Preserved Topic: What makes interfaces easy to understand? (Page 1 of 1)

well.. the question is there. Things like Ozone's interfaces or anyone else's for that matter. Just what is it that is logical? Are there any real answers?

some interesting examples: http://www.miniml.com http://www.ozones.com (of course) http://www.8plus9.com

Thanks

Shine and shine. :: [Cell=992] :: [See my team's 30 second animation!! ]

Bmud: Well its a little tricky answering the question from those examples as the Doc's is the only one I would define as being easy to understand - the other two would be at the opposite end of the spectrum for me.

Interfaces that are intuitive and work well tend to mirror the ones that work in the real world as GUIs or as physical control devices. This may be because we are well trained in using them and expect certain things in certain plays and for different things to work in different ways. I would imagine in this day and age most successful interfaces have had decades of testing and refinement and so are pos. the easest to use.

I do get the feeling I've possibly misunderstood though

Oh yes and how could I forget: metaphore

<jedi_mindtrick>There has been no editting of this post. This post has remained unaltered since it was posted</jedi_mindtrick>

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

I think you did a good job on that one Emps. I think that interfaces that work well mimick other interfaces that work well. Such as the Windows menu system and such.

I couldn't wait (or wouldn't rather) on the 8 plus 9 site to load. Too much clicking and waiting. TOO LONG. The other example that you posted, I am not sure what that site even was. It just had links to other sites. It was a neat concept though.

I think that interfaces are to web people as database archetecture is to database designers. They find pleasure in coming up with the best possible solution. I don't think that made sense to anyone but me.

Later,

C:\


~Binary is best~

Logic helps a lot. It sounds like a mayor 'duh', but putting the right things in the right place, and thinking up a good wa to classify subsections is also a good idea.

For my site I thought up something like this: (just a mockup, nothing like it is in reality)

Graphics:
-'normal' 2D art
- signatures
- sprites

Information:
- tutorials
- personal information
- contact information
- FAQ

Exit (lacking a better term)
- Guestbook
- Links

While this is quite simple, it's more than nessecary with bigger sites to completely lay it out.

Also, giving visual clues is important. Is something a button? Make it look like one. Icons can help, but never forget to add text to make sure there can be no doubt.

Also, like with most things, simple is better. Try not to add random extra graphics which can confuse the viewer. Clarity is often a big issue.

This is a great oversimplification of things, but it's a start.

Familiarity.

This explains the popularity of "buttons" in GUI apps. Who's not going to understand a button? Any 5 year old knows how to use a button.

Checkboxes make sense because they look like things on typical forms that one would fill out by hand. Radio buttons are named after the old buttons on radios, where only one could be pushed in at a time. Choosing a tab in a dialog box is just like finding a file in a file cabinet, or like looking at card catalogs in a library.

Other typical form controls don't have parallels in real life (dropdowns, scrollbars), but people have picked them up over time, and now that they're familiar with them, using them is second nature.

Simplicity is also important, as is a logical layout and usage. But trying radically new things has never really been successful in interface design.

for a start, read this book, or, if you're not the spending type, be a freeloader like me, and just read this free chapter, which is actually all about navigation and interface.

now, what exactly is in a good interface? here are some things that come to mind (if i end up stealing any of dear zeldman's ideas, i apologise, i read that book a while ago, and it most likely influences my ideas now):

creativity. there needs to be something a little 'fun' about your interface. something that invites interaction, that makes the experience enjoyable. something as simple as a motif, or metaphor on the website can be great for this. (and zeldman touches on this)

consistency. simple or not, the user has to put time into comprehending how your navigation works, and how the information is distributed across your website (the arcitecture, or site framework, call it what you will). Don't put them through that again. Make the menu options, style, size, layout, function, everything - consistent throughout the site. Even if there are changes (such as a contextual menu to dig deeper into the site) which may enrich the user's experience, ensure that these are logical and predictable. (And again, keep it consistent, following the behaviour and style of the main menu, and acting the same way in each area of the site.)

clarity. this is probably the hardest, and usually the most important aspect of effective interface design. basically, you should make your interface as easy to understand as possible.
This means taking into account issues such as:
[list]*number of elements - ensuring that there are enough top level elements to organise your information properly, yet be able to digest sufficiently. Generally, 4-7 top level elements is a nice start. any more than this, and it is too cumbersome when deciding which of these elements is most likely to take me to my goal.
*depth of information - whilst trying to organise the 'width' of your information architecture, such as the number of elements, you must also ensure that no information is buried so deep in your navigational structure that it would ever be worth clicking that far. How deep is too deep? Well, as a guideline, if your user can be sure that after each click, they are getting closer to their goal, then you should be ok. Of course, this can't be 'wild goose chase' closer - it should be closer in a sense of eliminating all unimportant information. For example, a camera site that has every single make and model on the homepage would be messy, and confusing, even if you are only one click away from buying any model. However, one would be happy to locate one's camera with a number of clicks, such as FILM > SLR > CANON > EOS 300v > EOS 300v with 28-90 lens Package. (heh, guess what i bought last week )
*logical information placement - a really tough task, that needs - needs - external user testing. depending on how serious you are about this, you can even survey some users - tell them to find out for you how many different types of dog bones your company sells, and what the most expensive one is, and then see how many 'attempts' it takes them to search through your site for the information. To make your site effective, you must think of the primary purposes a user would have when they get to your site, and ensure these needs are met as quickly as possible. For example - lots of corporate mumbo-jumbo sites have big links to 'about us' and 'our history' - is this what the user is after? more often than not, no. They usually don't care who you are, just what you can give them.
*appropriate naming - very much linked with the above point, giving each information area a name is part of your crucial role. it should be as concise as possible - often a hard task. however, do not be afraid to challenge the status quo - just name whatever sounds right for your site, not whatever most sites have.
*simplicity - related to most, or all of the above sub-points, simplicity is essential. Not only does your interface need to provide the user with the links they need, it should discard of those they don't, so that they have fewer elements to digest and decide upon. Do all users really care when your company was founded? yes? then put a short paragraph on the homepage. No? then keep it off.

-----------------------------------------------------------

well, that about covers it.

except, of course, for one major factor:

PURPOSE.
A website can only use its creativity, consistency and clarity effectively when it is all directed towards a specific purpose. Before designing your site, before collecting your information, before determining your navigational structure, before all else - determine what the purpose of your site is.

In clear terms.
In actual words.
Established and approved by all key stakeholders.

Once you have this specific purpose, you align all elements of your site design to this purpose. A creative design for your site is only effective if it's style communicates the key purpose of your site. A coherent navigational structure is only useful if it directs users to areas of your site that will then enable them to achieve what you intended them to do.

-----------------------------------------------------------

ok, now that totally covers it from my perspective.

feel free to add to or challenge any of my opinions.

This is a great thread! I think it should be added to the FAQ at some point, or added onto a FAQ that deals with this topic.

Shame on you all!

A whole thread about interfaces and now one mention of the word metaphore (although slime did hint at it).

Interface design is a huge topic and it branches out into several other topics. Slime hit the nail on the head if your going for "useability" but you can gear interfaces to other means. I was reading an article about "interaction design" a while back, I think I bookmarked it... Yup, here it is: http://www.nathan.com/thoughts/unified/

Lots of really good stuff there. It's not really about web site interfaces but it'll get you thinking about how an interface works, how the information ties into it and how the interactive processes of the user might unfold. He also wrote an article about websites here: http://www.nathan.com/thoughts/recipe/index.html But I wasn't quite as thrilled by that one.

The construction of Experience is also a good read if this kind of thing tickles your fancy: http://www.interlog.com/%7Edrokeby/experience.html

One of my lectruers also pointed me towards this resource last year, it's old content now but the concepts it puts forth as to why you use specific elements of the OS are still valid today: http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/mac/HIGOS8Guide/thig-2.html

While I'm dreadging up old links, Neal Stephenson might not be everyones favourite bedside table novelist but this one really is a must read. I swear, you'll never look at a computer the same way after this book: http://www.cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html



[This message has been edited by Dracusis (edited 03-13-2003).]

Dracusis: You said:

quote:

---

Shame on you all!

A whole thread about interfaces and now one mention of the word metaphore (although slime did hint at it).

---

I think if you check I did <jedi_mindtrick>you must have overlooked it when you read this thread</jedi_mindtrick>.

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

sorry drac.

i never mentioned "metaphore".

however, i did say this:

quote:

---

creativity. there needs to be something a little 'fun' about your interface. something that invites interaction, that makes the experience enjoyable. something as simple as a motif, or METAPHOR on the website can be great for this. (and zeldman touches on this)

---

so yeah. the only real reason i didn't mention "metaphore" is because it isn't actually a word.





edit: but don't worry, i won't get all pedantic about spelling - otherwise, i would be challenging your spelling of "lecturers", "dredging" and "usability".


[This message has been edited by reitsma (edited 03-14-2003).]

I am thrilled that I've launched a topic that interests some of my favorite people around here. This is great for me. Thanks for so many responses. In the sense of Quality over quantity, this is still a wealth of information. I'm getting ready for spring break in a week, and I will DEFINATELY use this as a vital resourse for my website's new layout and interface. I second your suggestion Nethermind. This is good stuff. See if we can get The Doc to say a word or two.

Thanks again

Shine and shine. :: [Cell=992] :: [See my team's 30 second animation!! ]

Don't hold your breath bmud... he's extremly busy.

"Freedom of speech is by no means freedom to insult others" from the Razorart goodbye letter.

Design your site based on a TV-remote and most of the worlds population will be able to use it =)

Oops. My bad. I did skim the thread but I obviously missed those bits and some... eh. As for the spelling... Sorry to dissapiont, but I like most people, I'm not perfect. :P