Clients are funny

25 Aug 2008 - 2:27pm
6 years ago
26 replies
864 reads
Marty DeAngelo
2007

Just thought I would pass along this little treat.

I got an email about an hour ago telling me that our client was
concerned that the video player on one of our projects pages had
controls that were 'below the fold', and the client was concerned it
would cause user experience problems. I asked which page and went to
check it out. Looking at the page, I wasn't sure how it could be below
the fold since it sits near the top of the page, but asked for
clarification of the user's screen resolution and browser type.

In the meantime, I tried several different resolutions, different
browsers and browser sizes, toolbars on/off, and couldn't get the video
player to NOT have the controls visible. I sent an email explaining
what I did to our client rep, informing him that because the client
standards are for 1024 x 768 resolution, we had developed to that size,
but that it should work even at 800x600 resolution. I re-iterated my
previous requests and asked if it would be possible to get a screen shot
to see what he was seeing. Well, I just got the screenshot and the
problem was immediately evident, if not anticipated:

They only had their browser window open to about 30% of their screen
real estate.

Needless to say, 30% of an 800x600 resolution DID hide quite a bit of
the page, including the controls for the video player. I could only
respond as nicely as possible that 'maximizing their browser should
solve the problem'.

** SIGH **

Marty DeAngelo
User Experience Lead
D I G I T A S H E A L T H

Comments

25 Aug 2008 - 2:41pm
SemanticWill
2007

:-)

"The Fold" is soooo "old media"

scrolling is the new black.

On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Marty DeAngelo
<mdeangel at digitashealth.com>wrote:

> Just thought I would pass along this little treat.
>
> I got an email about an hour ago telling me that our client was
> concerned that the video player on one of our projects pages had
> controls that were 'below the fold', and the client was concerned it
> would cause user experience problems. I asked which page and went to
> check it out. Looking at the page, I wasn't sure how it could be below
> the fold since it sits near the top of the page, but asked for
> clarification of the user's screen resolution and browser type.
>
> In the meantime, I tried several different resolutions, different
> browsers and browser sizes, toolbars on/off, and couldn't get the video
> player to NOT have the controls visible. I sent an email explaining
> what I did to our client rep, informing him that because the client
> standards are for 1024 x 768 resolution, we had developed to that size,
> but that it should work even at 800x600 resolution. I re-iterated my
> previous requests and asked if it would be possible to get a screen shot
> to see what he was seeing. Well, I just got the screenshot and the
> problem was immediately evident, if not anticipated:
>
> They only had their browser window open to about 30% of their screen
> real estate.
>
> Needless to say, 30% of an 800x600 resolution DID hide quite a bit of
> the page, including the controls for the video player. I could only
> respond as nicely as possible that 'maximizing their browser should
> solve the problem'.
>
> ** SIGH **
>
> Marty DeAngelo
> User Experience Lead
> D I G I T A S H E A L T H
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

--
~ will

"Where you innovate, how you innovate,
and what you innovate are design problems"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will Evans | User Experience Architect
tel: +1.617.281.128 | will at semanticfoundry.com
aim: semanticwill | gtalk: wkevans4
twitter: semanticwill | skype: semanticwill
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

25 Aug 2008 - 3:03pm
Nancy Broden
2005

In my more jaded moments as a consultant I used say that there was
only one user you needed to please: the CEO. I just prayed that s/he
knew how to turn on their computer and what a "browser" was.

On Aug 25, 2008, at 12:27 PM, Marty DeAngelo wrote:

> I got an email about an hour ago telling me that our client was
> concerned that the video player on one of our projects pages had
> controls that were 'below the fold', and the client was concerned it
> would cause user experience problems.

--------------------------------
Nancy Broden
nancy.broden at gmail.com

25 Aug 2008 - 3:09pm
Matt Nish-Lapidus
2007

I used to work with people at an interactive agency who typed
"http://" manually every time they wanted to view a site... :/

Now, working with some public institutions, it's astounding to see how
many people still have old 800x600 (or less) monitors...

On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 4:03 PM, Nancy Broden <nancy.broden at gmail.com> wrote:
> In my more jaded moments as a consultant I used say that there was only one
> user you needed to please: the CEO. I just prayed that s/he knew how to turn
> on their computer and what a "browser" was.
>
> On Aug 25, 2008, at 12:27 PM, Marty DeAngelo wrote:
>
>> I got an email about an hour ago telling me that our client was
>> concerned that the video player on one of our projects pages had
>> controls that were 'below the fold', and the client was concerned it
>> would cause user experience problems.
>
> --------------------------------
> Nancy Broden
> nancy.broden at gmail.com
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

--
Matt Nish-Lapidus
work: matt at bibliocommons.com / www.bibliocommons.com
--
personal: mattnl at gmail.com
twitter: emenel

25 Aug 2008 - 4:22pm
Alex ONeal
2008

I have discovered that "the fold" has different levels of relevance
according to the audience. For example, working for a tech company with an
audience composed primarily of engineers, we discovered that so long as the
information was easily navigable (anchored properly, etc.), users preferred
a long page to multiple pages for tech specs, tutorials, case studies, etc.
But a news site benefits from chunking pages and offering a "print" or
"single page" option for the minority that desire a single page.

Right now I work for a social network in which our user profiling shows
several strong minorities of browser and resolution, so we can be flexible
in design. So long as there is a clue that scrolling down leads to
interesting information or apps for them, we're good :-)

bests,
Alex O'Neal
UX manager

--
The best time to plant a tree is twenty years ago. The next best time is
now.

25 Aug 2008 - 9:28pm
Paul Eisen
2007

Further to Alex's post below and some other comments in this thread, the usability testing I've done also demonstrates very different behavior these days compared to the 1990's, with respect to people whom I would characterize as novice users.

As the risk of repeating the obvious, in the early days, any content below the fold really was at risk of being missed. Most novices could not be counted on to scroll the page.

These days, on the other hand, scrolling seems to be ingrained behavior for anyone with a mouse in their hand. In a web site design I tested last year, for example, the design offered two options for viewing a list of search results: via paging, or in 1 long list. Almost all users - regardless of experience with computers - elected to scroll vertically through the whole list of results, rather than page through the list. And regardless of the option selected, I observed vertical scrolling in practically any page where the user had interest.

Paul Eisen
Principal User Experience Architect
tandemseven

-----Original Message-----

I have discovered that "the fold" has different levels of relevance
according to the audience. For example, working for a tech company with an
audience composed primarily of engineers, we discovered that so long as the
information was easily navigable (anchored properly, etc.), users preferred
a long page to multiple pages for tech specs, tutorials, case studies, etc.
But a news site benefits from chunking pages and offering a "print" or
"single page" option for the minority that desire a single page.

Right now I work for a social network in which our user profiling shows
several strong minorities of browser and resolution, so we can be flexible
in design. So long as there is a clue that scrolling down leads to
interesting information or apps for them, we're good :-)

bests,
Alex O'Neal
UX manager

25 Aug 2008 - 10:28pm
Chan FoongYeen
2008

Probably a good idea to add script such as "auto maximize browser window to
certain size" when it is link and open up the page :)

cheers,
Donny

26 Aug 2008 - 10:56am
Marty DeAngelo
2007

I wish I could share the screenshot but there's too much proprietary
info on it. I understand that not everyone has their browser maximized,
but 30% of a 800x600 screen (when their own standards are 1024x768) was
what I got a chuckle out of. I doubt that many websites could be usable
in a 240 x 180 space -- and expect most users know to increase their
browser size when things aren't visible in a partial state.

-- Marty

-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Gassman [mailto:nick at netwiz.demon.co.uk]

>They only had their browser window open to about 30% of their screen
>real estate.

I wouldn't be so dismissive of what's going on here. If your client
only showed 30% of the window, how many users of the site will do so?
Do you know? Do you know how many maximise their browser? How many
have toolbars installed? If you're designing to a specific resolution,
do you assume all users have their browsers maximised?

'The fold' does matter, but usually you don't know where it is for any
given user.

* Nick Gassman - Usability and Standards Manager - http://ba.com *

26 Aug 2008 - 11:11am
Mark Schraad
2006

There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that the fold is no longer an
issue for user - and it is very old school thinking. The dreaded
scroll avoidance of the 90's is for the most part over.

The problem comes in that revenue partners and customers (particularly
those who buy ad placements) are significantly behind the curve and
continue to use this as bargaining leverage.

Granted, the user should be the primary consideration for Ix work, but
there are other stakeholders.

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Marty DeAngelo
<mdeangel at digitashealth.com> wrote:
> I wish I could share the screenshot but there's too much proprietary
> info on it. I understand that not everyone has their browser maximized,
> but 30% of a 800x600 screen (when their own standards are 1024x768) was
> what I got a chuckle out of. I doubt that many websites could be usable
> in a 240 x 180 space -- and expect most users know to increase their
> browser size when things aren't visible in a partial state.
>
> -- Marty
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick Gassman [mailto:nick at netwiz.demon.co.uk]
>
>>They only had their browser window open to about 30% of their screen
>>real estate.
>
> I wouldn't be so dismissive of what's going on here. If your client
> only showed 30% of the window, how many users of the site will do so?
> Do you know? Do you know how many maximise their browser? How many
> have toolbars installed? If you're designing to a specific resolution,
> do you assume all users have their browsers maximised?
>
> 'The fold' does matter, but usually you don't know where it is for any
> given user.
>
> * Nick Gassman - Usability and Standards Manager - http://ba.com *
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

26 Aug 2008 - 11:38am
Charlie Kreitzberg
2008

Seems to me that while users are more sophisticated about scrolling, it is
just common sense to make certain that anything you want the user to see on
initial view should be visible.

My recent experience in user testing is that while users have developed
expectations about how websites operate, they are also more frazzled and
rushed and will often not take the time to look at screen elements to see
how they work.

Particularly on the home page.

An interesting study that Ben Shneiderman just sent me indicates that users
make aesthetic decisions about a page within 50-500 milliseconds. Talk about
fast!

Reference:
Evaluating the consistency of immediate aesthetic perceptions of web pages
Tractinsky, Noam / Cokhavi, Avivit / Kirschenbaum, Moti / Sharfi, Tal
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 2006 v.64 n.11 p.1071-1083

============================
Charles B. Kreitzberg, Ph.D.
CEO, Cognetics Corporation
============================

26 Aug 2008 - 11:49am
Mark Schraad
2006

Well - I take what I see in the usability lab with a grain of salt.
But I kept track for a half dozen days. Out of 39 respondents we
brought in (various products being tested)... 36 scrolled to the
bottom of the first page they were shown within the first 10 seconds.
There is certainly some bias here, it was no ton their normal display,
and they new they were told they were there for 'testing' (I
absolutely hate using that word with respondents) so they likely
wanted to make sure they fully assessed the situation. I realize it's
just one measure.

Milissa Tarquini also puts things in a perspective here
http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/blasting-the-myth-of

And Charles I agree to some extent - that important things need to be
at the top of the page. I just think the fold is a somewhat arbitrary,
and less than useful measure.

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Charles B. Kreitzberg
<charlie at cognetics.com> wrote:
> Seems to me that while users are more sophisticated about scrolling, it is
> just common sense to make certain that anything you want the user to see on
> initial view should be visible.
>
> My recent experience in user testing is that while users have developed
> expectations about how websites operate, they are also more frazzled and
> rushed and will often not take the time to look at screen elements to see
> how they work.
>
> Particularly on the home page.
>
> An interesting study that Ben Shneiderman just sent me indicates that users
> make aesthetic decisions about a page within 50-500 milliseconds. Talk about
> fast!
>
> Reference:
> Evaluating the consistency of immediate aesthetic perceptions of web pages
> Tractinsky, Noam / Cokhavi, Avivit / Kirschenbaum, Moti / Sharfi, Tal
> International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 2006 v.64 n.11 p.1071-1083
>
> ============================
> Charles B. Kreitzberg, Ph.D.
> CEO, Cognetics Corporation
> ============================
>
>
>

26 Aug 2008 - 12:38pm
Christine Boese
2006

While I can agree that the fold may not be a barrier to users, I would argue
that the fold remains a SERIOUS consideration for ad display rates and
views, and in search results display.

Whether or not users are ABLE to scroll and readily do so does not affect
the power of the screen scan on initial page load, esp with high bounce
rates being pretty normal.

It's that power of the page scan on page load that gives the fold power
still, and not anachronistic power because advertisers are slow on the
evolution of user behavior.

For instance, people have always known they can read entire front page of
newspapers, entire newspapers, but that knowledge does not diminish in any
way the power of the REAL newspaper fold, given that it shows through the
window in the automated machines, or appears at the top of the stack of
papers wherever they happen to be up for sale. As a newspaper photographer
many moons ago, I had no illusions that my stock went up exponentially every
time I landed the dominant front page shot above the fold that carried the
page.

This same reasoning also figures in the way resumes get out of a slush pile,
what they call the 5-second scan. That 5-second scan does not diminish the
importance of having substance backing it up within the resume, but it does
establish a resume "fold" of sorts as well.

So if I were either advertisers or people trying to reach preferred natural
search engine results placement, I would not diminish the importance of the
fold any time soon.

Chris

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 12:11 PM, mark schraad <mschraad at gmail.com> wrote:

> There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that the fold is no longer an
> issue for user - and it is very old school thinking. The dreaded
> scroll avoidance of the 90's is for the most part over.
>
> The problem comes in that revenue partners and customers (particularly
> those who buy ad placements) are significantly behind the curve and
> continue to use this as bargaining leverage.
>
> Granted, the user should be the primary consideration for Ix work, but
> there are other stakeholders.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Marty DeAngelo
> <mdeangel at digitashealth.com> wrote:
> > I wish I could share the screenshot but there's too much proprietary
> > info on it. I understand that not everyone has their browser maximized,
> > but 30% of a 800x600 screen (when their own standards are 1024x768) was
> > what I got a chuckle out of. I doubt that many websites could be usable
> > in a 240 x 180 space -- and expect most users know to increase their
> > browser size when things aren't visible in a partial state.
> >
> > -- Marty
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Nick Gassman [mailto:nick at netwiz.demon.co.uk]
> >
> >>They only had their browser window open to about 30% of their screen
> >>real estate.
> >
> > I wouldn't be so dismissive of what's going on here. If your client
> > only showed 30% of the window, how many users of the site will do so?
> > Do you know? Do you know how many maximise their browser? How many
> > have toolbars installed? If you're designing to a specific resolution,
> > do you assume all users have their browsers maximised?
> >
> > 'The fold' does matter, but usually you don't know where it is for any
> > given user.
> >
> > * Nick Gassman - Usability and Standards Manager - http://ba.com *
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> > To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> > Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> > List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> > List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
> >
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

26 Aug 2008 - 2:50pm
Santiago Bustelo
2010

I lately discovered that I can understand both users and computers,
but sometimes clients still elude me.

--

Santiago Bustelo // icograma
Buenos Aires, Argentina

26 Aug 2008 - 3:16pm
SemanticWill
2007

sometimes it is best to cultivate clients in very much the same way one
might cultivate - say - mushrooms.

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 3:50 PM, Santiago Bustelo
<santiago at bustelo.com.ar>wrote:

> I lately discovered that I can understand both users and computers, but
> sometimes clients still elude me.
>
> --
>
> Santiago Bustelo // icograma
> Buenos Aires, Argentina
>
>

26 Aug 2008 - 3:19pm
Matt Nish-Lapidus
2007

with carefully measured amounts of sunlight, moisture, and manure?

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 4:16 PM, Will Evans <will at semanticfoundry.com> wrote:
> sometimes it is best to cultivate clients in very much the same way one
> might cultivate - say - mushrooms.
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 3:50 PM, Santiago Bustelo
> <santiago at bustelo.com.ar>wrote:
>
>> I lately discovered that I can understand both users and computers, but
>> sometimes clients still elude me.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Santiago Bustelo // icograma
>> Buenos Aires, Argentina
>>
>>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

--
Matt Nish-Lapidus
work: matt at bibliocommons.com / www.bibliocommons.com
--
personal: mattnl at gmail.com
twitter: emenel

26 Aug 2008 - 3:46am
netwiz
2010

On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:28:43 -0400, Paul wrote:

>These days, on the other hand, scrolling seems to be ingrained behavior for anyone with a mouse in their hand. In a web
site design I tested last year, for example, the design offered two
options for viewing a list of search results: via paging, or in 1 long
list. Almost all users - regardless of experience with computers -
elected to scroll vertically through the whole list of results, rather
than page through the list. And regardless of the option selected, I
observed vertical scrolling in practically any page where the user had
interest.

Where you have a list of results, it's relatively obvious that there's
more if you scroll down. I've seen a lot of people in test situations
not scroll, even when they describe themselves as web savvy. If you
have a design that looks like it might be the end of the page, there's
no cue for people to scroll further - and many seem not to notice the
scroll bars. It's something that puzzles me, but can't be ignored, and
it's dangerous just to assume that people know they have to scroll.

* Nick Gassman - Usability and Standards Manager - http://ba.com *

26 Aug 2008 - 12:09pm
netwiz
2010

On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 12:11:43 -0400, Mark wrote:

>There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that the fold is no longer an
>issue for user - and it is very old school thinking. The dreaded
>scroll avoidance of the 90's is for the most part over.

As I said, I have observed directly a number of times that the fold
can be a problem. It's something that puzzles me. Unless you have
direct evidence from your customers on your pages, for anything, you
are running a risk if you make assumptions. It's too easy for us to
inject our own opinions in this business. I'm not arugin that it's a
big deal in general, and people will presumably learn - but would you
bet your business on assumptions?

* Nick Gassman - Usability and Standards Manager - http://ba.com *

26 Aug 2008 - 12:46pm
netwiz
2010

On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 12:38:29 -0400, Charles wrote:

>
>An interesting study that Ben Shneiderman just sent me indicates that users
>make aesthetic decisions about a page within 50-500 milliseconds. Talk about
>fast!

There are all sorts of psychological studies using tachistoscopes,
which flash up visual materials very briefly, that cast light the
quick judgements that people make. I sometimes quote this research
when talking about the different things that attract first time users,
and repeat visitors. First time users have less information than
repeat visitors on which to judge the merits of a site, and so will be
more influenced by how it looks.

The research referenced shows that people can and will make judgements
very quickly on relatively little information. What I'm not sure about
is the persistence of this effect. If someone who has made a judgement
after 100 milliseconds then visits a site for one minute, or five
minutes, how much does that initial perception persist.

And how similar are the perceptions generated in the experiment
similar or different from those in real use?

Does anyone know?

* Nick Gassman - Usability and Standards Manager - http://ba.com *

26 Aug 2008 - 11:39am
rfein
2008

Mark,
I think you just hit on the crux of the matter. Anecdotal evidence...

Does anyone know of a reputable (to ad buyers and marketers) usability
report stating that users scroll? and that being below the fold doesn't hurt
click thru or uptake (or at least much)?

cheers,

Robert M. Fein
Director of User Experience
t: +44 (0)20 7908 0708
m: +44(0)7803 605 666
f: +44 (0)20 7908 0701
Moray House
23-31 Great Titchfield Street
London, W1W 7PA
www.thegrandunion.com

DISCLAIMER NOTICE: Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and
do not necessarily represent those of Grand Union Limited unless
specifically stated. This email and any files transmitted are confidential
and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please contact
Grand Union and delete this file from your computer. Although we have taken
steps to ensure that this e-mail and any attachments are free from any
virus, we cannot be held responsible for any viruses transmitted with this
email and any such attachments.

----- Original Message -----
From: "mark schraad" <mschraad at gmail.com>
To: "Marty DeAngelo" <mdeangel at digitashealth.com>
Cc: <discuss at ixda.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Clients are funny

> There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that the fold is no longer an
> issue for user - and it is very old school thinking. The dreaded
> scroll avoidance of the 90's is for the most part over.
>
> The problem comes in that revenue partners and customers (particularly
> those who buy ad placements) are significantly behind the curve and
> continue to use this as bargaining leverage.
>
> Granted, the user should be the primary consideration for Ix work, but
> there are other stakeholders.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Marty DeAngelo
> <mdeangel at digitashealth.com> wrote:
>> I wish I could share the screenshot but there's too much proprietary
>> info on it. I understand that not everyone has their browser maximized,
>> but 30% of a 800x600 screen (when their own standards are 1024x768) was
>> what I got a chuckle out of. I doubt that many websites could be usable
>> in a 240 x 180 space -- and expect most users know to increase their
>> browser size when things aren't visible in a partial state.
>>
>> -- Marty
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Nick Gassman [mailto:nick at netwiz.demon.co.uk]
>>
>>>They only had their browser window open to about 30% of their screen
>>>real estate.
>>
>> I wouldn't be so dismissive of what's going on here. If your client
>> only showed 30% of the window, how many users of the site will do so?
>> Do you know? Do you know how many maximise their browser? How many
>> have toolbars installed? If you're designing to a specific resolution,
>> do you assume all users have their browsers maximised?
>>
>> 'The fold' does matter, but usually you don't know where it is for any
>> given user.
>>
>> * Nick Gassman - Usability and Standards Manager - http://ba.com *
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
>> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
>> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
>> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
>> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

26 Aug 2008 - 5:17pm
Mark Schraad
2006

Frankly, this is what I get paid for.

On Aug 26, 2008, at 1:09 PM, Nick Gassman wrote:

> It's too easy for us to
> inject our own opinions in this business.

26 Aug 2008 - 8:40pm
Anonymous

"scrolling seems to be ingrained behavior for anyone with a mouse in
their hand"

I suspect that the more prevalent presence of the central scroller for
the mouse is a reason why scrolling is more common now, even among
novices. The mouse design lends itself to easy scrolling, when you don't
have to move specially to the side of the screen to do it.

In my experience, on the home page users don't like to scroll, but once
they're at a destination page, they will happily scroll.

Alinta Thornton
User Experience Lead

independent digital media
web publishing | marketing+technology services | publisher solutions
Westside, Level 2 Suite C, 83 O'Riordan Street, Alexandria NSW Australia
2015
PO Box 7160, Alexandria, NSW 2015
W www.idmco.com.au

B http://ezia.blogspot.com

-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com
[mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of
Matthew Nish-Lapidus
Sent: Wednesday, 27 August 2008 6:19 AM
To: Will Evans
Cc: discuss at ixda.org
Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Clients are funny

with carefully measured amounts of sunlight, moisture, and manure?

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 4:16 PM, Will Evans <will at semanticfoundry.com>
wrote:
> sometimes it is best to cultivate clients in very much the same way
one
> might cultivate - say - mushrooms.
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 3:50 PM, Santiago Bustelo
> <santiago at bustelo.com.ar>wrote:
>
>> I lately discovered that I can understand both users and computers,
but
>> sometimes clients still elude me.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Santiago Bustelo // icograma
>> Buenos Aires, Argentina
>>
>>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

--
Matt Nish-Lapidus
work: matt at bibliocommons.com / www.bibliocommons.com
--
personal: mattnl at gmail.com
twitter: emenel
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

26 Aug 2008 - 9:18pm
Jared M. Spool
2003

On Aug 26, 2008, at 12:39 PM, Robert M. Fein wrote:

> Does anyone know of a reputable (to ad buyers and marketers)
> usability report stating that users scroll? and that being below the
> fold doesn't hurt click thru or uptake (or at least much)?

Don't know about it being reputable.

But it's been done:
http://www.uie.com/articles/page_scrolling/

Wrote it in 1998. Not much has changed since.

Jared

Jared M. Spool
User Interface Engineering
510 Turnpike St., Suite 102, North Andover, MA 01845
e: jspool at uie.com p: +1 978 327 5561
http://uie.com Blog: http://uie.com/brainsparks

27 Aug 2008 - 5:50am
Mark Schraad
2006

Well it may very well be an issue of semantics Nick.

My opinion is generally based upon some blend of research,
experience, knowledge and a bit of perspective. Hopefully it is well
thought out. Hopefully I am able to deliver something beyond all of
that stuff, as added value. Other wise they might as well have some
one else doing this job (and someone else may very well do it
better... and most certainly differently). Research does not answer
questions nor does it make design decisions. It must be analyzed,
interpreted prior to synthesis and applied. The human is a vitally
important part of this equation.

If instead you mean 'do I design for myself' as opposed to finding a
more aggregate or distributed user perspective, the answer is of
course. We all do. We try and augment that viewpoint with user
research and alternate perspectives. But we are nearly always acting
at some level on researcher introspection.

Mark

On Aug 27, 2008, at 4:30 AM, Nick Gassman wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 18:17:03 -0400, Mark wrote:
>
>> Frankly, this is what I get paid for.
>>
>>
>> On Aug 26, 2008, at 1:09 PM, Nick Gassman wrote:
>>
>> It's too easy for us to
>> inject our own opinions in this business.
>
> Really? Can I have your job. I'd love to have a job where all I have
> to do is to express my opinion, and people do what I say. That would
> be great. But why would anyone pay you to have an opinion over anyone
> else?
>
> I think what I'm paid for is not my opinions. I'm paid to find out the
> opinions, views, needs etc of my customers and users of my site. When
> someone asks me about UI issues, I try very hard not to give an
> opinion, but to base an approach on what I've seen and know about
> customers. It's that knowledge and approach that I hope makes it worth
> paying me over someone else. The active bit in what I said is 'our
> own' opinions. When I give a view that is my own opinion (because I
> don't have any evidence to substantiate it), I make a point of letting
> people know. In such cases, someone else's opinion is as valid as
> mine.
>
> I'm not trying to suggest that Mark isn't professional in his
> approach, or to question his knowledge and authority. Maybe it'll turn
> out to be a semantic distinction, but are we really paid because our
> opinions are worth more than other peoples?
>
> * Nick Gassman - Usability and Standards Manager - http://ba.com *

27 Aug 2008 - 7:57am
Santiago Bustelo
2010

Such CEOs are worth their weight in shares. Pleasing them ensures
foolproof design ;-)

--

Santiago Bustelo // icograma
Buenos Aires, Argentina

On 25/08/2008, at 17:03, Nancy Broden wrote:

> In my more jaded moments as a consultant I used say that there was
> only one user you needed to please: the CEO. I just prayed that s/he
> knew how to turn on their computer and what a "browser" was.

27 Aug 2008 - 9:14am
pnuschke
2007

Nice find. ;)

I think the main thing that has changed is that it is now easier to scroll
because many mice have scrollwheels.

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 10:18 PM, Jared Spool <jspool at uie.com> wrote:

>
> On Aug 26, 2008, at 12:39 PM, Robert M. Fein wrote:
>
> Does anyone know of a reputable (to ad buyers and marketers) usability
>> report stating that users scroll? and that being below the fold doesn't hurt
>> click thru or uptake (or at least much)?
>>
>
> Don't know about it being reputable.
>
> But it's been done:
> http://www.uie.com/articles/page_scrolling/
>
> Wrote it in 1998. Not much has changed since.
>
> Jared
>
> Jared M. Spool
> User Interface Engineering
> 510 Turnpike St., Suite 102, North Andover, MA 01845
> e: jspool at uie.com p: +1 978 327 5561
> http://uie.com Blog: http://uie.com/brainsparks
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

28 Aug 2008 - 7:06pm
Jarod Tang
2007

> I used to work with people at an interactive agency who typed
> "http://" manually every time they wanted to view a site... :/
it's still correct, isnt it? (sometimes, we design a cool feature, but
dont see user using it, which is not they uncommon case!)
if the browser displays URL without http//https (like just, google, or
www.google.com), user;s behavior may change (so it looks like a
design's fault?)
>
> Now, working with some public institutions, it's astounding to see how
> many people still have old 800x600 (or less) monitors...
>
it's user's working context, we can't easily say "guys buy a new one
with 150 bucks" for our new design, isnt it?

Cheers,
-- Jarod

--
Designing for better life style.

http://jarodtang.spaces.live.com/
http://jarodtang.blogspot.com

3 Sep 2008 - 12:34am
Josh
2006

Just thinking about how screwed all of us Web professionals would
really be if our users couldn't use browsers. I mean we could be
building the next big thing (think Amazon + Facebook + Craigslist +
Google with a dash of Twitter) with tons of funding, but the bottom
line is that people, CEO's included, access our work via someone
else's app and UI. Luckily the Web has been around for a while and
lots of folks have figured out how to use their browser, and Google's
been doing search results long enough that folks have figured out how
to scroll vertically.

--
Josh Viney
EastMedia Group
Company http://www.eastmedia.com
Blog http://www.kungpowthinking.com

Syndicate content Get the feed