Design Commission & UI Stencils

By Anders Rosenquist | Feb 5, 2011 5:11:29 PM

 

A big thanks again to our frends at the Design Commission for hooking us up with iPhone stencils for our recent School of Visual Concepts mobile design workshop.  We had a great turnout and the attendees were super-excited when we handed the stencils out. (there is still space available for our March session if iterested.)

The stencils are made by UI Stencils and come in many flavors - iPhone, Android, iPad, etc.  They also have some great sketchpads to do your concepting on.  We find that they come in handy for putting together some quick mobile ideas to share with the Creative and Dev teams (and even clients.)

Very cool.

Facebook Open Graph Coming to a Phone Near You

By Anders Rosenquist | Jul 14, 2010 2:36:26 PM

Facebook is pushing the mocial envelope these days. At the MobileBeat 2010 conference in SF earlier this week, Facebook announced that it will be extending its Open Graph platform to mobile, moving away from an individual mobile app strategy and moving into a let's-allow-facebook-to-be-connected-into-everything strategy.

What does this mean?  App makers will now be able to connect into the Facebook platform and incorporate data into their own apps, leveraging information such as friend recommendations.  It's easy to imagine a scenarios that combine information from your friends with location-based services - say Foursquare but with your whole Facebook community and history.

For marketers this means greater opportunities to serve offers at the right time and place, but with the added benefit of having the backing of your friends. A hotel chain's app that leverages a user's Facebook community could connect friend-recommended POI's and restaurants with discounts to stay in at a nearby hotel property.  Or a retailer could show you your friend's reviews of the product you are looking at while on the showroom floor.  Pretty cool.

Facebook also stated that they have 150 million mobile users of Facebook and are growing.  A nice plus that they just implemented too is the ability to sign up for a new Facebook account completely on your mobile device.  Good call, and good move toward further breaking mobile's tether to the desktop.

More info check out:  http://social.venturebeat.com/2010/07/13/facebook-mobile-platform/

Creating Compelling iPad Apps

By Anders Rosenquist | May 7, 2010 4:06:16 PM

Apple's iPad has only been on the market for two months, but already it is changing how we engage with content. The iPad is poised to change the landscape of magazine publishing—both in how readers consume their favorite editorial content, and in how magazines, struggling with the decline of print readership and advertising, can grow their revenue streams in new and immersive ways. 

After Steve Jobs announced the coming of the iPad in January 2010, the editors and publishers of Entertainment Weekly magazine wanted to create an iPad app to coincide with the launch of the new product. We positioned the opportunity for Entertainment Weekly as compelling, easily consumable editorial content tied to e-commerce—the magazine’s first step toward- redefining its future and creating a new business paradigm.

The app takes a simple and very popular feature of the magazine, "The Must List"— featuring the Top 10 pop culture phenomena of the moment—and presents it in a playful, interactive set of panels that makes excellent use of the iPad’s scale, touch interface and visual punch. (free download from iTunes)

I recently sat down with ZAAZ's Jon McVey, Executive Creative Director, and Tim Klauda, Creative Director, to talk about their strategic and creative work on EW's ipad app.. 

This is the first iPad app for Entertainment Weekly magazine. Why was EW interested in creating an iPad app?

Jon: I'd say their motivation was similar to what we are seeing across the publishing world: The iPad is a second chance. Publishers first tried to bring their print content to the Web, but they didn't do it right. You don't have to look far to find examples of high-profile failures in the magazine world. Established publications like Gourmet magazine are gone.   Publishers are seeing the iPad as a do-over, another opportunity at doing digital right. It’s a godsend to them. So it goes beyond the business drivers for Entertainment Weekly—it is the future of the industry. And if you look at it from the financial side, there is no revenue share in the print version. But on the iPad, not only can you go deeper on the editorial content, you can also read a review, and then buy the soundtrack, watch the trailer, buy movie tickets, etc. 

What excites you most about creating experiences on the iPad?

Tim: It's simply awesome to design for a touch screen of this size. It’s the closest connection between the consumer and the content that we've seen. There’s no mouse or cursor–you just touch the content to interact with it. Another exciting angle is the way people approach mobile now, and how it fits into their lives. People expect more from technology than they ever have before. The iPad isn’t mobile in the same way that the iPhone is, but it’s perfect for curling up with on a sofa, cooking with in the kitchen, flying cross country…things where the bulk of a laptop is intrusive and the size of a phone is annoying. You have the opportunity to be intimate with the content or easily pass it around a room to share.

Jon: It represents a whole new way of thinking about things. I'm a big magazine lover, and with an iPad app, I’m able to check articles out, have them on hand, with no big piles of print magazines.  Now I can read an article, get more information and buy related items, all in one intimate experience.  It allows for richer storytelling.

The iPad is more of a lifestyle object, and the apps are mainly about your lifestyle. Because you can choose them, they’re an extension of you. A laptop represents work, but it’s fun time when you are on the iPad. 

What was different about creating for Web vs. for the iPad?  What can you do for the iPad that you couldn't do when creating a website?

Jon: The Web is clunky. But the iPad is fast and responsive. You get to the content pretty quick.  You don't have to put as much on a page. 

Tim:  You don't have Web conventions. … You don't need a site map for an app.  It’s refreshing to design for something very specific. It allows you to hone in on the relationship between the content and the person engaging with it. 

How did you decide on what features to include in the app?

Tim: We didn't really talk about it in terms of features. We talked about the content that makes up the Must List, and how we'd enhance it.     For some sites, you focus on functionality—scope, features—and then roll content into it.   You make a shell, then someone will write the content and the site displays it.

For an app, the content is the feature. You start with how the content can be relevant to someone and how it affects that persons lifestyle, then we extended that experience. For the Must List, we have 10 things. Some are books, some are movies—and then we help the user act on them.

Will you adapt the iPad app for mobile phones? 

Tim: The Entertainment Weekly app will come out on the iPhone as well. It will have the same content and a similar experience, but we had to rethink the UI a little bit.  For example, it’s easier to use on the go with one thumb.  The experience needs to fits the device. The iPhone is about lists and getting there, rather than interacting with the list before getting there.  The iPad requires more of an investment in the experience.

What recommendations do you have for brands interested in developing an iPad app?

Tim: They need to look at all the mobile devices – iPad, iPhone, Windows, Android. They need to see where their audience is, and look at what their brand has to offer each device.  The iPad has a particular type of engagement and interface. What can they add to someone passing around an iPad in a home or office vs. walking down street with iPhone? You can’t just import straight Web or magazine content and expect it to work. You need to pick a core piece of your brand and focus on that.

How is the app doing in the Apple App Store?

Tim: The EW app was featured in the New and Noteworthy section in the app store, and that brought it up into the store’s Top 20 free apps.   

Thanks to Jon and Tim for sharing their insight on creating for the iPad!

The iPad is just a big iPhone. Isn’t it?

By Anders Rosenquist | Apr 1, 2010 9:28:41 PM

  When Apple officially introduced the iPad in January after months (years?) of speculation of a tablet-based computer, I heard and read more complaints about what it couldn't do than what it could.   "Where is the file system?" "I can't have multiple windows open at once?"  "It doesn't multitask?" Clearly Apple blew it by not providing a standard operating system on this new device.  A laptop replacement seemed to have been assumed.  And most of the arguments about the limitations of the iPad are true - it doesn't run a full OS, and it's not a replacement for your laptop. So isn't the iPad just a big iPhone?

In January it was. At its unveiling we only had glimpses into what the iPad could do, including demonstrations of a handful of new apps and the ability to run all your favorite iPhone apps. But it didn't seem to do anything really new, anything different from what the iPhone could already do.  And it was bigger and more expensive, and it couldn't even make calls. Even the shape of the device looked like an iPhone. But when the iPad is released in two days, it will stop being compared to an iPhone or a tablet computer or a laptop - it will stand on its own. Here's why:

Over the holidays my dad said he wanted to buy his wife a netbook so she could browse the web and share pictures with her friends and listen to music. He saw an inexpensive one at Costco -  a cheap option for the handful of tasks she needed to do. "Don't worry," my dad reassured me, "I have a friend at the office that will help install software and help with any issues."  And last month my wife's dad, a farmer in Central Oregon, recently decided it was finally time to dust off the used mac we gave him a few years back and give it another go. He was looking into taking a class at the local JC so he could learn (as he calls it) the "basics", and then teach his wife how to use it.  These are not uncommon scenarios I've encountered over the years as the family IT guy. In many cases what they often needed was something that could do what they needed simply and easily, without the overhead, the viruses, or the steep learning curve.

I think the iPad ushers in a new way for us to think about computing, pushing us past the mental model of the file system, window and memory management, and other administrative elements. A recent post by Steven Frank sums this up well. For the majority of us that have grown up with computers, how we think about a computer now seems hardwired. But what about the new generation - the kids under say 7 or 8 -  that have played with a touch-based device like the iPhone and simply "got it".  What is a computer to them? What is their model of how it works?  Similarly, how about the many people, my dad's wife and father-in-law included, that have never taken an interest in computers or have decided the effort to learn and maintain them is often too great - what is a computer to them?

I'd argue that Apple's big statement with the iPad, aside from it being lightweight and multitouch, it that they've pushed the OS further into the background and brought the content front and center.  In many ways they established this with the iPhone, but now they are taking it to a much bigger device, one that falls somewhere between a phone and a laptop. They have effectively hidden much of the OS from the user - users interact directly with the content - so that the majority of people that use it will never think about what is missing.

At ZAAZ, as we've been building for the iPhone and iPad, content as the interface has been a guiding principle.  When the iPhone came out, Tufte underscored the importance of removing administrative debris from the screen. On a mobile device, you don't have the freedom to include multiple persistent navigation elements, controls, and menus. You focus on the content and you act on the content as directly as possible. This holds true for larger-screen touch devices like the iPad.

A recent Computerworld article speculates on the high interest in the iPad by the under-12 demographic.  The post was written more from a "will you get your kids one?" angle, but I think it points to a much larger fact - kids are going to grow up using more and more of these types of devices.  They already gravitate to the iPhone and it's touch interface.  They are naturally going to jump to the iPad and other similar interfaces. Again, kids don't care about multitasking or file systems.  What they care about is content.  And ultimately, that's what we all care about too.

[Cross posted at mobileux.net]

Mobile UX and the Google Phone

By Anders Rosenquist | Dec 12, 2009 11:48:32 PM

[cross posted from mobileux.net] My colleague Chris Kerns gave a shout out earlier today about Techcrunch's reported existence of an Android-powered device that will be offered directly from Google. There have been rumors for months about a Google Phone (even hints back when Android itself was first announced many moons ago.)  Now this device from Google hasn't been officially announced - just tweets from some Google employees who have be using the device, and some rumors at this point.  The early impressions are very positive and the specs do look impressive: thinner than the iPhone, 1Ghz+ Snapdragon processor, unlocked, OLED display, great camera, sound-canceling technology.  This all sounds good, but good specs don't necessarily make for a good mobile user experience. However, there are a few "features" of this device that stand out and stand to make the Google Phone a game-changer. Here's why. 

First, this is Google's first hardware entry into the mass market. This puts Google in the position of owning both the software and the hardware, and being able to optimize the user experience.  They of course have to get it right - tight integration of all aspects of the device - but this puts them much more in the Apple and RIM (Blackberry) camp of being able to call the shots on all aspects of the device and how the user interacts with it.  The fast processor will help as well. My experience from owning a G1, and more recently a Motorola Cliq, is that Android needs something fast under the hood to make the screens and interactions move fluidly. Both of my Android devices get bogged down easily from background processes, screen refreshes, and network activity, which make for a painful experience at times. I'm particularly not very fond of the unregistered screen presses and choppy scrolling.

The second "feature" worth noting is that the device is rumored to be sold unlocked by Google itself. What is this a big deal, considering you can already buy many unlocked devices? Several reasons:

• Google will most likely offer an attractive and competitive price point. Google will want to get these devices into many hands, and may be willing to cover the subsidization costs (that the carriers normally absorb). If any of the free (read: company subsidized) products that Google currently offers is any indication, the Google Phone may carry stong price appeal in the market.
• The device-network balance will shift. By buying an unlocked device, you get to choose the device first and then shop for the carrier. This flips the model we are used to in the U.S. where carriers tend to have "exclusives" on mobile devices - subsidized devices in exchange or 1- or 2-year contracts - thus locking the user onto a particular network if they want a particular device. Want an iPhone?  You're stuck with AT&T.  How about a Palm Pre? Hello Sprint. By putting the device first, you are able to select a carrier that meets your particular needs, be that best nationwide coverage, lowest-cost plans, discounted international calling, etc.
• Carrier contracts may change or (hopefully) go away. If you buy an unlocked phone and can go to any carrier, what will the carrier be locking you into a contract for?  If you are not getting the device subsidized by the carrier, they are really acting as your ISP and providing the data pipe. Aside from startup costs to joining a new carrier like porting your number or activating an account, the whole idea of the Early Termination Fee will become irrelevant.

Oh, and the Google Phone is rumored to have Google Voice included, which allows you to make VoIP calls and bypass many of the services offered by carriers such as visual voicemail, low-cost international rates, and built in SMS messaging - all additional charges by the carriers. Another thorn-in-the-carrier-side and disruptive  (did AT&T Apple ever get around to approving Google Voice for the iPhone?) I haven't heard (beyond speculation) about ad integration. It would seem that a phone built by Google would naturally integrate advertising (and they did just buy the mobile ad network AdMob.)  Perhaps the device will be free, but will have banner ads in your calendar and music player. Who knows - we will hopefully see soon.

With the Google Phone, I see several potential wins for users here - the user experience win that comes from tight hardware and software integration, and the consumer win that comes from changing established models in the wireless industry. These aren't a given, but we've seen boundaries pushed by the introduction of the iPhone - perhaps Google can push them even further.

Anders Rosenquist is a Senior User Experience Researcher at ZAAZ and works on a variety of usability and UX issues. Anders is particularly interested in the multiple faces of mobile, including UX design, usability testing, strategy, and the mobile ecosystem/devices.

Creating Solid Mobile UX

By Anders Rosenquist | Aug 14, 2009 12:15:18 PM

[Cross-posted from MobileUX]

The momentum of mobile application development has accelerated over the past year. Apps have increased the functionality of mobile devices, and the success of Apple's iPhone app store has lead the charge in the introduction of app stores on other platforms such as Android, Palm, Nokia, and soon Windows Mobile. A key element in the adoption of mobile apps is a focus the user experience. There are lots of good apps out there, but many more bad ones.

So how do you ensure creating a great mobile experience for users? There are two key ingredients: One is focus, the other is testing. "Focus" actually has multiple parts, including simplicity, consistency, and great performance. Taken together, these parts help pinpoint the core elements to meets users' needs. Focus is especially important for clients that have existing sites or applications - there is often a strong push to include much of the functionality that a user would encounter on a desktop. But because mobile has many different interactions than the desktop - frequency and duration of use, context (e.g. riding the bus, walking downtown), and input methods - it important to focus on core elements that be engaged with during common “mobile” usage.

A great example of focus can be seen by comparing Amazon.com's desktop homepage and their mobile iPhone app. The Amazon desktop experience (left) includes a dizzying range of information and functionality. The Amazon mobile app (right) includes only core elements - search, product information/reviews, one-click purchase. 

Edward Tufte nicely describes all the extra screen stuff as the "computer administration debris" - on mobile the content is the interface. Amazon has effectively minimized this debris and focused on content in their mobile app. By providing the core elements, mobile users can quickly and easily engage with Amazon's extensive range of products and purchase them. Their mobile app is highly focused.

The other ingredient in ensuring your mobile app hits its mark is usability testing. Here the key is to have users engage with the app on the actual device and to have them complete authentic tasks. We like to have users sit or stand in the lab while interacting with the device.  We record the device interface (either directly or using an emulator that runs on the observer's computer) along with the user's voice and facial expressions. Here we capture interaction issues as well as affective elements - how the user engages with the app, what gets them excited, etc.  This provides a great opportunity to test out what features to include, along with highlighting issues that need to be addressed.

I've quickly described two core pieces in mobile app creation - focus and testing.  It is important to note that there is a ton of thinking and decision making that goes into this process. But doing so helps ensure the best mobile experience possible.

Anders Rosenquist is a Senior User Experience Researcher at ZAAZ and works on a variety of usability and UX issues. Anders is particularly interested in the multiple faces of mobile, including interface design, testing, strategy, and the mobile ecosystem.