Wikia. The #1 Free, Hosted Wiki?

wikia-logo (part 2 of 7) Wikia, Wetpaint, PBwiki, Google Sites, and Versionate. There are literally hundreds of different wikis available, each offering unique online experiences and presenting different interpretations of what it means to be wiki. Within this series we explore and discuss the top 3 most popular, free, online wikis and 2 (of very many) notable up-and-comers — and, in the end, announce the winning wiki experience.

Website: Wikia
Briefly: Wikia was found to be the #1 free, hosted wiki, based on Alexa popularity ranking, in April 2007. (read more)

00 wikia_home

 

Enjoyable

  • Wikia is the most popular free, online wiki, today. One of the direct benefits to the Wikia user, of this huge popularity, is Wikia‘s equally huge community (support) and user generated content (consumer choice).
01 huge_community

 

  • The inclusion of dynamic widgets provides access to fast and useful wiki information.
02 widgets

 

03 portability

 

Disappointing or Unsatisfying

  • The interface through which wiki content is created and edited is critical to increasing adoption and lowering its intimidation factor. Here, Wikia, as is common to many other wikis, does not provide a WYSIWYG interface, but one that requires use of their special markup language.
04 no_wysiwyg

 

  • Creating a new wiki cannot be directly accomplished. To create a new wiki, the user has to submit a request for a new wiki, and await its approval.
05 wiki_request

 

  • Wikia only supports the management of public content. While administrators can control whether or not a page can be edited, they cannot prevent any page’s viewing.

 

In the next post of the series I will be exploring the #2 popularly ranked wiki, wetpaint.

Think & Share…

What would change about the Wikia wikis?

Subscribe now (click here) to make sure you don’t miss any part of this series exploring best online wiki User eXperiences as well as other upcoming, insightful posts from The Product Guy.

More Information

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Add to Social Bookmarks: Stumbleupon Del.ico.us Furl Reddit Magnolia Google Add to Mixx!

Wonderful Wikis… they are Free and they are Hosted!

wiki (Part 1 of 7) More and more companies, from start-ups to Fortune 500s, are making greater and greater use of wikis.  As the trend and adoption of wikis has spread, so too have the options.  There are hundreds of features, plan choices, and price points to consider from all types of wiki providers.

With so many choices available, it would not be possible for me to delve into the good, bad, and desirable improvements of every wiki in existence.  I have decided to limit the scope of this discussion of the User eXperience (especially including Usefulness) of wikis to the…

Top 3
Hosted wiki solutions

.. as determined by their corresponding Alexa rankings.

Wiki
Alexa Ranking
( May 2008 )
Wikia 324
wetpaint 2,281
PBwiki 3,029
 
wikia
wetpaint
pbwiki

 

In addition, later in the discussion, I will also introduce you to 2 other noteworthy wikis…

 

google sites versionate

 

Both of these wiki providers warrant keeping an eye on as they develop and evolve.

Wikis exist to help the average person contribute to a collection of web pages.  Within a corporate environment, whether small or big, new or established, if chosen well, a wiki can contribute to the long term knowledge management and improved collaboration amongst all its users.  Success of a wiki starts with support from the organization and continues with use by all within it.

Therefore, starting off on the right foot, with the best wiki available is all that much more crucial.  Over the next few weeks, I will discuss the enjoyable, disappointing, and desirable aspects of these 5 wikis, Wikia, wetpaint, PBwiki, Google Sites, and Versionate, and share with you which I find to be today’s ultimate wiki, as well as what to look out for tomorrow.

Think & Share…

What is your company’s current wiki experience?  How would you change it?

Subscribe now (click here) to make sure you don’t miss any part of this series exploring best online wiki User eXperiences as well as other upcoming, insightful posts from The Product Guy.

More Information

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Add to Social Bookmarks: Stumbleupon Del.ico.us Furl Reddit Magnolia Google Add to Mixx!

Reveal More

reveal Dynamic, expanding, dropdown… These are all terms that are often associated with interesting and, sometimes, fun interface elements. But, they can also contribute to the obfuscation of the interface and deterioration of the User eXperience.

twhirl, a desktop Twitter client, was recently upgraded. Within twhirl‘s upgrade were some needed, and fully appreciated, improvements to the User eXperience — most notably, along the lines of Usability.

While the interface change was not major, in terms of pixel area within twhirl, many (myself included) have found that this simple change has dramatically enhanced their experience of the product and, in turn, their interactions with Friends and Followers on Twitter. twhirl’s upgrade has also provided us with an opening to the topic of the oft encountered, lesser User eXperiences that hide more and reveal less than most people’s corresponding expectations and desires.

Before talking more about the nice new bits of twhirl, let’s first discuss and understand which information and design decisions can lead to confusion and frustration, and why an interface should be kept simple and reveal more.

Hidden Actions

Hidden actions and hidden information result in hidden choices, slowed decisions, and confusion. The less searching, less thinking, less clicking, the better the user’s product experience will be. There are many commonly found interface elements that work against users’ product experiences, two of which are drop-downs and scrolling lists.

Down and Out

state-drop-down

Drop-downs always require at least 2 clicks to use – one click to open, and another click to make the selection.

The information contained within a drop-down interface element is hidden. Simply to see or reference the available options that the user has, that user first has to open it. The deficiency of this type of interface becomes even more apparent when the drop-down contains actions, as opposed to attributes. Actions typically necessitate greater engagement by the user than attributes – after all, people use an interface to accomplish some task (through action). And each of these actions, via a drop-down, always requires 2 clicks; 2 clicks repeated again and again do not present a simple experience.

The drop-down also suffers from other ailments. In many situations, when a drop-down has been opened, some other part of the interface becomes covered, unnecessarily hiding other choices or even information that may soon, or immediately, be relevant to the current decision process.

Many websites, for example, use drop-downs to allow the user to indicate within which State they reside. The information applied to the drop-down results in a very long list, one that needs to be carefully scanned and scrolled through until the desired answer has been located – a very cumbersome process.

Instead of using the drop-down, the user of the product can be better served with more obvious, more revealing (of information and intention) interface elements. In the previous example of the State selection drop-down, one can provide the user with a basic textfield. Everyone knows how to type the correct State; and for those that make a mistake (e.g. typo), backup the less confusing interface with sound error checking, correction, and prevention.

Needless Scroll

Scrolling lists exhibit many of the same Usability shortcomings familiar to drop-downs. Scrolling lists do not allow for everything to be easily seen at the same time – they require scanning and scrolling.

multi-select

An application of scrolling lists, that I am sure you have used within numerous online products, is multiple item selection. An example of this implementation is one in which the user is prompted to select their favorite five items from the entire list. Not only does this implementation result in shielding all of the available options from view (how do you know what five to pick unless you know everything that is available?), the scrolling list also hides many, or all, of the selected items – concurrently hiding from view possible mistakes made in deselecting earlier selections.

Here too, the User eXperience can be improved through simplification and revealing more. Selecting from a list that reveals all available options simplifies the decision process. Selecting my favorite five items from a list that reveals all available options, not only simplifies the selection process, but also helps prevent me from making mistakes (e.g. accidentally deselecting the wrong item).

Wrong Dynamics

Of course there other dynamic elements, regions of the page that appear and disappear, menus and windows that conceal portions of a product’s interface, et cetera, that also exhibit many of the similar downsides as drop-downs and scrolling lists. The important lesson that can be applied to many forms of interface element is that, through some small changes in a product’s interface, through revealing more, the product experience can easily be improved.

A Brisk twhirl

Among the many pluses that twhirl has always had in its favor is its Usability, within a simple and pleasant User eXperience. twhirl has always done well in capturing the key features, and primary goals and desires, of Twitter and the Twitter user base. Prior to the latest product upgrade (version 0.7) the default interface looked like this…

twhirl-07-petrol

The primary actions of the average Twitterer (Twitter user) are viewing ones timeline and tweeting. Tasks such as filtering, customizing, refreshing, and deleting tweets are given lower priority, but remain a simple button click away. However, in version 0.7 of twhirl, actions of a bit more importance, and more frequently used, are nowhere to be seen – they are hidden in a drop-down.

twhirl-0.1.008-panechange

The hidden actions allow the user to check for replies or direct messages (and more). These are very common actions performed by the average Twitterer – on Twitter it is difficult to be certain that you did not miss a tweet, therefore checking replies and direct messages become a fairly common occurrence. twhirl 0.7, presents a drop-down, containing actions – actions that can be useful to the product’s users.

With just a tiny change, in twhirl 0.8, by revealing more and elevating valued actions, users received a simpler, more enjoyable, easier to understand and act upon interface, that encourages greater interaction with the product and, in turn, greater engagement with fellow Twitterers.

08twhirl

 

Balance is Key

The key to improving a product’s User eXperience is not always obvious and is most often done iteratively through ongoing tweaking and upgrading.

With revealing more and improving the overall User eXperience come challenges to find …

  • balance between decision overload and finding what you want to be able to do,
  • balance between presenting relevant information and hiding important information,
  • balance between temporal elements and information overload, and
  • balance between the abstract and the obvious.

The goals of any User eXperience shift over time. The primary activities and information may change, but the path to many improvements in User eXperience remains constant – to reveal more. The ‘more’ may change, and pose new and exciting challenges to the overall product experience, but there will always be room for improvement, even in an excellent product, as twhirl has further demonstrated.

For more reading…

 

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Add to Social Bookmarks: Stumbleupon Del.ico.us Furl Reddit Magnolia Google Add to Mixx!

Modular Innovation gets a Weave

weave The direction of products on the Internet is one of Modular Innovation. Key in this emerging next generation of products are the qualities of portability and user control. Mozilla Weave is representative of just such a Modular Innovation.

The Modular Innovation…

Weave is an open infrastructure and data exchange model that may eventually be, to online applications, what Firefox is to plug-ins.

As though quoting from my own writings on Modular Innovation, the basic principles behind Weave (excerpted from Mozilla Labs website)…

  • provide a basic set of optional Mozilla-hosted online services
  • ensure that it is easy for people to set up their own services with freely available open standards-based tools
  • provide users with the ability to fully control and customize their online experience, including whether and how their data should be shared with their family, their friends, and third-parties
  • respect individual privacy (e.g. client-side encryption by default with the ability to delegate access rights)
  • leverage existing open standards and propose new ones as needed
  • build an extensible architecture like Firefox

Mozilla Weave is simultaneously a product, an architecture, and a data exchange model. It provides for the mirroring and synchronization of both metadata and actual data between different applications, computers, and locations. Basically, Weave exists to provide all the necessary hooks for developers to then leverage in new, extensible ways… all resulting in the user’s greater control of their Internet user experience.

Coinciding with the launch of weave is a POC (proof of concept) whereby the intent is to allow a user of Firefox to synchronize both bookmarks and browsing history across multiple computers. There have been a ton of bookmark synchronizers done in the past, allowing for all of ‘your’ computers to share the same organized set of bookmarks. However, having one’s browsing history can be seen as an early example of synchronizing local computer state across multiple computers. It does not take much imagination to foresee extending this POC to encompass more of the browser — switching to a mobile device or other computer and having all of the browser tabs that were open on your home computer, automatically open, accounts logged into, everything just as you left it, accessible wherever you go via whatever device you use.

The Limitations…

Right now, Mozilla’s Weave is at version 0.1. It is much too early and it would also be too presumptive to claim to know what limitations will remain when/if a version 1.0 ever emerges or what new or different limitations or restrictions may evolve. Today’s limitations of Mozilla Weave can be seen as…

Firefox only. Actually, Mozilla Weave will only run in Firefox 3 Beta and greater. Hopefully, through open standards, Mozilla’s Weave will be able to move beyond a single browser to all browsers and platforms.

APIs. There aren’t any…yet. They will be coming out soon. However, through API’s one can better understand the true directions and intentions of the underlying product. So, for now, we can only infer from the ‘marketing’ and POC.

Redundancy. Information can currently be stored at a single Weave server of choice. However, eventually the needs for reliability of accessibility will dictate being able to setup a primary and secondary (and tertiary and…) Weave server to make sure the user is always able to stay in control of their information and not be dependent upon one server, service, or company. For the moment, it seems logical, that since no restrictions are placed upon whose servers the data can be stored on, that open source will also facilitate the generation of generic plug-ins for use by other/all browsers — as long as Mozilla or others do not put up any new roadblocks into the potential broader adoption.

So, there remains much to do and many paths that may be followed other than the ones I hypothesize herein. The Mozilla Weave API’s won’t even be out until sometime in the beginning of 2008 (first half of 2008?). For now, Mozilla Weave, especially in its current form, is something to be ‘played’ with, discussed, and used to spur imaginations forward about what this and other similar products may eventually bring into reality.

The Possibilities…

There are many cool concepts that can become reality through the leveraging and expansion of the Mozilla Weave framework.

  • Enable fully centralized and portable social network settings (friends, apps, etc.).
  • Store files, spreadsheets, and documents and access and edit them from anywhere.
  • Backup computers and maintain redundant copies of your data, such as file backups and bookmarks (already implemented in the version 0.1 prototype).
  • Increase the portability of one’s own generated content. Easily move from one CMS (content management system), or social network, etc., to another; more easily migrate and convert from WordPress to tumblr to Blogspot… they become platforms for editing and displaying your data, data that is stored centrally on a Weave server, not being dependent upon any of these or product platforms.
  • Control and customize access permissions of your own content by product, groups, and friends.
  • Maintain all state information via a centralized form of persistent state memory. For example, remember the exact state of products and browser windows and be able to transfer those sessions from product to product, from device to device.
  • Couple Mozilla Weave with something like Google Gears and you have an experience that is available both online and offline from whatever device and location you choose!

More use cases from Mozilla can be found here.

Furthermore, I can envision a future optimal situation where a product user can set up multiple servers to be able to leverage local, Mozilla, and 3rd party servers to store the data so that the individual never has to worry about an outage or loss of data; where the servers used within the configuration not only keep the individual’s data accessible and synchronized, but also synchronize between one another, server-to-server, to provide always-available type of access and true user control of their online content and experience.

I hope to see other enablers just like Weave emerge to offer everyone further redundancy and allow us all to not be locked into one platform or framework or service provider. Mozilla Weave is clearly all about user control, ownership and portability of one’s own content and data. It will be very exciting to see how this Modular Innovation enabler evolves, how others similar to it evolve, and how well they also interact with one another.

Read more…

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

OpenSocial: Impediment or Catalyst?

opensocial OpenSocial. There is a great deal of excitement and hype behind the (gradual) release of Google’s OpenSocial. I have spent the last few weeks, since the release of OpenSocial, experimenting with, as well as speaking to the individuals involved with both product sides, widget and Container, and really digging into what is known, what is hypothesized to be, and wrapping myself around OpenSocial’s current and full potential.

What is OpenSocial?

OpenSocial allows websites and social networks (OpenSocial term, ‘Containers‘) to run mini-products (OpenSocial term, applications; aka gadgets, widgets). The mini-products can be shared across multiple social networks and leverage the existing content and data on the social networks (i.e. your existing friends). The Containers can host these mini-products as well as exchange information with other Containers, other social networks.

What does Google say about the Container a.k.a. OpenSocial Service Provider Interface (SPI)?

“To host OpenSocial apps, your website must support the SPI side of the OpenSocial APIs. Usually your SPI will connect to your own social network, so that an OpenSocial app added to your website automatically uses your site’s data. However, it is possible to use data from another social network as well, should you prefer. Soon, we will provide a development kit with documentation and code to better support OpenSocial websites, along with a sample sandbox which implements the OpenSocial SPI using in-memory storage. The SPI implements:

  • Adding and removing friends
  • Adding and removing apps
  • Storing activities
  • Retrieving activity streams for self and friends
  • Storing and retrieving per-app and per-app-per-user data “

Pasted from <http://code.google.com/apis/opensocial/container.html>

The most exciting information can be found in the highlighted statement within the above excerpted quote from Google’s explanation of the OpenSocial SPI. It is the possibility of sharing, exchanging, porting information between DIFFERENT social networks, not tied down to any one social network, where the networks have to provide value-add and truly unique user experiences to keep a user. In an environment where a user can easily move all of their gadgets (apps, widgets, modules) from one network to another, as well as, and most excitingly, port their user created content and friends from one network to another, at will, is tremendous (or should I say, ‘will be’?) for the progression of the Internet environment and user experiences, and the evolution of the Internet towards one of all around Modular Innovation.

———–

A while ago I coined the term Modular Innovation to describe the next phase of the Internet’s evolution; one which includes, but is not limited to the layer of the Internet referred to, by many, as the ‘social Internet’ – highly relevant to this discussion of OpenSocial. The stage of the Internet’s development after ‘Web 2.0′ is the period that I refer to as Modular Innovation.

Modular Innovation. Where users are able to determine the user-facing modules with which they can interact. Where users can determine which location or locations the information that these modules use are stored. Where users are able to customize their total Internet interaction and user experience, without third-party restrictions placed on how they can access, share, or move the content that they, themselves, have created. All this is Modular Innovation — innovation of many parts, or modules, that result in a much larger, cohesive whole for the user.

The components and products that enable this time of Modular Innovation knock down the encumbering walls. They allow for complete control of one’s own content, through the ability to integrate with other Innovative Modules (services & products), incorporating flexibility, portability, and facilitating the total customization, and self-determination of and by users with respect to how they interact with their personal creations and those of other individuals and companies.

OpenSocial is Open & Social. Really?

Just a little bit. I mean, well, that is how much of OpenSocial has actually been released, despite all of the articles and press releases that everyone has been reading. To be fair, right now it is difficult to give OpenSocial a complete and thorough review with 100% clarity, since it is still not completely “out there.” Over the past few weeks I have spoken to people and organizations throughout the OpenSocial product chain from the developers to the companies themselves, and experimented with and studied everything from the widgets to the Containers.

The initial release of OpenSocial was on the widget-side of things. At the time of OpenSocial’s release, if I hadn’t been prudent in my assessment and given Google more time to see if they would be able to paint a clearer picture, I would have maintained, as also has been said by others, that OpenSocial would have been better labeled as the “OpenWidget” platform. The App (Data) and Container API documentation all remain very incomplete, often merely consisting of little more than a few bullet points to guide peoples’ expectations. However, I have of late had the opportunity to study parts of the OpenSocial Container API, albeit a very incomplete and far from concrete API, to build a firmer understanding of the total vision of OpenSocial that I can now more accurately, more confidently, share with you.

Where does Google’s OpenSocial fit in? Does it help or hurt the progress and emerging next phase of the Internet, Modular Innovation?

orkut Now! For the moment the biggest value in OpenSocial lies with its ability to drive new development and user adoption for Google’s social network — orkut. If you want to develop and test apps or widgets you are pointed right to orkut. The Container half of the OpenSocial system, the part where the widgets are actually used and users/friends are created and edited, is clearly the lagging half of the OpenSocial release, with much more support and documentation already out for the widget-side. Trying not to pose too cynical a question… what’s the hurry? The more time that it takes to get the Container support out the door, the more people are (strongly?) encouraged to make use of orkut for development and testing, the more people are curious about new OpenSocial apps they come across, where orkut is the primary place to check them out and experiment with them, the better it is for Google … for orkut.

Other places (Engage.com, Friendster, hi5, Hyves, imeem, LinkedIn, MySpace, Ning, Oracle, orkut, Plaxo, Salesforce.com, Six Apart, Tianji, Viadeo, XING) will be implementing Containers and hosting these widgets, but not yet comprehensively. Full Container support and implementation will be a while in coming. The documentation isn’t there. And there are still plenty of questions on the app hosting and Container sides of the equations. So, for now, the bulk of developers’ focus is on widgets and apps — great news for orkut.

As a matter of fact, if anyone sees this move by Google as a purely altruistic offer to help the developer and the social Internet consumer, don’t lose sight of the fact that orkut’s U.S. market share, as of February of this year is a paltry 0.26%.

I would be remiss to not point out, that while orkut has been very successful internationally, they have yet been able to repeat that success in any meaningful way in the U.S., where the real advertising dollars can be found.

Will orkut, as a result of OpenSocial see a boom in its U.S. market share? You can count on it. This is indeed a very, very smart strategy by Google. I point this out not to slam OpenSocial, its ideas, or its strategy, which I find to be truly impressive, or the fact, that the slower they move on the Container-side, the greater the potential market share grab for orkut, which has been awesomely and intelligently executed, getting orkut competitors to buy-in (very impressive, Google), but to frame the logical, following question…

How much of OpenSocial and Google’s OpenSocial grand vision will come into being? Will it occur quickly? Or drag, and drag, and drag out over many years to come?

I ask these questions which, for now, can only be posed and re-evaluated as OpenSocial becomes more open, because my gamble, my interest, as well as the interest of everyone of the Internet lies in the visible progress of the technology and paradigms of the Internet. If something occurs to impede their progress, then it is best that everyone be on their toes and fully aware to address these issues and needs head-on, and with creative vigor and enthusiasm. It remains too early to draw any final conclusions.

Beyond orkut.

The OpenSocial environment is made up of (1) Applications (or widgets or gadgets) and (2) Containers. The Applications are independent modules that are able to display and perform actions based on the data fed into them — for example, list friends, latest friend activity, share restaurants you liked visiting with your friends, etc. Each module typically performs a specific, finite task, like mini-products, based upon a normalized set of input data. Each module can also communicate back to the parent, Container, what activities or other changes have occurred – e.g. new restaurant visited. Containers host, or run, the modules. orkut is a Container that early developers, and interested consumers, are able to use for testing their new modules to see how they work and how they interact with the data on orkut via the Container interface (aka API).

Creating the OpenSocial applications and modules that can run on every social network (that supports them) is nice – but hardly the exciting part. The part that is far from production ready, albeit starting to become available on places like hi5, Ning, and Plaxo, is the Container piece.

If OpenSocial lives up to the press releases and talking points, then OpenSocial just might be a positive catalyst in the world of Modular Innovation. If the walls of portability, access, sharing, self-determination of one’s own content remain, or if new walls spring up, or new cumbersome hindrances or restrictions emerge, then, what might be a positive influence may become the impeding technology, slowing progress of the clear eventuality where Modular Innovation rules the day.

For now, we shall all wait, continue to play with the pieces that constitute OpenSocial, the pieces that have been released, that eventually, will constitute the full release of OpenSocial — an event that we are all still anticipating.

Until then, myself and others will keep experimenting, observing and discussing Google’s OpenSocial to see just where it ends up; and waiting and watching for more Modular Innovations and noting those companies that facilitate the next phase of the Internet, and those that attempt to impede the inevitability.

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

P.S. and a Note to Google: In the future, try to not let the rhetoric get months ahead of the actual full release… starting out with unfulfilled expectations, sets the wrong tone for a product, a platform, that could have a huge impact on the future development of the product and the Internet, for good or worse (‘evil’ perhaps). This is valuable advice that does not apply solely to Google, but can be an educational learning point for all startups and companies releasing their products on the Internet. For Google and OpenSocial, we will have to wait and see.

Microsoft’s Mistakes. You too can learn from them.

microsoft (Part 2 of 2) The other day I briefly highlighted what I saw as the ‘Good parts’ and ‘Good starts’ within Windows Live Events to clearly distinguish where I feel the product has missed a golden opportunity; and highlight some broader takeaways that should be applied to the current and next generation of online web products and services.

Not so good parts…

Overall, I found the user experience pretty good, as long as I didn’t have to interact with the page and its components and features. In some cases I found the negatives to be in the simple user interaction and experience design, in others it was the sense of being mislead by the user interface to expect bigger and better functionality from my click.

Where’s the pop?

The User Interface didn’t POP. By pop, I am not referring to those annoying ads that everyone loves to hate, but to the responsiveness and feeling that goes along with the interaction of the user interface. Here, with Windows Live Events, I found the interface experience, my user experience, to be slow, sluggish, and, at times, sleep inducing.

When I log into my account and select an event that I want to update or invite people to… let me do it QUICKLY and painlessly. I want to login (pop), click (pop), invite (pop), and go (pop). The interface rendering times, the additional pages that were being loaded again and again, can all benefit from a major overhaul. Empower me, your potential user, to do what I want to do with my event…efficiently, productively.

Microsoft, did you ever hear of Ajax or dynamic page elements? My advice to you is to make the event overview and its management a single page, a page that loads the ‘dashboard’ view once and dynamically allows me to enter new information or be updated while I am looking at my event. Don’t force me to navigate back and forth, again and again, to manipulate my details and invite people. All those extra pages, all that extra loading, all that interruption in my workflow of planning and managing and ENJOYING my event just slows me down, ruins any potential happiness I may get from some of the features, and makes me want to look elsewhere for a UI that will be fast, responsive, and fun to interact with.

The sluggishness I found to be present within the UI goes beyond the unnecessary extra page loading that occurs, but is also found in the initial page downloading and rendering. I am not, as of the posting of this article, sure what is going on under the hood or what sort of processes at Microsoft are resulting in this bloated feeling that appears to be all too common to Microsoft products, that causes such a slow and sluggish feeling (I used IE , FF, and Opera browsers). The sluggish interface is not unique to Windows Live Events. I also experienced excessive sluggishness in Microsoft’s (now discontinued) Live Product Search — a product I thought was head and shoulders above the competition out there. With Live Product Search, a product that I truly enjoyed and recommended to people, as with Windows Live Events, its big negative was that it was slow in how it responded to user interaction . Back then, I stopped using Live Product Search, and most likely many other people did too, because it was just sooo slow.

The ‘fun potential’ of the user interface is present, but quickly dissipates when the actual interaction portion of the user experience equation is taken into account. Correcting this portion of Windows Live Events will go far towards user adoption, but is also the lesser of the ‘Not so good parts.’

The future is in Modular Innovation.

Within Windows Live Events It is nice that I can blog about my event; even though it is not readily obvious that I can do so at first glance at the event’s dashboard view. It is nice that I can share pictures and discuss the events with friends and other attendees. It is nice that it is an experience integrated with the Windows Live suite of web products.

Wouldn’t it be NICER (or great, or awesome) if I could blog, not just on Windows Live Spaces, but on WordPress (The Product Guy’s platform) or other blog formats? Wouldn’t it be NICER if I could share or integrate with my pictures on Flickr or other photo sharing platforms? Wouldn’t it be NICER if I could communicate with other people, in real-time, or via Twitter or receive updates when there are new bits of information being shared?

Answer: Yep.

While the layout of the page presents the promise of a sharp user experience and alludes to the potential of a great, integrated, centralizing event planning application through some obvious and some hard to find features, it falls far short. So far short, it only is integrated with Microsoft – a very limited web product audience.

Windows Live Events, what could have been a nice module that combined and brought together information from other web products (modules) online, instead is only a repackaging of a proprietary Microsoft-only event planner.

Those tougher to find features on the Event’s homepage are the ones that drew my greatest attention for which I also carefully chose my words when describing. I purposely described “the good” with words like “promising” and the “layout encourages.” While there are hints of good ideas, hints of implementing (a) Modular Innovation(s), Windows Live Events, in my opinion, missed a great opportunity. (Of course, I am not saying they cannot make a reattempt at this opportunity through a future release.)

The (missed?) opportunity…

Event planning is not unique to the Internet. What I did like seeing was their eye towards greater integration with other services. However, without allowing for integration with third-parties (Via an API? perhaps.), what could possibly be the incentive for people to sign-up and use Windows Live Events? For people that are not Windows Live-only users, there isn’t any.

Integration is the key to any chance of broad-based success for Live Events. Have I mentioned this a few times already? Hmmm… it must mean it is IMPORTANT! What is unique here? Microsoft Events does present a nice, simplified UI, but with so many other product options out there, there is nothing making this new service stand out. This is where the opportunity lies.

Windows Live Events would be more interesting to the public at large if events could just simply integrate with other blog platforms and social networks to invite friends from your social network to your created Live Events. Don’t limit the users to the Microsoft blogging platform and picture sharing — let me choose and customize my user experience by connecting it with other online products (that aren’t Microsoft, if I choose).

‘missed?’ well, one can hope that the Windows Live Events team will heed my advice and make many of these improvements.

Learning parts…

There are many constructive lessons that can be learned by poking at and experiencing Windows Live Events that, when applied to other web products, will result in broader acceptance and adoption, and an overall better experience that your users will come back for time and time again.

To build a larger base, secondarily, Microsoft will have to clean-up and make enjoyable (interactive, responsive, not slow) the user experience; but, primarily, at the very core, empower its users through modularity by…

  • Allowing integration. Enabling people to connect their Live Events to their other online experiences (Flickr, YouTube, Twitter, Blogger, IM, etc.). For example, let me invite people that are my close friends in MySpace to my party being planned via Live Events.
  • Allowing portability. Enabling people to download or move all of their event information for editing or manipulating on other event or related platforms. This will allow more people to try it out, without worrying about losing their information and experiment with different methods of interacting with and using and leveraging Windows Live Events. Also, how neat-o would it be to be able to download all of the plans, pictures, and discussions surrounding an event and burn them to a DVD to watch with your friends next time you meet up?
  • Allowing modules. Enable people to interact with Windows Live Events as a module. As a module, you can place features, actions, or other types of updates within any other service. Also, as a module, other services can transmit information to the Live Events module (e.g. friend X has accepted the invitation to your party).

In the end, some nice User Experience (UX) and integration (barely), but the 2 big problems that I have found to be all too familiar to the majority of Microsoft’s web products (not unlike their desktop products) are:

  1. sluggish UI and UX really hurt any gains made by some of the good UI decisions, and
  2. openness — connect to and give the people a way to connect complementary services and other platforms (social networks, IM, blog, flickr, twitter, etc.)

It will be interesting to watch Windows Live Events and see what of my advice is eventually adopted and the resulting consumer responses (and their corresponding UX gains).

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Looking for the good in Windows Live Events…

date (Part 1 of 2) So, clearly, Microsoft saw there was a huge need and demand for an online event planning utility — and Windows Live Events was born. (Sarcasm)

But, seriously, there are some positive, along with the negative, aspects of this new product offering.

Last Friday, Microsoft released Windows Live Events. After completing my review of this new web product, which is clearly aligned to compete with the likes of Evite, mypunchbowl, Renkoo, as well as many others, I came away with mixed feelings about its future, and some solid observations of user experience that I feel everyone can benefit from hearing and thinking about, as well as apply to other projects to create more successful web products.

Good parts…

The User Interfaces start out well. The initial visual presents a simple, cohesive overview, easy to find and click primary actions, summaries, all with just the right amount of detail.

image

An especially nice section of the interface, are the huge buttons, along the top, dedicated to the most frequent event related actions — nice and easy: inviting guests, tweaking event details, communicating and sharing — all relevant to the event.

image

The summary information is presented in fairly good balance to the event details on the same page. It is a very nice experience that allows the user to quickly login, take a peak at the event, and know the latest information — easy to take it all in ‘at a glance.’

Good starts…

I found it difficult to clearly classify the parts of the page that are for sharing and socializing entirely with the Good or Bad parts section of this post. My imagination (or was it my hopes?) got the best of me when I saw the parts for blogging, discussions, and picture sharing.

Before clicking on any of these ‘Good starts’, I was filled with all sorts of cool ideas and questions…

  • Is ‘Blog about this event’ going to really let me connect this to my blog (powered by WordPress) or other blogs out there?
  • Will I be able to ‘Share photos’ on Flickr?
  • ‘Discussion,’ that will be a fun way to quickly coordinate and keep track of everything.

The social and communication components of the page contain considerable promise. These components provide some nice, and fairly easy to access (blogging and calendar integration are somewhat buried) features. The _layout_ of the page definitely encourages the sharing of event related photos and group discussions.

While my findings did not live up to my expectations, one can hope that some day they do, and, at least, they are a good start to integrating with a social community, even if it is Microsoft-only, for now.

In Part 2 of my discussion of Windows Live Events I will delve into the negatives and other universally applicable product lessons. 

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Yahoo Rocks my World! (Sorry, Google.)

my_y_bang_logo Yahoo has just surprised the financial analysts. Yahoo just reported that they are seeing increased revenues and user-generated momentum in search, as well as other key web products.

I was not surprised.

As a matter of fact I have been talking about Yahoo and how they contrast with Google for some time. Put simply, Yahoo gets the normal users; and Google gets the geeks. I believe this is the beginning of an emerging trend where we will see more and more users seeking out and returning to the Yahoo user experience (UX) over that of Google’s current product offering.

Google’s got Tech

Google has the technology, the scale, speed, and algorithms to present excellently targeted search results and advertisements. Hey, we already know that. And, big deal if their interface is sterile, or the more powerful aspects of their technology and products remain elusive to the average user. Everyone knows how to start a search. So what if I (and everyone else) are only successful on the first search query 15% of the time that and it takes, on average, 4 attempts to find what I (we) want? (http://www.ysearchblog.com/archives/000494.html)

Discussions with developers and product managers at Google have lead me to believe that at some level they understand that their current appeal is overly skewed to the more technically inclined individuals. However, over the past year I have seen very little movement in the realm of UX (other than Desktop Search – but, to be honest, that is another techie oriented product; the average home user doesn’t use it nor know about its existence) that would or could appeal to the broader audience, that I so often talk about. For a company like Google, where they have (nearly) unlimited resources to solve a problem, I wonder just how much they believe in moving the company to the next level in User eXperience.

Cool features are great. But what do all these cool features matter if most people never know about them or how to take advantage of them?

Google is known and used by the typical Internet user for search. Google’s search interface is simple, but all their other search tools as well as other Google product functionality is hidden from the ‘normal’ user. A user’s interaction with Google is limited to a text field and a search result list. That’s it!

Google, help me find what I want. Facilitate my introduction to and use of your other web products. Stop intimidating people with overly complicated, overly technical interfaces where the average person is going to be too timid to click and see what happens — especially if they were finally able to locate what they were looking for – probably accomplished through trial and error.

The Internet, and finding what you want and using new web products can be an overwhelming experience; albeit for many, nerve racking and scary. And Google has, to date, not visibly sought to lower the bar for the user or simplify or make the experience enjoyable. They have a visible attitude that goes something like this: We (Google) will lead with new technologies, dropping in more interfaces and Google paradigms to learn, and it’s your (the user’s) job to figure it all out.

There is one more thing I would like to mention before I jump into my discussion on why I believe Yahoo’s approach is ‘The Approach’ that is driving the shift now being seen in Yahoo’s latest quarterly report. APIs.

API Philosophy: getting to the guts of the products

There is a very interesting observation that can be made with respect to the APIs offered by both Google and Yahoo. I believe the differences in the cores of these APIs, as well as what they are most known for, speaks to very different philosophies that drive the product innovation processes at Google and Yahoo and, again, where Yahoo draws its strength and growing consumer-driven momentum.

Google’s APIs are targeted to empower the web developer to connect to Google and create more technically sophisticated applications. The emphasis is on deep technical integration.

Yahoo’s APIs are targeted to empower the web developer to leverage the Yahoo platform and, more importantly, create more standardized, easier to use, visually and interactively pleasing web products. The emphasis here is on the interactive user experience.

The key is user experience. The future of successful web products and platforms is user experience via Modular Innovation. Both companies provide for Modular Innovation (MI); Google’s are very technical, Yahoo’s ‘average’ consumer focused and geared towards real-people engagement.

Technology may (does) produce great results, but the user experience (of course, when coupled with sound technologies) is what makes the users want to come back and drives the product’s growth momentum and, in turn, revenue.

What is that that I feel?

Many people do not or are unable to clearly identify what aspects of a product made it “feel right” or why they “enjoyed” interacting with it. But, those same people do know that they will come back for it again, and as their enjoyment and comfort with the product increases, so too will their frequency of using that product.

That product is Yahoo!

When you go to Yahoo and its various connected products and services you can consistently expect to see and experience…

  • Simple interfaces
  • Clean page layouts
  • Animated (for a purpose) UI components
  • Mouse and interaction responsiveness
  • Minimal clicks to accomplish one’s goal
  • Intuitive functionality
  • A guiding, helpful presence.

Briefly…

Simple interfaces with clean edges and layouts allow for the smooth transition of the user’s eyes from page element to element. They facilitate intuitive designs, interactions and results. Animated page elements, not for the sake of animating, but for the sake of the gentle transition from one state of information or ideas to another are invaluable to empowering the user to accomplish things painlessly and pleasingly in as few clicks as possible. This is Yahoo!

Please & Thank you.

A wonderful example of the added value and top-notch user experience that Yahoo presents is within their Search product. Yahoo presents an extremely pleasing search experience. There have been countless times where I have attempted, on other search engines, to find something online, and search and search I did — sometimes without success — many times spending endless hours.

In what I feel is a great example of the Yahoo approach to excel in user experience is their Search Assistant. As I enter my search into Yahoo Search they automatically provide me with suggested auto-complete phrases. When the search runs, I am also presented with helpful ways to refine, try alternate ideas, phrases, and topics, and zero in what I want. I do not have to search for the Search Assistant. I do not have to figure out some complex way of entering more advanced queries. I do not have to worry. When I need it, I receive the right amount of help with the Search Assistant. Yahoo caters to its users’ needs, does not ask them to figure it out, but guides them on a journey to increase their gradual exposure and comfort with everything that is Yahoo. Yahoo, thank you.

It’s all about the trend.

Yahoo is not (yet) my default search engine. But, when I am having trouble finding something, it is to Yahoo I go — because Google is not going to help me. When I want to find a better way to do something online it is to Yahoo I go to see if they will offer or introduce me to something that will facilitate my task — they have content and services on their homepage for me. With increasing frequency many of us are returning to Yahoo for Search and the other products that they have been acclimating and introducing everyone to on each of our returning visits.

This is the heart of the trend in Yahoo’s visibly improving, more competitive, performance.

As Yahoo continues to push in their portal and user experience strategies, so too will the frequency of return users continue to increase. An ever improving and useful user experience will drive sustained growth in returning users, that will, in turn, drive revenue and future success of the Yahoo suite of products. A fact that many other Internet companies (and their constituents) can benefit from by truly taking to heart.

Remember, neither strong technology nor a cool user experience alone drives sustained success of a consumer product, but when intelligently combined, they result in sustainably successful products. Yahoo, you rock my world!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy