Here’s what the process looked like to install a SYNC system update:

• Download the update to a USB dive on a computer
  This was relatively simple enough, with clear step-by step instructions and a visual indicator on the website showing installation progress.  The indicator helped me know how long it would take to complete the process and a know when it was complete.

• Receive instructions on how to install the update in your car 
  Here’s where it starts getting messy.  A link with full instructions is provided, along with the following statement:

“Follow your printed out instructions exactly with your vehicle running. Approximately 60 seconds after you begin the installation, you will hear an “Installation Complete” message. DO NOT REMOVE your USB drive or turn off your vehicle. You must wait an additional 4-18 minutes until you hear a second “Installation Complete” message before you can remove your USB drive.”

Ok, so, even though it will give me a message saying it’s complete, it’s really not, and if I didn’t read this little note about the process, it makes it sound like I could cause some form of irreversible damage. Great.

• Install the update in the car
  Beginning the installation is relatively straight forward, and the system displays an “Installing application…” message on the screen during the initial portion of the install.  However, as warned above, upon completion the SYNC voice says “Installation complete. The system will now reboot. Please wait a few moments before using the system.”  During this reboot process, there’s no visual indicator of what’s happening. The system switches back to playing the radio, and you’re stuck wondering how long you have to wait until the process is actually complete.  Since the message told me to wait before using “the system” I wasn’t sure if I could do anything at all, so I just sat there hoping something would happen. The system also never tells you what to expect when the process completes, so you’re left hanging with no idea what’s going on.After about 5 minutes, the voice came back and said “Installation complete” a second time, which is confusing since the system already told me the install completed, I was just waiting for it to finish rebooting.  A “Reboot completed. You may now unplug the USB drive and insert your media device” type message would be much clearer.  I was left wondering if the process was really done, and hesitant to do anything.
• Plug in your media device
  After installing the update,  I plugged my iPod into the USB port and tried initiating a voice command. The system prompts me to “say a command”, but after I asked it to play a song, the SYNC voice responded by telling me the system was still indexing the music on my device, and I had to wait until that process was completed.  However, again, there’s no indicator of how long this process takes.  The only way to check if it’s done is to keep trying voice commands.  After indexing is complete, the system also has to “build voice commands” before it can recognize your voice.  Since these two actions have to happen every time you update the music on your device, some sort of visual indicator of their progress would reduce user frustration and errors in trying to use the system before it is ready.

Firstly, in a world that’s going wireless, why are we still using USB drives? That’s like using a floppy. The system should be able to automatically update over-the-air, or at the very least wirelessly using a home network (provided the vehicle is parked within range of a wireless router).

Secondly, Microsoft should be familiar with the user experience having been building operating systems for the past twenty years. User feedback isn’t one of those things that should be overlooked. And any competent user experience designer should use feedback systems by default, not even having to think once.

Finally, methods of providing user feedback are probably some of the most important pieces of a system or interface. They help guide us through the system, letting us know what we did right and what we did wrong, so we can adjust our mental models as needed. Without them, our assumptions of how a system works could be all over the map, wasting time and causing frustration.

“Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do…”

“Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life. Don’t be trapped by dogma — which is living with the results of other people’s thinking. Don’t let the noise of others’ opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.”

“Stay hungry. Stay foolish.”

~ Steve Jobs 1955 – 2011

Thank you, Steve Jobs.

Part of designing a successful user experience is to eliminate confusion and cater to the user’s needs. Some users have vision disabilities and have difficulty reading text with low contrast. Links that are styled too similarly to the body copy won’t be seen and the site loses usefulness and becomes less usable. The web is, after all, a network of hyperlinks. Underlining links on over, or having them underlined all of the time, makes it immediately clear for everyone what is a link and what is not. It’s courteous and users will appreciate it.

This is not to say that I recommend keeping blue, underlined links all of the time, rather I’m suggesting that links be styled so that they’re clearly links, whether you use an underline or not. Keep in mind that some users can’t see certain colors so color shifting isn’t always the best approach.

What’s the best approach in my opinion? Links that are clearly styled differently from the body copy that underline on hover. This will leave no question to the user as to what is a link and what is not, and will cater to those with vision impairments. The way a site works should always take precedence over the way a site looks. The web is, after all, a useful and usable tool.

Option 1: Hover Menu
Basically, there are two ways to approach the drop-down menu: with either a hover or a click to activate the menu. From a design and convenience standpoint, a hover menu is better.

Option 2: Clickable Menu
On the other hand, many will argue that a clickable menu is better because it is much more usable. Reason? Because of the way a hover menu is constructed, the user has to have the pointer over the menu at all times. If the user loses focus of the hover menu, it closes. Therefore, it is better to go with a drop-down menu that is activated by clicking a button, then deactivated by clicking the button once more

Based on the above, we can either have convenient or usable. Well, if I have to choose one, I’d obviously go with usable. However, aren’t convenience and usable the same thing? I mean, logically if something is convenient then it’s usable too, right?

Personally, I find drop-down menus that activate on hover annoying. I tend to “read” with my mouse and if I happen to roll over something and a menu appears it might interrupt my flow. I like to be in control when I’m browsing. If I want to expand a menu, I’ll choose how and when. That being said, hover-activated drop-down menus are not convenient to me.

So that would make both of these options personal preference for the user. Some people might prefer hover-activated drop-downs, others might prefer to click them open. Since there are no real standards on this scenario, what’s the best solution? I think I may know.

To account for users like myself who don’t like the spastic opening of drop-downs on over (usually on accident, but still) developers should implement the jQuery hoverIntent, which does a pretty good job of guessing if the hover was intentional or not. If the user hovers over the navigation item for a given number of milliseconds, the menu will expand, otherwise the mouse hover will be ignored.

Additionally, by adding the option to click open the menu would make for the perfect compromise to the the hover versus click drop-down problem.

Before Twitter, Facebook was kind of going in this direction. Then Twitter came out and Facebook took the whole status update thing and ran with it because it was popular. It’s nice to see Facebook getting back on track though. However…

I do feel it’s a bit cluttered. There are pictures everywhere which annoys me. There’s no longer a single attention-grabbing thing to see when I first view a profile. Instead, there’s a main profile picture, a row of pictures under the intro, a column of pictures of friends on the left, and a few pictures in a column on the right for “People you may know”. Then the ads, if you don’t have them blocked. I like the thought and direction, but it’s just way too busy now and the stuff about me almost becomes secondary, at least visually.

How do you guys feel about it? Do you feel that having a brief overview of who you are at the very top is more important than your latest status update?

The early 90s presented us with one of the first “modern” browsers: Mosaic. It was extremely mundane, but it allowed everyday users like us to access and experience the web without all the technical expertise that it previously required. As technology evolved over the next decade-and-a-half, both computer and connectivity speeds increased. The results? Websites started growing from simple text-based pages to more presentable layouts with colors and images (i.e. AOL member pages and Geocities sites).

As with most things, our experience and knowledge increased proportionately as we spent more and more time online. The unfamiliar became familiar and the unknown became known. As we grew more comfortable with the internet, web designers and development teams began to push the boundaries and started to create more engaging and visually stunning websites.

With the introduction of anything new, the addition of more visual websites set back user experience (UX) until web users gained more familiarity. This was okay back when the internet was new, but it wasn’t so much useful as it was “neat” and “interesting” and “cool.”

Having adapted to the new methods and ideas, we eventually regained our footing and created more visually-infused sites. However, the more familiar and comfortable we get, the less likely we are to accept a new method or change. We’re stubborn creatures, after all.

In the past decade or so, the internet has become less of a playground and more of a tool. We pay bills online, we look for babysitters, jobs, vehicles, and stuff to buy through various sites. Time is of the essence and the quicker we can accomplish our tasks, the more time we all have to do other things (i.e. spending time with our family, playing Call of Duty).

In theory, it’s always great to push the boundaries of technology – after all, that’s how things evolve. But web designers, developers, agencies and information architects alike should be careful how far they push these boundaries and how much they change. Users are sensitive and impatient creatures by nature and we don’t like to wait too long. We also certainly don’t like to view a site design that doesn’t work with how we think it should (i.e. navigation bars situated at the bottom of a page have proven to be less user friendly).

In other words, the line in that second chart (above) might not swing back into the positive.

Ultimately, user experience isn’t the only visual aspect a user sees when visiting a site. It’s also the emotional and mental experience of browsing through the page. A “cool” looking website may end up being frustrating to navigate or a really simple website might be exceedingly easy to use, but could provide too few of sentences to be worth visiting. Balance must be sought.

However, finding balance isn’t as easy as it seems and it shouldn’t be taken lightly. Whether you’re a designer, developer or information architect, we should all strive for a balanced user experience – one that is exciting, satisfying, time-saving and intuitive.

Above all, user experience is key in building websites that make the web an easier place to browse.

Think for a moment about your favorite brands. What makes them your favorites? It probably isn’t the way the brand looks. No. How the brand works however, is another story. It’s the way products work, the way we’re left feeling after using the product (or website), that makes the brand memorable and successful.

Have you ever eaten at a little hole-in-the-wall restaurant and come out wondering why it wasn’t more well-known because the food was incredible? The name of the restaurant, or the brand, isn’t what’s going to keep you coming back or recommending it to others. It’s the experience you had while there.

Got a favorite toothpaste? Why? Is it because the logo is really well done? Or is it because it leaves your teeth feeling clean and your breath fresh?

What about a favorite antiperspirant/deodorant? How well it works – your experience with it – makes it your favorite.

Maybe you’re like me and have a favorite pen? While I love the simple “PILOT” logo, it’s the way the pen writes that keeps me buying them.

If you do a lot of typing, maybe you’ve got a favorite brand of keyboard/mouse hardware? I like Logitech because the keys have that perfect responsiveness and the mouse clicks are solid. Overall I feel that Logitech hardware is more durable too. But I have no idea what their logo is. All I know is the name and my experience with it.

You see, the way a brand looks doesn’t matter. Sure, it’s always nice to have a pleasant looking brand (and website) but what’s more important is the user experience behind it. It’s sad when the user experience gets the back seat. The user experience is what makes brands successful. Without the user experience the brand is nothing more than a design. It’s meaningless and pointless. It’s nothing.

The user experience is everything.

Despite all the Flash-like features, I’m all about simplicity. I believe that most people (myself included) use the web as a tool, whether it’s to pay bills or to find certain information. When you simplify what users do online, it almost always boils down to something with an end goal.

My task as an interface designer is to create user interfaces that people can actually use. Having only the user’s end goal, I then try to reverse engineer the design by finding where the user starts. Simply put, how does a user get to where they’re going?

When it comes to user interface design, the simpler the better. Do those drop shadows really help your user achieve their goals? Maybe or maybe not. Do those gradients help or hinder your user from getting around the site? Not likely, but who knows.

My tip is to start designing with either wireframes or grayscale versions of the interface. Use intelligently placed and intuitive “paths-to-actions” that are clear, both visually and contextually. My job as a User Experience (UX) designer is to make my user’s task as simple and enjoyable as possible.

In many cases, it’s smart to evaluate whether gradients, drop shadows, whiz-bangs and other gizmos are needed. This might add extra visual appeal, but if those additional features slows a user down from getting to their goal, then it definitely takes away from the user experience.

Case in point: Google. According to a study released by comScore, 66.8% of the global search market is owned by Google. So why does most of the world use Google? Google’s homepage has nothing more than a search box and a few modest links. Bing, one of Google’s rival search engines, has moved towards a similar direction, albeit with a few more visuals. With their plain white background, minimalist layout and intuitive search functions, it’s easy to see that simplicity is one of the main reasons Google has captured a 58% increase in search query volume over the past year.

Simplicity, it seems, is a winner no matter how you look at it.

In a usability guidebook called Don’t Make Me Think, author Steve Krug focuses on designing for the web with an intuitive, as-little-clicks-as-possible approach. Simply put, the more time it takes to get to content, the less time a user will want to spend on your site.

With this in mind, it’s always good to remember that the first rule of usability is: “Don’t make me think.”

The second rule? “Please. Don’t make me think.”

Sure, there are a lot of in-depth studies about web usability and designing for a better user experience. In a growing genre of usability advice, case studies, books, reports, and presentations, one common theme is apparent: users shouldn’t strain their cognitive muscles to figure things out.

It’s all about maximizing the efficiency of your website and minimizing effort on the user’s end. Ultimately, it all boils down to how much time it takes for a user to think about the actions they perform online. Some things to consider:

• How many clicks did it take you to get to a specific page?
• Are the major sections of the site apparent on the navigation?
• Do you have to “muddle” through content to find specific information?
• How often are you using the back button?
• Can you tell what page you’re on and what the site is called?
• Does the homepage easily convey what the site’s about?

A successfully designed website is one that aligns with your intuition. Small steps like designing with ample white space will amplify calls to action tenfold. Whether it’s buttons, text, navigation, content or Flash animation, all elements of your site should be logically placed where a user can expect to find them. And, most importantly, whatever it is that you design shouldn’t force users to think about how to use it. As Krug notes, websites should be “self-evident, obvious and self-explanatory.”

If all sites were designed using this principle, we’d all be one step closer to a one-click society.

I’d consider myself an advanced web user. I know the ins and outs, the ups and downs and the insides and outsides of how it works. I can plan, prototype, design and develop so I feel I have a fairly well-rounded understanding of the web. I’m also a user. I use sites, navigation, I explore images, make payments, send messages, update content… write blogs… You get the picture. But this mockup opened my eyes to something new. And here’s why: this client, as brilliant as she is, doesn’t have the same technical knowledge of the web. She just knows if something works or not and how easy it is to use or conversely how confusing something is. Her mockup wasn’t done by a professional; it was done by someone with the mind of an innocent child – with a fresh, open, user-focused approach. And it was refreshing.

We all have instincts and we all listen to them on some level. When it comes to the web and usability, it’s our instinct that is usually the thing we should listen to. In this case, my client sent me a mockup of a site based solely on her instincts of where things should be. While it was far from perfect, it was interesting to see how she was thinking. She placed buttons where she thought they should be based on how she would use the application. She placed the navigation where she thought it would be most beneficial to her. And so on.

I believe that as one who practices best usability practices, it’s good to cater not only to our trained, experienced and honed instincts, we should also consider and cater to the instincts of our users. The innocent, child-like approach they take just might surprise you.