Delete it. Haven?t read up lately from that one RSS feed? Unsubscribe. Have several websites that you check out each day yet their content overlaps heavily? Stop visiting all but one.
Flipping on my PS3 this week, I was reminded of the system?s poor user interface. I wanted to watch some Netflix and make some system setting changes, but the setup was awkward and clinical, while also taking longer than expected. Ironically, those same characteristics could be applied to Sony?s tepid response to their recent massive Playstation Network (PSN) security breach.
That?s the thing about user interfaces; they reflect the priorities and values of their makers. Apple?s work is known for its visual simplicity and graceful lines. Twitter conveys freshness and a sense of whimsy. What about Sony? Other than favoring dark color schemes with pulsating icons and text, giving a vaguely generic, Euro-slick vibe, there isn?t anything that makes Sony?s UI stand out or be that approachable.
That?s exactly why a UI refresh is important, especially in light of Sony?s PSN debacle. An improved user experience can both help get the brand back on track and add differentiation from its competitors. I?ve got three suggestions for Sony: ditch the XMB, improve notifications of game and system updates, and emphasize large imagery and user avatars.
There?s an irritating trend I?m noticing more often with new technology offered up online: It starts as the curious and technologically adept download apps, read from new publications, and sign up for services with a lot of buzz and discussion on Twitter, Facebook and blogs. Many are free but some of the most interesting, from huge music streaming services to small scale, members only audio content are not.
It’s on these payment models which give many pause. Clich?d arguments usually appear which emphasize how online models only succeed when they are free, and how many equally good free alternatives already exist. The majority move on to other options.
That’s a problem.
Free always has a cost. I?ve downloaded ?free? apps that crash, are rarely updated, or have pixelated, annoying ads that waste my time. I?ve read from ?free? blogs that carbon copy press releases with little insight or unique analysis. I?ve watched ?free? video clips that are poorly edited and produced.
Given the high volume of content I read online, Readability, a new subscription based web and mobile reading app, seemed like a good fit; I decided to sign up for a month and try it out on my Mac, iPad and iPhone. Four weeks and over a hundred read articles later, while the experience isn’t perfect, I’d recommend it to almost anyone, especially those that read frequently from blogs and other online sources. The HTML5 mobile app has some bugs, but my current pairing of Readability on the desktop and Instapaper for mobile makes for an excellent experience.
Basics
Readability is a twist on existing apps like Instapaper with a built in compensation scheme for content writers and publishers. The app’s foremost objective is to deliver an uncluttered reading experience for what’s online. Users find any web page article of interest (e.g. blog post, news story) and use a browser based extension or bookmarklet to strip the article down to its essence: No ads, ample white space, clear typography, and sparse imagery. In addition, 70% of subscribers’ membership fees go directly to the publishers and writers behind articles read through Readability. That often translates to pennies to the writer per article read, but cumulatively it adds up. I see Readability’s payment system as one step closer to a paid ecosystem that doesn’t rely on traditional sources of revenue like banner ads and paywalls. The whole process also requires almost zero commitment on the part of content publishers, just a registration with readability.com to receive revenue.
Considering the App Store’s maturity I’m surprised how many new iOS apps like Pulse and Pocket Casts deviate significantly from Apple’s native visual style. Back in 2008 or 2009 such wide deviations and experiments were expected, yet today I’m downloading apps with solid functionality and design in a package that feels and looks like something Apple could have never designed; that?s a problem.
Don’t get me wrong – I’m not suggesting developers that blindly copy the company’s aesthetic to automatically expect greatness. Originality of design and function, not to mention solid customer support and a well written code base are all critical factors behind app success. Nevertheless, the appeal of Apple?s native app look shouldn?t be underestimated: Remember a huge subset of iOS users spend most of their time buried deep within Apple’s native apps (e.g. Safari, Calendar, Mail, Messages), only occasionally branching off into other third-party apps. If a third-party app it just looks or feel too different from Apple?s approach, especially for novice users, it runs a risk of being ignored or eliminated. In addition, the bias of the Mac tech elite (e.g. John Gruber, Macworld) have toward more native Apple looking apps is significant; often it’s their recommendations that trickle down to other power users (e.g. yours truly) who in turn ultimately spread their influence to a wider, more casual audience.
The enthusiastic response to this month’s iPad 2 launch made me reflect on how far technology has come in recent years: First smart phone computing went mainstream with 2007’s iPhone, followed by tablet computing’s exponential growth years later in 2010 with the iPad. The emergence of these new markets caused many web sites and apps last year to cater to three distinct platforms: desktops, smart phones, and tablets.
I’d argue in recent months we’ve reached another turning point: With advances in technology like cloud syncing and fast mobile processors the wall of separation between each aforementioned platform is breaking down. Whether in the office with my 30 inch display, at home on the couch with the iPad or on the subway with my iPhone, I’m not just doing work (writing, code editing, news consumption), I’m doing the same work. That’s a big paradigm shift from 2009 or 2010. Put another way, in 2011, cross platform coverage isn’t enough; consistency between those platforms emerges as a more critical factor.
This week Amazon unveiled Cloud Drive, an online storage system for Amazon users to upload their music collections for both on demand streaming and backup. It’s unquestionably huge tech news; Amazon is the first company of this size and stature to provide a cloud based service on this large of a scale. Intrigued, I’ve spent the last two days putting the service through its paces and in the process have come to several conclusions:
Mainstream users will rush to embrace cloud-based services (albeit slowly at first)
While it’s true that the tech community has heavily utilized cloud-based file services like Dropbox and Crashplan for years, Amazon’s Cloud Service is really the first to nail it for a mainstream audience: Unlike most other cloud solutions, there’s no additional drives to be mounted or cumbersome software to download. Instead, Amazon requires just a small Adobe Air app used to upload music (in a nice touch, Amazon auto scans your HD), the music player itself just a web site. Given that level of simplicity, Amazon’s solid customer service, not to mention 5GB free for anyone that has an Amazon account, a lot of households will jump onboard.
Expect this to be the first major step for mainstream users to incorporate cloud-based computing into their day. Music is a great starting point: millions already use web-based streaming clients like Pandora and Rdio so jumping over to an Amazon website to listen to their music library is a natural progression. I’d predict that competitors like Dropbox and Apple will make great efforts to make their services more enticing for a non tech audience (simpler UI, more competitive pricing plans, more devices) and in the process their respective user bases should grow exponentially.
This all takes time; it’s a big step from uploading songs from one’s music library to enterprise sharing and larger scale backup plans. Nevertheless, as the other heavyweights like Apple, Sony and others join in (post Amazon’s move, it’s inevitable), demand will spike.
This week the details of The New York Times online subscription and paywall model were finally revealed to the public. It’s huge news for both future of online journalism and for myself on a personal level; I’ve spent more than a decade considering the Times an essential resource, from the print version in my early college days to the iPhone and iPad apps in heavy use today. That said, after pouring over the details, I’m very dissatisfied with the Times model, and I feel strongly the paywall will fail for three reasons: it’s confusing and complex, it provides no added benefits or perks for paid subscribers versus what’s available today and the monthly cost is too high.
I’ll go into each of these points in greater depth, but it’s important to first note I believe strongly a subscription model makes sense. The existing internet standard of advertising can’t support coverage with such international breadth and depth that the Times provides; something has to give. That said, a subscription plan as poorly thought out as the Times, especially after 14 months of internal deliberation, is inexcusable.
Like its iOS counterpart, the Mac App Store excels in its variety; I regularly scan the top download lists and I?ve stumbled on a few inexpensive, focused apps that fit my interests well.
While there?s been at least six such apps that I?ve tried since the App Store?s debut, two have gotten by far the heaviest use: Folder Watch, a file syncing utility and Minutes, a simple, colorful timer app. I?d recommend checking out both. Continue reading…