A promising post on the IE Blog hints at some of the features (or “fixes,” depending on your point of view) to expect in IE7. It looks like some of the CSS inconsistencies are going to be addressed, along with PNG alpha transparency support. Nice.
Peter Merholz : User Experience is a Quality, Not A Discipline
Posted by Richard Ziade on April 21, 2005, 03:20PMDave Shea gives his thoughts on Microsoft's XAML. Shea's a web standards guy and he's seeing XAML as a potential step back. I agree on some points here. The comment thread is interesting as well.
My thoughts: for better or worse, XAML is part of Microsoft's grand plan. We can't ignore the momentum they can generate with a new operating system (e.g. Dell is not going to pass on the next OS because they think XAML is lame). That said, Microsoft is notorious for caking on unnecessary layers of complexity just to cover everything under the sun. You have to assume that this will add up to a barrier of entry for many. In any case, love it or hate it, it can't be ignored.
Posted by Richard Ziade on April 19, 2005, 09:04AMWebstandards.org gives its take on the acquisition, focusing on the impact of RIA’s. PDF + SWF = document delivery + application delivery. Interesting.
The Blogosphere (man I hate that term) has been bursting with news of the Macromedia acquisition by Adobe. Some interesting theories have been raised about the rationale behind the acquisition – mostly revolving around consolidating multimedia tools around Flash.
In my opinion, I think this is less about end-users and more about the Enterprise. The innovations that are happening on the web are not fueled by breakthroughs in visual design, but rather the delivery of information and application interfaces. From Silicon.com:
From Adobe's perspective, the acquisition of Macromedia's tools for authoring multimedia content also bolsters its standing in the business market. The combined company can offer a fuller suite of cross-platform products for building document-oriented applications and 'rich media' web applications. It can also offer Macromedia's collaboration products.
"The enterprise market is absolutely what this is about," said Robert Markham, principal analyst at Forrester Research. "It's really broadening Adobe's capability to compete in the enterprise as opposed to having off-the-shelf packages."
The audience for Adobe and Macromedia's software consists of so-called creative professionals, such as web designers and graphics artists. But the companies are also seeking to expand their business with corporate technology departments.
As to whether the merger ends up being a big’ol mess as a result of egos and territorial thinking, that’s anyone’s guess. Unfortunately, there’s plenty of opportunity to lose focus. Macromedia had a great cohesive story across their products. Only time will tell if Adobe helps realize it, or dilutes it.
Posted by Richard Ziade on April 17, 2005, 06:51PMIt’s always interesting to see how and when the mainstream media chimes in on emerging technology trends. The New York Times (everyone’s favorite tabloid) just put out an article called An Update On Stuff That’s Cool. It mostly showcases Google Maps (satellite imagery and all). There’s some other stuff in there, but I found this paragraph particularly telling:
The real importance of Google's map and satellite program, however, is not its impressive exterior but the novel technology, known as Ajax, that lies beneath. About that, and its implications for Google and other companies, there will be more to say in a future column.
Well, looks like Ajax – a harbinger of RIA’s, is finally penetrating the masses (if this article is any indication). Interesting.
Posted by Richard Ziade on April 13, 2005, 08:40AMTed at PowerSDK.com fiddled around with Avalon (Microsoft's graphics engine for Longhorn) and concluded that it is garbage.
His biggest gripe is the face that it requires 250MB of libraries to even run. Not exactly lightweght. Take it all with a grain of salt. Based on his prior postings, he's somewhat of a Flashophile (though his points are still valid regardless).
Posted by Richard Ziade on April 12, 2005, 11:10AMSince Google Maps debuted, the attention and praise Google has achieved is impressive. The praise is not unwarranted. Maps is a very impressive web application. It makes Yahoo! and Mapquest look like…web sites.
And so, discussions have bounced around the Internet about why Maps is so darn good. The general sentiment is that it’s so easy to use. Kottke put it best. Leaps in user experience are, in fact, innovation. By bridging the chasm between machines and people, people react to it – almost emotionally at times. There’s a sense of connectedness to the product that goes beyond just basic use.
Under the hood, Maps is using some very impressive technology. It’s safe to say that only a handful of companies can reproduce what Google has done with Maps. I would even argue that the overall usability with Google Maps isn’t that great. I can’t print out directions. The Back button has gone to hell. There are other issues as well. Once I got past the “ooh ahh” phase of playing around with it, I went back to Yahoo! for driving directions.
Nevertheless, people are very impressed. Simply put, no other web mapping site feels this way. It is responsive and easy to digest. And so, perception shifts. Google’s brand is enhanced. Regardless of whether Mapquest or Yahoo! more accurately nail the use cases that drive this kind of software, the damage is done. This merging of whiz-bang technology (zooming and dragging maps, satellite imagery, etc.) and decent usability results in a benefit to Google that goes beyond just making users happy. You can’t underestimate the impact a “toy” like this has on the perception of the Google brand.
And so, for interface designers, as well as the shops that are focused on creating richer interfaces, you can thank Google for another bullet on your brochures: enhance your brand perception with better user experiences.
Good stuff.
Posted by Richard Ziade on April 11, 2005, 01:11PMBaekdal.com has taken a good first stab at laying down usability guidelines for Ajax use.
There are obviously no obvious hard and fast rules as to when to use (or not use) Ajax, but this is a good start. My favorite is the last recommendation: don’t overuse it.
Ajax is apparently seeping into various content management system. CMSWatch has an excellent summary of the changes that are happening, via a neat little Flash film.
Yahoo! has wired up its shopping.yahoo service to RSS. Good stuff.
Posted by Richard Ziade on April 9, 2005, 10:43AMFlashant.org has a good summary of RIA development tools out there (with an emphasis on Flash-based tools). They make some good points about what developers and designers need to brush up on to become valuable in this space.
Paul Rademacher soldered together the Google Maps and Craig’s List web services to create a map-based application of real estate for rent/sale.
An awesome example of what’s possible with some creative, out-of-the-box thinking. I bet this didn’t take more than a few days to whip together. Very useful and very impressive.
Posted by Richard Ziade on April 7, 2005, 09:04AMAt the risk of posting something trivial, I’ve been thinking about two habits I’ve acquired when writing this blog and whether they’re right or wrong (or not even worth discussing).
First, anyone who reads basement.org knows that all links open new browser windows - an arguably obnoxious proposition. I do this because if a reader is reading a post, the clicking of a link should not disrupt the flow.
Then again, most savvy users know to hold down the SHIFT key to open in a new window (CTRL to open a tab in Firefox). So…maybe forcing new windows is obnoxious (or just short of). I don’t know. In any respect, I’m going to stop doing it.
The second issue is the notable lack of via references to articles I point to. I often have little to say in a post other than “go here” followed by a link. Admittedly, I often find these wonderful tidbits on the Web through posts on other blogs. Waxy, for example, always provides a via link, pointing to the source. Kottke, on the other hand, doesn’t.
And so, on this particular issue, I will not be pointing to the source because (a) I’m not an academic journal (b) it’s more work and (c) if the source doesn’t add anything to what I’ve already said, then there’s no need. In the spirit of transparency and openness, you can find my blogroll here.
Now I can sleep better at night.
Posted by Richard Ziade on April 6, 2005, 01:49PMhttp://www.webpronews.com/news/webdevelopmentnews/wpn-42-20050406WhyGoogleisSyndicationShy.html
Anyone who tells you RSS/feed syndication is just a trend among techies need only read over this bit of news: Feedburner, a feed enhancement service, has just raised $7 million in a second round of funding…and they’re not even a blogging service or aggregator play.
The Ajax craziness is starting to ramp up (“craziness” being an entirely relative term). It’s interesting to see how some makeshift “branding” of a loosely tied set of technologies can really help a particular approach gain momentum.
Fiftyfoureleven gives some thoughts on the trend.
Posted by Richard Ziade on April 2, 2005, 03:01PM
There’s been some buzz of late about how Yahoo! is proving to be more innovative and intelligent about its offerings than…gasp…Google.
Ben Hammersly sums it up nicely for the Guardian UK.