The IC3 Blue Train - A little journal about design, marketing, sales and other matters

Another example of how to use the Design Yardstick introduced on August 19.

For this third entry in the series, I decided to use our yardstick to dissect a commerce website: amazon.co.uk , itself a standard (not to repeat 'yardstick') for e-commerce excellence.

Here is (click on the thumbnail) my evaluation of the amazon.co.uk site according to our yardstick’s five criteria, including 14 reasons why I like to shop on amazon.

click to see the pic

This may again look rather simple/simplistic but, if you look at my 14 points, you’ll probably find the reason why you last aborted shopping on a badly designed website. Would you agree?

A simple example of how to use the Design Yardstick introduced in the previous journal entry.

Our main objective concerning the design yardstick introduced in the previous entry was to create a simple, practical tool enabling the implementation of good designs that balance objective and subjective factors.

Here is (click on the thumbnail) a simple example of the use of the yardstick to evaluate my favourite corkscrew (I could write a book about corkscrews – don’t tease me).

click to see the pic

No rocket science, right? Some people may think it’s simplistic. Some others, that it is too complicated. The wisdom could come from one of my favourite Albert Einstein’s quote: “Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler”.

A simple checklist for engineers, product designers and developers, and marketers to help them create superior user-centred objects, systems, software, and documents of all kinds.

Why is the Apple iPod a market leader in spite of its premium price? Primarily because of its superior, user-friendly design, don’t you agree? Probably also because of the Apple brand, of which power results mainly from a long history of design prowess.

Now, why is the iPod design superior? At first glance, because the little box is simple, attractive and, for most users, likeable. The product catches immediate attention through its aesthetics. However, a further analysis shows that the iPod also stands out because it offers an appropriate set of functions; because it is easy to understand and to use, following the long Apple tradition in superior usability; and because it fits well (and feels nice) into one’s hand, with all functions accessible through the thumb.

In other words, the iPod design scores high in both subjective and objective domains. Have a look at the five-category design yardstick we have developed: the iPod scores high in all five categories. That’s why we think it’s a superior design, with a perfect balance between reason and emotions.

If you have problems reading the text in the picture, please click on the thumbnail below

Engineers (like me) and industrial designers tend to approach design from a rational point-of-view and to focus on measurable parameters. Artists and other ‘creatives’ work on the other side of the spectrum; but they also have to master the technical aspects of their discipline (how to mix colours for a painting; how to combine harmonies in music; how to set up a camera; etc.). Reciprocally, in the last ten years or so, scientists and engineers have ‘discovered’ the importance of feelings in the design of successful products (examples of this trend include books such as  “Emotional Intelligence” and “Emotional Design”).

That's why we think that our yardstick can help engineers, product developers, marketers and other professionals to design better ‘balanced’ systems, products, software, websites, marketing materials and programmes and so on. What do you think?

Where analogue’ traditions’ can be the best complement to digital technology

On the PC/Windows scene, things are significantly better than they used to be. My current PC is soon one year old and it still works pretty well. It’s fast and has lots of semiconductor and magnetic storage capacity. Its 20” widescreen flat panel monitor is convenient and soothing for the eye –great for watching DVDs.

And its sound system is amazing: four speakers, plus a big box that sits on the floor and a fantastic control element (see picture) that includes two more speakers. The perfect support for iTunes. In a nutshell, a digital technology extravaganza of some sort.

Yet, my PC’s best feature is analogue. The sound system’s control element features a good ol’ knob that allows me to manage the sound volume: clockwise to increase it, anti-clockwise to reduce it and turn it off. No need to grab the mouse, to launch a control panel, to grab the tiny cursor and to move it to the desired level.

The knob is here (see picture), under my flat screen, and I can use it without even thinking, instinctively, the same way I control the sound level on my radio, my HIFI amplifier and some other electrical devices.

 
It beats any cursor, push button (my former PC’s sound control was enabled by a ‘plus’ button and a ‘minus’ button on top of one speaker that was difficult to reach and to operate), control panel or gadget invented by nerds who never heard about usability.

We, humans, are analogue ‘beasts’ and I bet you that in about fifty years this digital revolution ill be over and that computers, music, movies e tutti quanti will be (back for some) analogue, and with incredible levels of performance and user comfort.

An open letter to Jim Stephen, President and Chief Executive Officer of Weber-Stephen Products Co., 200 East Daniels Road, Palatine, IL 60067-6266, U.S.A.

Dear Mr Stephen,

This is about the user experience of a nervous owner of one of your Q Gas Grill ‘systems’. First, the good news: mine works fine (phew!). The bad news: this product is a case study in bad user-centred design. You have good engineers but you don’t seem to have any designer focusing on usability. Moreover, what about marketers making the whole experience as friendly as possible rather than, it seems, lawyers obsessed about potential liabilities?

Joy of Cooking?

Let’s start with the Owner’s Guide. The first two pages include 42 WARNING or DANGER triangles and nothing else. The 12 pages of the Guide contain no less than 74 of these triangles. I felt I was about to operate a nuclear space craft.

After these two pages describing all catastrophes that could happen, you get to the “Cooking” section that represents a whopping 2% of the Guide. This is followed by “Cleaning” – already! – come on, I haven’t even started; but I get two more warnings. Then “Parts List” and “Assembly” – aha! –action at last. Actually, putting together the ‘flying saucer’ was quite straightforward.

At that point you start to relax. But you quickly face three pages of “Gas Instructions” that are downright scary. I read just enough to connect my gas cylinder. At that time, I was getting hungry. So, I jumped to “Lighting Instructions”, followed all the steps and … nothing happened: I had forgotten to open the tap on the cylinder (not supplied by Weber). Second attempt: open cylinder tap, open grill knob, press the little red button and … whoopee: little blue flames brighten up the burner. Bring the rump steak.

The Tap, the Knob and the Button .

Sounds like a western-spaghetti? The tension is the same. We are entering here the land of design flaws. My cylinder tap operates as one would expect: turn counter-clockwise to open, because it’s gas (if it were electricity, it would be clockwise). The Weber knob [see yellow arrows] operates like a normal gas stove’s: counter-clockwise to open, and then still counter-clockwise to reduce the gas flow – the opposite of what you do to reduce the water flow from a water tap. Isn’t that weird? Finally, there is a little red button to create a spark that launches the whole craft into cooking orbit.

The first problem is that the Q Gas Grill knob is half hidden by the handle [see picture left] when the right flap is still folded on the grate and totally out of the sight for a normal user in standing up position when the flap is open (and, if you don’t open the flap, it will burn on top of the grate).

 At that point, your right hand is blindly controlling the knob; so your eyes are free to look for the ignition button … that is at the opposite side of the grill, far left [red arrow in the top picture]. OK, once you’ve done it twice, you sort of get used to all that jazz and perform the whole sequence without problem. However, wouldn’t it be more logical to put the red button close to the knob? The current design looks to me as the result of engineers worrying more about making their job easy and the device cost effective than about the poor ‘end-user’.

Amenities?

My Q Gas Grill stands of top of the companion trolley sold by Weber. It seems that designers of kitchen counters, BBQs and other similar items have not realised that the average height of humans has significantly increased over the last century. Why should we get backache when we cook?

Here, the Q Gas Grill ‘features’ another flaw: the three little hooks [see blue arrows in the top picture] provided to hang up utensils are too low. Standard utensils tend to touch the ground and the position of the hooks at the front of the grill make the appearance of greasy stain on users’ shoes and/or trousers very probable. Why not put the hooks on the left side? Fine, but they would be hidden by the other flap. Oops!

Here’s a possible solution: allow both flaps to slide on their rotation axis. Sliding the right flap would make the knob visible. Sliding the left one would give easy access to the utensils. Your lawyers would probably ask you to add another dozen of warnings concerning what is reasonable to put on the flaps after take-off; but your customers would gain in terms of usability.

Or you could of course re-design the whole grill, this time starting from the user, and reinforce your leadership position on the BBQ market, don’t you think so?

Yours sincerely,

Henri Aebischer