Introduction
Welcome to Design View #61.
Let me set the scene: Google has a BIG idea and they're putting
together a web dream team to make it happen. It'll be headed up by the Rasmussen
boys of Google Maps fame.
And now they want YOU to join the Scooby
gang.
That was exactly the scenario presented to SitePoint author and
all-round web superhero Cameron Adams last year. Reminds me of an
ubergeeky The
Italian Job recast in Sydney.
This month I had a chance to ask Cam what life's like as a "G
Man", and some hints on what he has cooking for us at this year's
Web Directions South conference.
Speaking of which, Design View
readers can win a ticket to Web Directions South
by taking a short
quiz -- you'll need to make your own way to Sydney, but for
30 seconds of your time to potentially save $995, it's certainly an
attractive proposition, wherever you're based.
Finally, we'll take a quick peek at Aviary's new visual markup tool: Falcon.
Enjoy.
Alex Walker Editor SitePoint Design
View

Are you a designer seeking amazing
layouts and looking to put some extra money in
your pocket? - Over 1000-plus designs for ONLY
$49.
- The best selection of Web, Flash,
Flash-enabled, Newsletter, and Logo templates on the
Web.
- Complete web sites (HTML or Flash) for only
$29 extra.
- A FREE year of dedicated server
hosting with a platinum membership.
To start making
professional designs and earning extra money, click
here!
Summary
Cameron Adams Rides the Wild Wave
If you're yet to be up to speed on
Google's next big thing -- Wave --
let me give you the elevator pitch:
We all know about protocols like HTTP, email, and instant messaging.
Google have now developed a brand new protocol called Wave -- and the
applications that power it -- which aims to weave a bunch of those
protocols into a new, coherent whole.
In practical terms, this puts IM inside your email, Twitter inside your
IM, maps inside your Twitter, and much more. It's hard to overstate the
ambition and scope of this project, but if you want to gain a clearer
picture, I recommend listening to the full presentation Lars gave in late
May.
Recently, I had a chat to Cameron about his life as a "G Man"
and some of the ground he'll be covering in his Web Directions South talk in
October.
SitePoint: Hey Cam, thanks for giving us a little
of your time.
Google Wave certainly made a big splash (excuse the pun -- I'm sure
others have done it too!) at Google I/O in May, and web-types are pretty
excited about the prospects of reinventing online communication. How do
you go about defining interfaces for a form of communication that's yet to
exist?
Cameron Adams: Sure, Wave in its exact
form didn't exist yet (at that stage), but that doesn't mean it hasn't
been influenced by prior technology. There are quite a few different
communication models that map fairly well to Wave -- forums, wikis, chat,
document editing, email -- so our starting point was to look at all of
these models and figure out which parts would fit well into Wave's
structure.
The hardest part has been reconciling differences
that seem to be diametrically opposed.
For example, the immediacy of chat versus the more lengthy, structured
nature of document editing -- how do you submit content after you've
finished typing? The enter key? You would in chat, but people use the
enter key in documents for line breaks.
Our solution was to appropriate shift-enter to submit, which works quite
well (you can tell it does when you start using it everywhere else) but
raises learnability issues.
That's the other main challenge --
knowing when to stick with convention and knowing when to forge ahead with
a unique solution. Sometimes you get it right, sometimes you don't. That's
what testing is for!
SP: Yes, I guess it's really easy to forget how
many different uses the enter key has across different applications.
Google is obviously renowned for its testing. How did Wave's
user-testing program work? Are new functions and features user-tested as
part of the process of implementing them? Or is it more useful to
user-test the application as a whole at the end of each development
phase?
CA: We're still very much in the midst of testing. It's
still a while away before we get this thing into the hands of consumers, so
in between now and then we'll be fine-tuning things frantically.
There are two types of testing that we undertake with the product, and
they're at very different levels.
For testing stuff hot off the
presses, we basically walk around the office with a few prototypes, tackle
people to the ground, and force them to use the application. This
could either be in the form of static mockups or sketches, coupled with
questions like: What do you think will happen if you click this? Or, the
process that I find most valuable for an application like this is to
create a simplified prototype of the behavior that we're thinking of and
let people have a go on at it.
It's quite different to have an image that requires people to use their
imagination than it is to present them with what the engineers will build
after two months. So, I have a bunch of different interactive prototypes
that focus on one area each -- scrolling, typing, inserting, dragging, and
so on. And we'll tune these until we like what we have and users get the
optimal experience. Then we hand it off to the engineers to build it
properly.
The second set of testing that we perform is more
longitudinal -- it tracks people's usage of the product across a series of
weeks and months. This allows us to see which concepts are best
communicated to users, whether people grow used to some of the
application's unique interactions after a while, and just the general
usefulness of the product in day-to-day life. For the moment this is all
done with internal participants, and at a place as big as Google we have
no shortage of subjects.
SP: Wave is a project of enormous scope. I suspect
many techy people are really excited about it, but may have difficulty
defining the benefits to their managers and cheque-signers.
Do
you try to design it with simple pathways in and easy wins for early adopters? Or do you just
create the tools and let people decide how and where they'll use it?
CA: We think that the product itself has easy wins for
early adopters, so you can gain benefits out of Google Wave whether you
use every feature or just one of them. But from a design perspective we've
also tried to balance carefully between first-user experience and
creating a more feature-rich product for people to explore ...
perhaps swaying every now and then in the direction of features.
Letting people understand the product and come to grips with it the
first time they use it is definitely a strong priority, and probably
something we haven't quite finished yet.
I always advocate for simplicity over complexity (which is hard in a
company of engineers!), but we also acknowledge that the interface is only
one part of the puzzle for first-time users.
So we're also focusing on ways to engage people the first time they log
in, ways to keep them motivated as they use the product, and also a lot on
the messaging of the product outside of the application -- creating
marketing materials that not only interest people in Google Wave but also
inform them of how it can be used. I think the iPhone has done a masterful
job of this.
SP: Obviously Google has an almost unfathomably
broad cross section of users. Who did the Wave team collectively have in
your mind when designing for a user-base like that? Is it just lowest
common denominator or does Google have a set of user personas that they
use, or do you just try to make it work for Lars and Jens' mum?
CA: Not only their mum but also their extended
family.
Much like a lot of stuff at Google, Google Wave is
mostly written to scratch our own itch. Are we missing something that we
need? Are we building something that we don't need? In that sense, we aim
for a fairly decent level of technical competency, as they are the early
adopters. But we aim for the basics of the interface to be simple enough
for less competent users to pick up fairly easily.
I know that
other projects within Google have used personas very heavily in order to
define the targets of their application. However, for various reasons we
haven't adopted them on our team, despite the valiant attempts of our user
researcher, Aaron Cheang.
At a broad level, though, we build for
more consumer-oriented uses of the product. Enterprise is a lot harder to
get into due to the inertia of legacy systems, so that's something that we
like to tackle after consumer adoption has made a product a success.
Having said that though, there's been an astounding amount of interest
in Google Wave from the enterprise sector and we have a strong enterprise
story in the wings, so that might affect what happens right after our
consumer release.
SP: At the moment a lot of the standard
communication formats -- email, IM, and Twitter -- are generally widely
accessible. Does integrating them into a single, non-linear application
potentially introduce accessibility issues?
CA: I don't think there are any inherent accessibility
issues with integrating different forms of communication into a single
product. There are definitely challenges in having them work together in a
cross-format way (how do you handle an email user on a live chat?) but
that's more about different services working together rather than
accessibility.
I think one of the great things about Google
Wave is that the project isn't just about our client -- it's also about
the APIs and the protocol itself.
We definitely know that we
can't meet the needs of every user on the planet, so just like Twitter I
can envision a world where there's dozens of different Wave clients that
cater to a user's specific needs -- simple, complex, live, static,
aggregating, mobile, big, small, web, desktop. Take your pick and build it
how you see it.
SP: Wave integrates with
Twitter really nicely but refers to these events as "Twaves."
Did you make a stand against the adoption of this term?
CA: I would have made a stand if I'd known about it!
The extension/API side of things is probably Wave's equivalent of the
wild west. Developers go off and build things, and I see them when they're
demoed. So, the interface could be a bit ... unpolished, as is the
nomenclature.
There are great advantages to doing it this way
-- someone with a bit of programming knowledge can quickly build an idea
and see if it works, without having to go through hoops to get an
interface done. Then, if it turns out to be useful we can then start
refining the experience.
The downside is that if you build it, you get to name it!
SP: Ah, and in a piece of segueing genius, I'm led
to believe that's the kind of topic you'll be talking about in your WD09
talk?
CA: Exactly. At Web Directions I'll be talking about
innovation: how it can work inside a large company, how we approached it,
how to design (with it in mind), and (more) broadly about designing for
the next generation of web applications.
SP: Okay Cam, thanks for spending some time with
us, and we look forward to catching up with you in Sydney in
October.
CA: Cheers Alex.
Falcon Grabs Screens with Talon
Aviary have expanded their
offering of nifty AIR-powered, bird-themed graphics tools with the recent
release of Falcon -- a simple
visual markup tool.
So what exactly IS a visual markup tool?
Falcon is basically just a really neat tool for selecting, cropping, and
marking up screen content. Bloggers, writers, and general forum junkies
take note!
Like Aviary's other tools, Falcon is free and runs live in
your browser via the magic of Adobe AIR. However, the bit that makes
Falcon TRULY useful is its integration with Firefox via the Talon Firefox
Extension.
So, here's the 30-second tour:
1) After installing Talon, you'll find a new button on your Firefox
toolbar, and a new right-click/CTRL-click option on your mouse. Activate
this control and you'll be able choose between capturing areas, whole
pages, or the entire application window.
2) Once captured, your screen image is auto-loaded into the Falcon
application inside your browser, complete with a small but useful suite of
editing tools.
3) The toolbox allows you to add attractive, stretchable arrows, lines,
squares, and circles with a simple drag and drop. As these are vectors,
they remain fully editable at all times.
4) The Text tool lets you annotate your image. I must admit, I found the
lack of text-size controls a little disconcerting at first. However, once
you've become accustomed to the idea of using the scaling tool to control
the size of ALL elements, -- even the text -- it's all good.
5) When you're happy with your image, you can then choose from two
options: save to desktop or create an account with Aviary. The latter
allows you to upload the image directly to their image hosting servers.
Though I confess I'm partly loath to add yet another image hosting
service to my list, it's hard to beat the sheer click-and-forget joy of
the Falcon/Talon system. The transfer process is completely invisible, and
it also autogenerates ready-to-eat markup for Twitter, BBcode, Facebook,
and WordPress. Slick stuff.
I've been using Falcon for a couple of weeks now and it has quickly
become a fave. True, the editing tools are relatively modest but are good
enough to make your point in 95% of situations. In the other 5% of cases,
jumping out to more sophisticated tools (including Aviary's own Phoenix editor) is simple
enough when required.
Most importantly, Falcon is superfast -- even on modest systems -- and
clean, and positions itself exactly where you need it,
when you need it.
Check it out and let me know what you think.
 - Design amazing web interfaces
from scratch.
- Master key web interface design
principles.
- Create beautiful, yet functional, web
sites.
- Unleash your own artistic talents.
That's all for this issue -- thanks for reading! I'll see you in a few
weeks.
Alex Walker design@sitepoint.com Editor,
SitePoint Design View
|