November 16, 2011 – 12:33 pm
There was a post this morning by Dave Winer regarding the google results on an iPad. He thinks it’s bad design because Google changes the results layout, optimizing for tablet and providing less content.
His thoughts here: Google search on iPad is bad design.
While some of the points he makes are valid, I have to disagree with the closing statement.
Designers really need to hear the following, loud and clear: The iPad browser is fully capable. It doesn’t need you to treat it differently. You’re fighting with users when you get fancy. Just stick with what works on the desktop. And if you must screw around, then make the opt-out obvious and painless.
The iPad browser is fantastic, it works well, often better than my desktop browser. I agree that changing content often doesn’t make sense in an iPad browser, but this isn’t one of those cases.
Look at the above comparison. I get Mr. Winer’s point about the whitespace, it could be reduced to get an extra result on the page. What doesn’t work though, is the way a tablet screen is intended to be used, tapping without worrying about what else you’ll hit. On the tablet optimized version, each link is clearly on it’s own, no ambiguity about what will be tapped. Can you zoom in on the default results and get a larger hit state? Of course, but you’re adding another step to the interaction. Zooming isn’t a great experience to be default, it’s a step around sites that haven’t been designed for tablet or touch.
Besides the tapping, I actually prefer the secondary functions tucked away, making a more clear layout with the results the most important part of the page. This is a return to the simplicity that made Google famous, getting to the point quickly.
October 28, 2011 – 10:30 am
This house is so beautiful, it makes me question city-living. I particularly love that wood panel bar.
Mid-Century Modern By BassamFellows | Design Milk.
October 27, 2011 – 10:55 am
DESIGN ARCHIVE – BLOG: too hard to fine transmitted? Design changes together iOS 5.
The attention to detail is what I’ve always loved about iOS. I think my favorite tiny touch is changing the shadows from black to gray.
October 27, 2011 – 10:07 am
Nest | The Learning Thermostat
I’m certainly not the only person to talk about Nest this week, so I won’t try to dig too deep into it. I just wanted to note it, and comment on how nice it is to see design coming to the forefront of those hidden pieces of tech. Thermostats have been incredibly difficult to use ever since they became digital, it’s nice to step back a bit to an old style without a ton of buttons.
October 23, 2011 – 7:38 pm
It’s been some time now that we’ve been trying to get QR codes working as a marketing or user experience conduit, and it’s still just not working. For the majority of the smartphone-using public, QR codes are just not an option. They don’t know what a QR code is, they don’t know what to do with a code when they see it, or they don’t have an app installed. It’s easier and more efficient to just put a url on a poster now, than to try a QR code.
Some of the most misguided attempts have been QR codes on billboards by highways, or on moving buses. It seems like there wasn’t even any thought put into the usability of those codes.
This isn’t just another blog post complaining about their use though, I just want to make a quick point about where they are still valuable: where the general public doesn’t have to touch them.
Think in-app airline ticketing, a quick scan of the phone as you board. Mobile coupons, no more clipping paper. Any time someone needs to convey information from device to a store we can still use QR codes, and it still makes sense, and it can still make the end-user’s life easier. To state it more simply, never make your user have to interact with a QR code.
Let’s not make QR codes all bad, let’s remember that technology needs to be used appropriately.
