Thursday, December 27, 2007

Designing for Fun on the Run





Last week's Interaction Design class presentations at Stanford made me laugh. Scott Klemmer's CS147 class, a mix of undergrads and graduate students, demonstrated applications for mobile devices, which featured Nokia N95 (supplied by Nokia) and the iPhone. Each of the 15 or 16 groups had one minute to explain their project and that session was followed up by poster sessions with more detail -- a very nice format.

What made me laugh was how specifically personal the applications were. I might label these apps as Fun on the Run. Influenced by Twitter, these students focused on taking care of basic needs such as food and sleep, finding friends (often combined with food and drink), organizing their schedule, and what to do when they're bored. Many of the applications were not particularly original -- you can do many of these things via the Web already. Figuring out how to do them on the cell phone is a new challenge. Because the cellphone goes everywhere with you, it becomes part of you, just like your eyeglasses or your wallet or purse. It is you and yours, much more than a personal computer, and this is why these applications seemed so highly personalized.

Most of students followed the age-old design instinct to identify one's experience with a broader group of people. These were students presenting to other students and they had make that connection in one minute. Several of the presentations started out "Have you ever...", sounding like infomercials. One presenter said "How do you let your mother know that she's calling you when you're in class? And how can you say you're in class when she calls and you don't want to talk to her?"

Here are some of the applications:


  • Good Food Now. Find a restaurant quickly.
  • iLocator. Find lost devices.
  • wdzzup 2.0. Find out what your friends are up to right now.
  • Mobogotchi. Find out if your working out enough.
  • Alarm us. Set a nap alarm that blocks calls.
  • Simply on Time. A better alarm for power napping.
  • Shopping ++. A better way to list what you need to buy.
  • Food Hound. See Good Food Now.
  • Flight Finder. Find out how long your flight is delayed.
  • I'm There. Find out where your friends are.
  • InTransit. Find out what's happening with your bus or subway.
  • Fidget. What to do when you're bored on the bus or subway.

Another application promised to allow you to take a picture of an object in a store and do a look up on Amazon and other ecommerce sites. On its poster, the first component of the application was "Wizard of Oz" object recognition. A nice hand wave over a difficult problem.

One application that seemed more functional than many of the others was "Email Quick Replies", a macro facility for iPhone's email. Jeff Siebert and his team created a hack (which could become a native iPhone app once Apple allows it) so that with a few keystrokes you can recall a stock email reply. It was something that a guy over fifty like me might find useful.

These students apps could be a signal of what's to come once we have truly open mobile platforms. These user-driven mobile applications are a lot more fun than anything the carriers have come up with on their closed systems.

Photos below by Mike Krieger.

Friday, December 21, 2007

黄健翔:一个人改变我的命运 离开央视心甘情愿

  由于法甲开球时间太晚,所以格罗索转会里昂后,我确实很少看他的比赛。但恰好我在几天前看了里昂客场3比0大胜格拉斯哥流浪者队的冠军联赛,他踢得相当好,攻守兼备,还有一个长传助攻。而且他在场上显得信心十足,完全是世界冠军和意甲冠军的气质。上赛季他在国际米兰过得很迷茫——但这也很正常,毕竟他在2006年夏天的表现太神奇了。在云端度过了一个迷惘的赛季,又碰到了曼奇尼这样一个只认状态、不认大牌的教练。按理说,在国际米兰这样的球队混日子很简单,但格罗索没有这样,而是接受了里昂的挑战。我认为他是个很清醒、很冷静的人。现在他在里昂打的比赛多了,状态找回来了,队友也都很信任他,这证明了他的选择是对的。
  格罗索是那种动作不快、但节奏很稳的球员。他的左脚很出色,又是前腰出身——否则也不会在世界杯与德国的比赛中打进那么一脚精彩的弧线球。所以说,2006年夏天格罗索给人的印象就是挡不住,怎么打怎么有。那几场关键战,格罗索全都出彩了。估计在全世界,也只有意大利会由一位左后卫扮演如此重要的角色。
  格罗索希望我“永不放弃”,我也想对格罗索说:“祝你好运,继续努力。无论在什么样的位置,努力工作,养家糊口,对得起家人和朋友,对得起自己的良心,问心无愧就好。”我相信多纳多尼还会继续使用他,毕竟格罗索确实有一些意大利队“镇山之宝”的味道。意大利球员出国踢球并不是一件容易的事,很容易给人一种落魄的感觉。但格罗索的心态还不错,而且意大利舆论对他也很宽容,国家队也保留着他的位置。我相信以格罗索的能力,在意甲前八甚至前五名的队伍都是很容易找到饭碗的。他去里昂的主要目的,应该还是为了冠军杯吧。
  的确,正是格罗索那次勇敢前插后制造的点球彻底改变了我的生活,如果不是他,也许我今天还在央视继续着我的解说员生涯。我的人生因为他的出现而变得丰富了,阴差阳错间经历了很多人不可能经历的事情。在人生的道路上,很多东西只有自己经历过、感受过的,才是属于自己的,这非常难得。之所以说阴差阳错,是因为如果那是一般比赛,球迷们对于我的解说早就有一种评判标准;而当时是世界杯,电视前涌入了太多新球迷,他们对于解说员的定义完全是另一种标准,所以我的事就被无限放大了。
  我依然承认,2006年夏天那场世界杯1/8决赛发生的事情,对于我来说,完全是一个偶然。如果意大利的对手不是澳大利亚,我根本不会做出那么惊人的举动。看到澳大利亚队当时的主教练希丁克,我确实有情绪。4年前韩日世界杯,希丁克的韩国队依靠裁判淘汰意大利,当时在世界范围内闹得沸沸扬扬;去德国解说世界杯,我解说韩国对法国的小组赛时,台里就让我别谈裁判问题,到后来发展到连希丁克都不能谈,心里确实很憋屈;加上那场比赛前,我们已经连续奋战十几天,超强度奔波带来的疲劳,已经让人又焦虑又郁闷;再加上我在那年年初离婚,心里堆积了太多事情;另外我那时的嗓子也哑了,尽管头脑很清醒;此外,还有澳大利亚足协当时刚刚入亚引起我的不爽,以及新西兰1981年世界杯预选赛阴了中国队那一幕……可能是这一切搀在一起,再有了格罗索的推动,才促成了我最后的爆发……
  这一年来,我离开了央视,格罗索告别了意甲联赛。我不清楚他离开国际米兰是否情愿,但加盟一家能保证主力位置的球队,对于一名职业球员来说是件好事;而我却无所谓,离开央视,我是心甘情愿的。
  转眼又要到鼠年了。上一个鼠年,我作为主持人在演播厅里与球迷们一同亲历了国奥队的黑色9分钟,很多球迷也是在那一年的欧洲杯上熟悉了我的声音,那一年还有亚特兰大奥运会。2008年,国奥队和欧洲杯以及奥运会又来了,但我已经成为了观众。这种感觉挺好的。人这一生不可能事事如意,有所得必有所失,有所失也就必有所得。还是那句话:踏踏实实工作,踏踏实实做人。对于一名运动员来说,40岁早该退役了,而作为一名解说员,40岁退役却显得太早。英国著名评论员马丁·泰勒已经60多岁了,他知道我的故事,也认为我退的太早了。但中国和英国的情况太不一样了。所以还是顺其自然吧!反正我该经历的都经历过了:3届欧洲杯、3届世界杯,还有数不清的亚洲杯、美洲杯、奥运会……没什么可遗憾的了。顺其自然,和格罗索一样。每一个行业都会有创造辉煌的机会,谁又会想到德国世界杯能属于一名左后卫呢?
  目前我对2008年欧洲杯还没有什么计划,也许会以一名特殊观众的身份去现场看看球,写写评论;没准会带着我的球迷老父亲、女儿和家人自费前往奥地利来一次音乐足球之旅。边旅游边看球,对于我这样一个喜欢音乐的家庭来说,也是件非常惬意的事情。
  格罗索认为他“害”了我,我觉得不能说“害”!时也,命也,运也,有机会我真想和他坐下来好好聊聊。这次他送我的这件球衣上面印着“Huang”,我希望他将来能有机会再送给我一件印有他名字的球衣。当然,上面最好还要有意大利队其他22人的签名。对了,我也很希望里皮能在上面签下名字。

Monday, December 17, 2007

The Essential Website Usability Checklist

Give me almost any website and I will point out at least one common usability mistake. Chances are your website is included in that group. You could be missing out on sales, loyal visitors and links due to a usability oversight that’s easily fixable.
This post is a simple 13-point usability checklist for webmasters. Ever good website must be able to answer ‘yes’ to each of these points. How does your site measure up? Feel free to score yourself out of thirteen and share the results in the comments section.
1. Your essential navigational elements are easy to find
The navigational links you want readers to use most often should always be close to the top of the screen. Stuffing important navigational elements in the footer area is a worrying trend I see becoming more and more prevalent. Remember: it’s not true minimalism or simplicity if you’re taking away or hiding what’s important. Essential navigational elements should never be treated like clutter.
2. Your hyperlinks are easy to pick out
Not everyone visiting your site has 20/20 vision, not everyone can distinguish between colors and not everyone has their screen set to a bright resolution. It’s essential that your links stand out for all users. The simplest and most effective way you can ensure this is to double-format your links by changing both the color and the style of the hyperlinked text.
3. Your color choices are easy to read
Black text on a white background is hands-down the easiest color combination to read. Grey text on white might look slick and modern, but that won’t count for much if no-one is reading your content. If you have to experiment, try black text on a light color. Light text on a light background is a no-no, as is dark text on a dark background.
4. Your best content is easily accessible
Your best or most important content is the real reason why your site exists. Visitors shouldn’t have to dig through obscure links and scour the nether regions of your Sitemap to find your best stuff. Link to it from the main page and make it as easy as possible to find. Not only is this good for usability, it will also help draw visitors deeper into your site.
5. Your content is less than 2/3 a screen-length wide
Text that runs a mile across the screen is hard to read. 50% of the screen or less is ideal for readability, though it might be necessary to justify the text if you want to go really narrow.
6. There are wide margins around your text
Whitespace helps frame your content and give it space to breathe. Sentences which run into your website’s sidebar will give visitors a headache and create the impression that your page elements are bleeding into one another. You want to include as much separation as possible. Resist the urge to fill every inch of the screen with stuff. When it comes to good web design and usability, thoughtful reduction is key.
7. There is adequate padding between embedded images and text
Text running into images is another readability pitfall. Always make sure there’s sufficient padding around your embedded images. The difference between slick looking content and a readability disaster is only a few pixels.
8. Your header image links to your main page
Visitors expect this and it’s incredibly simple to implement. Unless, of course, your header image is the background of a table cell. If that’s the case, make sure to include a prominent link back to your home page as close to the header as possible. Using the browser’s ‘Back’ button should always be a choice, not a necessity.
9. You’re formatting text for maximum readability
We absorb writing on the screen differently to how we absorb writing on paper. We need more variation to make it visually interesting. Using sub-headings, box-quotes and bolded text is a fundamental aspect of readability and something no webmaster should neglect.
10. Your text is broken up with whitespace
Ever been confronted with a huge chunk of text? Ever actually stopped to read all of it? Probably not. Frequent paragraphs open up your content and make it much more inviting to readers. When writing for the web it becomes more important than ever that the eye frequently be given space to rest.
11. Your fonts are readable and consistent
Little fonts are bad for readability. Tightly packed fonts are also no good. Small, tightly packed fonts are the worst combination of all. It might seem cool to use little fonts, but visitors won’t thank you for it. Adequate gaps between each line of text are also essential. Mixing too many fonts and font sizes can also create readability problems.
12. It’s clear where each hyperlink will lead
Regardless of whether you prefer descriptive anchor text or instructive ‘click here’ links, it’s essential that readers have a specific idea where each link will lead. Hyperlinking vague keywords is bad usability, even if some argue that it’s good for SEO. Where will a link to make money online take me? It could be any one of a million places. A link to 15 ways to make money with your website is much more specific and user-focused.
13. Your site has an ‘About’ and ‘Contact’ page
Unless you don’t want to be contacted at all, there’s no excuse to do without either of these elements. The most common question new visitors to your site have is: “What is this about?” Your ‘About’ page provides an instant answer to that question. It also gives you an opportunity to persuade new visitors to stick around. If your site is missing an About page, you’re missing an opportunity.
Having a dedicated Contact page is also essential. It might seem reasonable to include contact information on your About page, but think of it like this: if I wanted to know how to contact you, would I ask this question:
Can you tell me about yourself?
or
How can I contact you?
It doesn’t make sense to ask the first. Usability should always be conversational.

10 Web Design and Usability Mistakes to Avoid

Looking for that web2.0’sh look for your website? It is now a trend everyone is now converting their pages into CSS and standards compatible pages, but still the majority of pages that you find on internet are badly designed. There are few biggest mistakes that one can make while creating website designs.
1. Slow-loading Web pagesOne of the prime mistakes that is common with both beginners and professional websites is that people do not optimize there pages for the loading time, many use magazine like images which are large in size and uncompressed graphics. By keeping large graphics files the web page is bound to be slow loading. The page if carefully designed this blunder can be avoided.
2. Table layoutTables Layout are still very common, these are structural elements and are not complaint with W3C. It is a wise thing to use CSS for layout instead of tables on your website, as it will make it accessible to all devices like PDAs, car browsers and Webtvs. You must test how your website looks on a mobile phone screen. CSS can be modified to adjust on each screen size and resolution type. Using CSS for layout also benefits on ranking better on search engines and also enable quicker loading pages
3. Bad color combinationsMany Website designers don’t pay much attention to the color combinations they use on their website. Others pay too much attention and still can not improve their work. Bad color combinations can lead to difficult-to-use pages. As a particular color identifies hyperlinks, with unused links and recently used links having different colors this are the website usage basics. The standard colors for links are blue for unvisited links and purple for visited links. Black or gray text on a white or off-white background is what people are used to, and it is the best choice. With this background color the standard link colors look just fine.
4. Using FramesAnother big blunder we find on websites is the use of frames which have plenty of usability problems, the pages are not printable and they can not be bookmarked, moreover the visited links across frames don’t change colors. Use of Frames must be totally avoided. Also the content in Frames is non search engine friendly.
5. Using Non-resizable text Use of Small text is prevalent on many websites, it looks good and you can give a lot of information on your webpage, but as resolution increases small text becomes non readable. To enable your website accessible to all kind of users, devices and different resolution types. One must specify the font size in terms of %, em or a relative value (like small, medium etc.).
6. Using Images that have text informationMany website designers use images to display text, this makes the text non resizable and definitely not accessible to other users and on handheld devices. Text on images also appears pixelated and is too blurry to read. This text is also not readable by search engines.
7. Wrong ALT textNew devices like car browsers and users that use slow dial-up connections who usually turn off images have dependability on correct ALT text, in place of images. To ensure accessibility, the images must have a correct ALT description that describes the image and its function properly.
8. No searchAlmost more than half internet users are so used to search function, by not keeping a search utility on your website you disappoint those who head straight for the search function to find what they are looking for instead of going by navigation. A prominent search bar enhances website usability and also helps in your conversion goals.
9. Meaning less 404 error pageA big blunder that people tend to do is either they don’t have a 404 page or if they do it is meaning less and adds no value to the website. Usually the 404 error shows up when a user reaches to a URL of a page that no longer exists or has been moved, this also happens when someone types an incorrect URL. Not all your users would know what a 404 error message mean so please don’t call this page as a 404 error page. You must inform the user on what happened and what he must do to reach where he intends to go. Such a page must have a call-to-action, like you could include a search function and few links to the homepage, site map, and most popular pages.

30 Usability Issues To Be Aware Of

You don’t have to agree upon everything. As a professional web developer you are the advocate of your visitors’ interests and needs; you have to protect your understanding of good user experience and make sure the visitors will find their way through (possibly) complex site architecture. And this means that you need to be able to protect your position and communicate your ideas effectively — in discussions with your clients and colleagues. In fact, it’s your job to compromise wrong ideas and misleading concepts instead of following them blindly.
In this context nothing can support you more than the profound knowledge of fundamental issues related to your work. But even if you know most of them it’s important to know how to name these concepts and how to refer to them once they appear in the conversation. Furthermore, it’s always useful to have some precise terms ready to hand once you might need them as an argument in your discussions.
In this article we present 30 important usability issues, terms, rules and principles which are usually forgotten, ignored or misunderstood. What is the difference between readability and legibility? What exactly does 80/20 or Pareto principle mean? What is meant with minesweeping and satisficing? And what is Progressive Enhancement and Graceful Degradation? OK, it’s time to dive in.
Usability: Rules and Principles
7±2 PrincipleSince human brain has some limits on its capacity for processing information, it deals with complexity dividing information into chunks and units. According to George A. Miller’s studies humans’ short term memory can retain only about 5-9 things at one time. This fact is often used as an argument for limiting the number of options in navigation menus to 7; however there are heated debates about The Myth of “Seven, Plus or Minus 2″. Therefore it’s not clear how the 7±2 Principle can, could or should be applied to the Web. Miller’s studies.
2-Second-RuleA loose principle that a user shouldn’t need to wait more than 2 seconds for certain types of system response, such as application-switching and application launch time. The choice of 2 seconds is somewhat arbitrary, but a reasonable order of magnitude. Reliable principle: the less users have to wait, the better is the user experience. [UF]
3-Click-RuleAccording to this rule users stop using the site if they aren’t able to find the information or access the site feature within 3 mouse clicks. In other words, the rule emphasizes the importance of clear navigation, logical structure and easy-to-follow site hierarchy. In most situations the number of clicks is irrelevant; what is really important is that visitors always know where they are, where they were and where they can go next. Even 10 clicks are OK if users feel that they have a full understanding of how the system works.
80/20 Rule (The Pareto principle)The Pareto principle (also known as the law of the vital few and the principle of factor sparsity) states that 80% of the effects comes from 20% of the causes. This is the basic rule of thumb in business (”80% of your sales comes from 20% of your clients”), but can also be applied to design and usability. For instance, dramatic improvements can often be achieved by identifying the 20% of users, customers, activities, products or processes that account for the 80% of contribution to profit and maximizing the attention applied to them. [Wikipedia]
Eight Golden Rules of Interface DesignAs a result of Interface Design Studies, Ben Shneiderman proposed a collection of principles that are derived heuristically from experience and applicable in most interactive systems. These principles are common for user interface design, and as such also for web design.
Strive for consistency.
Enable frequent users to use shortcuts.
Offer informative feedback.
Design dialog to yield closure.
Offer simple error handling.
Permit easy reversal of actions.
Provide the sense of control. Support internal locus of control.
Reduce short-term memory load.
You can learn more details about Shneiderman’s Rules For Design in Wikipedia: Shneiderman’s rules for design.
Fitts’ LawPublished by Paul Fitts in 1954, Fitts’ law is a model of human movement which predicts the time required to rapidly move to a target area, as a function of the distance to the target and the size of the target. The law is usually applied to the movement of the mouse visitors have to perform to get from point A to point B. For instance, the rule can be important to place the content areas in a more usable way to maximize their accessibility and improve click rates.
Inverted PyramidThe inverted pyramid is a writing style where the summary of the article is presented in the beginning of the article. This approach makes use of the “waterfall effect” well-known in journalism where writers try to give their readers an instant idea about the topic they’re reporting. The article begins with a conclusion, followed by key points and finally the minor details such as background information. Since web users want instant gratification, the inverted pyramid style, as supported by Nielsen, is important for web writing and for better user experience.
SatisficingWeb users don’t prefer optimal ways to find the information they’re looking for. They aren’t interested in the most reasonable and sound solution to their problem. Instead they permanently scan for quick’n'dirty-solutions which are “good enough”. Applied to Web, satisficing describes exactly this approach: users settle with a solution to a problem that is “good enough” — even if alternative solutions can better fulfill their requirements in a long run. [I-D]
Psychology Behind Usability
Baby-Duck-SyndromeBaby Duck Syndrome describes the tendency for visitors to stick to the first design they learn and judge other designs by their similarity to that first design. The result is that users generally prefer systems similar to those they learned on and dislike unfamiliar systems. This results in the usability problems most re-designs have: users, get used with previous designs, feel uncomfortable with new site structure they have to find their way through.
Banner-BlindnessWeb users tend to ignore everything that looks like advertisement and, what is interesting, they’re pretty good at it. Although advertisement is noticed, it is almost always ignored. Since users have constructed web related schemata for different tasks on the Web, when searching for specific information on a website, they focus only on the parts of the page where they would assume the relevant information could be, i.e. small text and hyperlinks. Large colourful or animated banners and other graphics are in this case ignored.
Source: Banner Blindness: Old and New Findings
Cliffhanger-Effect (Zeigarnik-Effect)Human beings can’t stand uncertainty. We tend to find answers to unanswered questions we are interested in as soon as possible. Cliffhanger-effects are based upon this fact; movies, articles and plots with Cliffhanger-effect have an abrupt ending, often leaving with a sudden shock revelation or difficult situation. The effect is often used in advertisement: asking the visitors unanswered and provocative questions advertisers often tend to force them to read the ad, click on the banner or follow a link.
Found out by Bluma W. Zeigarnik in 1927, this effect establishes an emotional connection with readers and is extremely effective in terms of marketing. Visitors can better remember what the ad is about and even smallest details are stored more clearly and precisely. In Web writing the Cliffhanger-effect is also used to bound the visitors to a web-site (e.g. “Grab our RSS-Feed to ensure you don’t miss the second part of the article!”).
Gestalt principles of form perceptionThese principles are the fundamental rules of human psychology in terms of human-computer-interaction-design.
The law of proximity posits that when we perceive a collection of objects, we will see objects close to each other as forming a group.
A real-world example of the law of proximity from MTV Music Awards 2002. Source.
The law of similarity captures the idea that elements will be grouped perceptually if they are similar to each other.
The Law of Prägnanz (figure-ground) captures the idea that in perceiving a visual field, some objects take a prominent role (the figures) while others recede into the background (the ground).
The Macintosh logo can be viewed as a regular happy face and a happy face in profile (looking at a computer screen). Source.
The law of symmetry captures the idea that when we perceive objects we tend to perceive them as symmetrical shapes that form around their centre.
The law of closure posits that we perceptually close up, or complete, objects that are not, in fact, complete.
We perceive the letters ‘I’, ‘B’, and ‘M’ although the shapes we see, in fact, are only lines of white space of differing length hovering above each other. Source.
You can find more information in the article Gestalt principles of form perception
The Self-Reference EffectSelf-reference effect is particularly important for web writing and can dramatically improve the communication between authors and readers. Things that are connected to our personal concept are remembered better than those which aren’t directly connected to us. For instance, after reading an article users better remember the characters, stories or facts they had personal experience with. In Usability the self-reference effect is usually used in terms of web writing and content presented on a web-site.
Usability Glossary: Terms and Concepts
Eye-TrackingEye tracking is the process of measuring either the point of gaze (”where we are looking”) or the motion of an eye relative to the head. eye tracking monitor records every eye movement and highlights the most active areas on the site visually. Eye-tracking studies can help to estimate how comfortable web users are with the web-site they’re browsing through and how quickly they can understand the structure and system behind it. You can find some interesting usability findings from recent eye-tracking study Eyetrack07.
Eye-Tracking: Source.
FoldThe fold is defined as the lowest point where a web-site is no longer visible on the screen. The position of the fold is, of course, defined by the screen resolution of your visitor. The region above the fold (also called screenful) describes the region of a page that is visible without scrolling. Since the fold is seen directly without scrolling, it is often considered as the area which guarantees the highest possible ad click rates and revenues. However, Fold area isn’t that important. [Usability.gov]
Foveal viewport (Foveal area)The fovea, a part of human’s eye, is responsible for sharp central vision, which is necessary in humans for reading, watching television or movies, driving, and any activity where visual detail is of primary importance. Foveal area is a small wide space area where your eyes are aimed at and it is the only area where you can perceive the maximum level of detail. Foveal area is a tight area of about two degrees of visual field or two thumbnails held in front of your eyes. This is the place where you’d like to deliver the most important messages of your visitors.
Foveal viewport is important, because outside of this wide screen area how your visitors see your web-pages change dramatically. Inside this area is the only part of your vision with the maximal resolution - only here no eye scanning is necessary. [Source]
GlossGloss is an automated action that provides hints and summary information on where the link refers to and where it will take the user once it’s clicked. Hints can be provided via title-attribute of links. From the usability point of view users want to have the full control over everything what is happening on a web-site; clear and precise explanations of internal and outgoing links, supported by sound anchor text, can improve the usability of a web-site.
Graceful Degradation (Fault-tolerance)Graceful Degradation is the property of a web-site to present its content and its basic features even if some of its components (partly or at all) can’t be displayed or used. In practice it means that web-sites display their content in every possible “fault” scenario and can be used in every configuration (browser, plug-ins, connection, OS etc.) the visitor might have. “Power-users” are still offered a full, enhanced version of the page. For instance, it’s typical to offer alternatives for Multimedia-content (for instance image) to ensure that the content can be perceived if images can’t be displayed. [Wikipedia]
GranularityGranularity is the degree to which a large, usually complex data set or information has been broken down into smaller units.
HotspotHotspots are clickable site areas which change their form or/and outer appearance once they are clicked. This is typical for :focus-effects when a link or any other site element is clicked.
Hotspot and gloss on Smashingmagazine.com
LegibilityLegibility indicates how clear the text is visually.
MinesweepingMinesweeping stands for user interactions which aim to identify the links on a web-site. In most cases minesweeping is a clear alarm signal for usability problems. Usually minesweeping involves the user rapidly moving the cursor or pointer over a page, watching to see where the cursor or pointer changes to indicate the presence of a link. [Usability.gov]
Mystery-Meat Navigation (MMN)In Web mystery-meat navigation describes designs in which it is extremely difficult for users to recognize the destinations of navigational hyperlinks — or determine where the hyperlinks are.
Physical consistencyThis concept describes the consistent outer appearance of a web-site - e.g. the position of logos, navigation, the use of graphic elements and typography. Physical consistency is essential for better orientation and effective site navigation.
Progressive Enhancement (PE)Progressive Enhancement is a design strategy in which sites are created in a layered fashion — from the basic functionality for all browsers to the additional, enhanced features for modern browsers. The main advantage of progressive enhancement lies in its “universal usability” — i.e. the fact that it allows everyone to access the basic content and functionality of a web page, using any browser or Internet connection, while also providing those with better bandwidth or more advanced browser software an enhanced version of the page. [Wikipedia]
ReadabilityReadability describes the degree to which the meaning of text is understandable, based on the complexity of sentences and the difficulty of vocabulary. Indexes for readability usually rank usability by the age or grade level required for someone to be able to readily understand a reading passage. Readability is not legibility. [Usability Glossary]
User-centered design (UCD)User-centered design is a design philosophy in which users, their needs, interests and behavior define the foundation of web-site in terms of site structure, navigation and obtaining the information. UCD is considered as a standard approach for modern web-applications, particularly due to the rise of user generated content. In Web 2.0 visitors have to be motivated to participate and therefore need conditions optimized for their needs.
Vigilance (sustained attention)Vigilance is the ability to sustain attention during prolonged, monotonous tasks such as proofreading a text looking for spelling errors, reminding of appointments, auto-saving word processor documents etc. In modern web-applications vigilance tasks are performed in background, automatically and thus improve the usability of the service. [I-D]
Walk-Up-And-Use DesignA Walk-up-and-use design is self-explanatory and intuitive, so that first-time or one-time users can use it effectively without any prior introduction or training. [I-D]
WireframeA wireframe is a basic structure — skeleton — of a site that describes the ideas, concepts and site structure of a web-site. Wireframes can be designed as presentations which explain to the stake holders how the site is designed, which functionality it offers and how users can accomplish their tasks. Wireframes usually don’t have any visual elements or a complete page layouts; they are often first drafts and sketches designers create on paper. Example? Here you go. [Glossary, Wikipedia: Wireframes]
Wireframes: Example.
References, Sources
Interaction Design EncyclopaediaA growing encyclopaedia on interaction design; the articles not only explain usability terms and issues, but also provide a detailed description of their use in modern design.
Usability First Glossary: Alphabetical IndexOne of the largest usability glossaries with hundreds of articles about usability-related issues.
Usability GlossaryUsability 101. Usability Glossary from the Information Technology Systems & Services of the University of Minnesota Duluth.

Wesabe launches mobile banking platform

Online money management website Wesabe has unveiled the mobile version of its service, the Wesabe Mobile, which enables users to monitor account balances, recent transactions and track expenditures.

Wesabe's free, web-based financial management tool lets users consolidate and analyze financial data from their bank and credit card accounts. The company also said that Wesabe Mobile works with Opera Mini and other browsers having SSL connections. According to Wired.com, the platform asks for minimum information on the mobile version to improve usability.
Jason Knight, chief executive at Wesabe said: "Having the information you need at the point of sale can really help you monitor your spending and make better-informed decisions."
Wesabe secured $4m in its series A funding in June 2007 and is the first provider to offer a complete mobile platform among its peers. Geezeo, another online financial management site offers SMS-based account information while Mint offers SMS alerts.
Source: ComputerWire daily updates

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

Web Usability and Accessibility

Web Usability and Accessibility Are As Important As Search Engine ProminenceSo you've optimised your website, done the keyword research, got the backlinks and everything is ethical. You're sitting proudly on the first page of the search results. Or you've set up a pay per click campaign, bid on your keywords, created some ads and performance tracking is in place. Again, you're at the top of the pile. Either way, you're visible and people are visiting your website. But visitors aren't converting into leads, prospects or customers. What's going wrong? Well your website may be visible, but is it connecting?Having attracted visitors to your website through prominent search engine placements, it is vital not to lose them by failing to connect. Different visitors will have different priorities and levels of satisfaction. In order to reach and retain as many as possible and to maximise the chances of conversion, you should consider your site's usability and accessibility.Web usabilityUsability is all about providing your visitors with an effective, efficient and satisfying experience. It's common knowledge that visitors tend to glance at, and scan, pages rather than study them in any great detail. If the message and options are not clear, they may leave. If they don't leave, the chances are that they will click on the first link that seems to be most relevant - it may not be the right one. Repeat the process a few times and soon a visitor can be lost, confused and frustrated. Either way the result is the same - missed opportunity and little likelihood of a return visit.The more self-evident your pages are, the greater the chance of converting the visitor into a prospect or customer.12 simple tips for a more usable website1. On the home page make it clear what the site is all about.2. Make the purpose of each page obvious.3. User hierarchical headings to give clear structure to the copy.4. Make the navigation and links obvious.5. Use clear unambiguous wording.6. Make the options and next steps obvious.7. Remove any wording or imagery that is unnecessary, confusing or distracting.8. Use consistent conventions throughout.9. Include site search and a site map.10. Make information such as contact details, pricing and delivery charges clearly accessible.11. Make the pages printable by including a cascading style sheet for printing.12. Don't allow careless errors to make your site look unprofessional.Browsers create their own set of problemsOne more tip - just because your website works fine in your browser of choice, do not assume that it will work equally well in all browsers. In fact it is not even safe to assume that it will work equally well in different versions of the same browser. Web designers who have had to cope with the incompatibilities of IE5, IE6 and now IE7 will no doubt testify to this point. It is vital to be sure that your website works on all the popular browsers. As well as IE and Firefox, don't forget Netscape and Opera on Windows and Safari on the Mac. And just to muddy the waters a bit further, Apple have recently announced Safari for Windows.So now your website is usable, but is it usable by everybody? For some, usability is just a small obstacle when compared to the barrier of accessibility.Web accessibilityAll businesses in virtually all countries have a legal obligation to make their websites accessible to people with disabilities, otherwise they are discriminating. Given that something like 15% of the population have some sort of disability, that's a sizeable market proportion. If you're not reaching them, your competitors probably are.One of the many myths surrounding web accessibility is that blind people are the only ones who need to be catered for. Whilst blind people and their use of assistive technologies to read web pages are an obvious and important example, consider also people with other visual, auditory, physical, speech, cognitive and neurological impairments.How does a colour-blind person cope with page colours?How does someone with a mobility impairment manage without being able to use a mouse?How does a deaf person gain access to auditory content?How does someone with attention deficit disorder make sense of the pages?Web pages should be accessible to all of them. And it's not just disabled people who will benefit. Older people, people with low literacy levels, people who are not fluent in the website language, people with low bandwidth connections, people using older technologies and people with short-term injuries and illnesses will also benefit.9 tips for a more accessible website1. Provide all images with an alternative text description. If the image does not convey any information, provide null (blank) text rather than no alternative text at all.2. Provide transcripts of audio content.3. Ensure that the contrast between text foreground and background colours is sufficiently strong.4. Do not use colour alone to convey information. There should also be some other form of visual indicator such as additional characters, images or font changes.5. Place column headings in the first row of a table and place row headings in the first column. If headings are ambiguous, use the HTML scope attribute to clarify.6. Never use the HTML blink and marquee elements. For animated GIFs or other moving objects, the flicker frequency must be less than 2 Hz or greater than 55 Hz. But better to have no moving content at all.7. Link text should clearly state the purpose and destination of the link. Phrases like Click Here may mean nothing to someone listening to a screen reader.8. Provide an option to skip navigation on all pages. This will save screen reader users from having to repetitiously listen to the same navigation, and keyboard users from having to repetitiously tab through every item. Use hierarchical headers to provide the same benefit and to enable navigation through copy.9. On forms, always associate prompts with controls so that each control is adequately described. Use the HTML fieldset and legend tags to give structure to complex forms.The importance of web standardsUsable, accessible web pages can only be achieved through strict compliance with the standards set by the World Wide Web Consortium. They provide a platform for consistency, compatibility, stability, flexibility and extensibility. Implementing standards throughout a website's design will address many usability and accessibility issues by default.Last and certainly not leastUsability and accessibility alone will not suddenly convert all your visitors into customers. Content is vital to a website's delivery capability. But at least those visitors may now stick around long enough to look at the content.

Sunday, May 27, 2007

Google Lays Out Its Mobile User Experience Strategy

Just market the word 'Google' with any event these days and you can pretty much bet it will sell out. Last night I was at a presentation by Google on mobile user experience. If any other company gave this talk, maybe 40 or so people would show up. But because the speaker was from Google and the event was in the company's New York City nerve center, over 250 people packed out the Google auditorium. For those of us lucky enough to get a ticket, we received an upfront look at how Google designs its mobile applications.

The event, "Google Presents User Experience & Mobile Apps," was co-hosted by the New York City chapter of the Usability Professionals Association.

Google user experience designer Leland Rechis started his talk by re-iterating Google's mission: Organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful. Rechis added that mobility is fast-becoming the key to making information "universally accessible," but he warned that without a solid user experience, there is no way mobile applications can be useful.

Rechis said that when Google plans to launch a mobile application, it looks at the potential app through six layers:

1. Understanding users, anywhere, anytime

2. Fits in your pocket

3. More personal than the PC

4. Consistency across modes

5. Localization is intensified

6. Integrated devices, modes, products

Rechis then broke out the company's mobile development and optimization strategy by each level.

Understanding users, anywhere, anytime

Rechis said that Google breaks down mobile users into three behavior groups:

A. "Repetitive now"
B. "Bored now"
C. "Urgent now"

The "repetitive now" user is someone checking for the same piece of information over and over again, like checking the same stock quotes or weather. Google uses cookies to help cater to mobile users who check and recheck the same data points.

The "bored now" are users who have time on their hands. People on trains or waiting in airports or sitting in cafes. Mobile users in this behavior group look a lot more like casual Web surfers, but mobile phones don't offer the robust user input of a desktop, so the applications have to be tailored.

The "urgent now" is a request to find something specific fast, like the location of a bakery or directions to the airport. Since a lot of these questions are location-aware, Google tries to build location into the mobile versions of these queries.

Fits in your pocket

Rechis stressed the limitations of mobile phones. He pointed out that any mobile application has to be able to fit on a small screen and cannot require complicated text input. Also, since the third screen has no X-axis, layout has to clean, simple, but maintain the basic usability of the parent desktop application. Rechis also stressed that the "density of information" changes on a mobile phone, requiring designers to identify only the most essential parts of any given application. Obviously, juggling all this isn't easy.

In order to achieve usable mobile applications, Fechis reminded the audience that they have to be willing to test and re-test applications with users. Otherwise you can't get it right.

Also, building successful mobile apps requires developers and user experience people who are passionate about their subjects. He pointed out one Google employee who went to great pains to make sure that Google Maps gave directions correctly for Japan. Since street signs and markers in Japan are different than in the West, this employee had to go to great lengths to make sure that the app rendered maps and gave directions in ways that are useful for that country.

Consistency

Google always strives to keep the look and feel of any Google application consistent, both within the type of function (i.e. all blog search results look different than map search results) and on devices (a map search on a desktop looks and feels like a map search on a mobile phone and vice versa). If mobile applications are to be universal, then developers have to maintain patterns and designs across all screens.

Localization is intensified

Rechis said, bluntly, that the mobile Web is balkanized, "The Pangaea of the Web is gone." And don't expect this to change anytime soon, either. Thanks to carrier portals and off portal applications, there is no one mobile standard to develop for.

In the mobile world developers have to be prepared to optimize for different devices, browsers, languages, carriers, countries and cultures.

I was struck by a couple of things during this presentation. One, I didn't realize just how much care Google takes in creating its new applications. They are really dedicated to making things as simple and easy to use as possible. The second was how much Google seems to thrive on its vaguely anarchist internal structure. Rechis pointed out how Google structures its development teams and the process seems to account for a lot of internal dissent and even debate. I was amazed at how different this is from most development efforts I have ever been a part of.

The third thing I was struck by was the level of Google's commitment to mobility. I know they've been talking about it, but last night I was impressed by just how much they are working to build a truly useful mobile Web. I think everyone else out there making mobile applications should take note.

« Marriott Offers Electronic Tools For Travelers | Main | Quick Tryout: DocuPen Executive Pack »



Author Topic: Google Lays Out Its Mobile User Experience Strategy
obrienbesa[at]gmail[dot]com Posted on 4/12/2007 07:38 AM EDT | Permalink |

These guys are good man. We have seen a bunch of other guys with huge sums but they never impress me. They really know how to stay in the lead with all the cash. For the past 5 years my favorite website is google. I mean google is the internet guys. All their goodies are a cut above the rest. Keep it up boys.
PS. Never again argue about that cabin thing in your JET.

Hats off gentlemen
Matt Ekram Posted on 4/16/2007 09:56 AM EDT | Permalink |

Google is in the direct direction. It seems that Google also realizes that to understand mobile user experience, they also need to evaluate the overall design of the physical devices as well, and how they interact with the screen and application.

Also, I don't think consistency of application between between PC and mobile is really a must have strategy, because this may stifle other approaches that can make the mobile application simpler and more intuitive.

Thursday, April 26, 2007

How Aggregate Displays Change User Behavior

A fascinating study demonstrates how simply displaying aggregate data like Top 10 lists heavily influences the way people make decisions on social web sites.

Aggregate displays are everywhere, from the book ratings at Amazon.com to the most-emailed articles at the New York Times to the number of diggs at Digg.com. They’re a primary element of social design. They not only let people know how their actions relate to others, but they also alter the behavior of those who view them.

Columbia sociology professor Duncan Watts has written the fascinating piece Is Justin Timberlake the product of Cumulative Advantage?, describing a sociology experiment that has huge implications for the display of aggregate data on social web sites. (thankfully, the article isn’t about Justin Timberlake at all. The author doesn’t even mention his name…probably titled by an editor at the Times)

Description of the Experiment

Watt’s study demonstrates how socially influenced we are as we use software and make decisions online. He describes an experiment in which they built two web sites. In one web site they showed a list of songs to users and had the users rate the songs as they listened to them, allowing the users to download the songs if they wanted to. In the other, they also allowed the users to rate and download the songs but they also showed the download numbers to the users. In the second group the users could see how often the songs had been downloaded as they used the site. The difference was in the display: users either saw the aggregate display of downloads (called the social influence group) or they did not (called the independent group).

In addition, they split up the social influence group into 8 parts. They replicated the same test 8 times to see if there were any differences over time.

Watts describes how the download numbers could be used to test:

“This setup let us test the possibility of prediction in two very direct ways. First, if people know what they like regardless of what they think other people like, the most successful songs should draw about the same amount of the total market share in both the independent and social-influence conditions — that is, hits shouldn’t be any bigger just because the people downloading them know what other people downloaded. And second, the very same songs — the “best” ones — should become hits in all social-influence worlds.”

In other words, the mere fact that users can see the downloads is being tested. A simple display difference. A design decision.

Does Seeing Aggregate Data Change Behavior?

Does displaying aggregate download data change the behavior of users? The answer is Yes. Their findings:

  1. The most popular songs in the social influence group were way more popular than those in the independent group. In other words, the rich got richer when people could see the aggregate data.
  2. The popular songs in the 8 social influence groups were not the same! That is, the download numbers affected the popularity of the songs. Early download leaders continued to lead not just because they were good songs, but because they were already leading.
  3. The independent group was considered the test for quality. The songs that were most downloaded were considered the highest quality because everybody voted independently…there was no social influence since download numbers were not displayed. These songs did correlate slightly with the songs in the social influence group that did well, but did not have much of an effect overall.
  4. The social influence group was influenced much more by the number of downloads than by the quality of the songs. The social influence had a stronger effect on the song downloads than independent, unbiased decision making.

This result could be seen as a confirmation of the bandwagon effect, a known bias resulting from our tendency to follow the crowd. This bias is probably the result of ignorance…if we don’t know something we tend to rely on the opinion of others. In this case users probably paid attention to the download numbers because they didn’t have any prior experience with the music.

Outcome is Unpredictable

One outcome is that predicting what will happen in social influenced situations is impossible. Watts explains:

“In our artificial market, therefore, social influence played as large a role in determining the market share of successful songs as differences in quality. It’s a simple result to state, but it has a surprisingly deep consequence. Because the long-run success of a song depends so sensitively on the decisions of a few early-arriving individuals, whose choices are subsequently amplified and eventually locked in by the cumulative-advantage process, and because the particular individuals who play this important role are chosen randomly and may make different decisions from one moment to the next, the resulting unpredictably is inherent to the nature of the market.”

In other words, early leaders tend to stay in the lead simply because people see they are leading and are influenced by it. If a song gets an early lead then people assume it is because of quality, but the case may simply be that it happened to be one of the first listened to.

Huge Implications for Social Site Design

This result has huge implications for all social web sites, especially those that show aggregate data. Digg, for example, shows aggregate data everywhere on the site. This experiment, in addition to several other issues that I wrote about in Digg’s Design Dilemma, suggest that the results there are socially influenced to such an extent that it would be hard indeed to know where the quality lies…

It also leads to interesting questions for those building social sites. What data do we aggregate? What should we display? Where? What influence will it have on the future behavior of those who see it? Does it influence the quality of content? How so?….etc…etc…

Another level of complexity can be added on top of this. What if the users knew more about the download numbers? For example, what if a user knew their best friend hated one of these songs? Of course that’s going to affect our decision as well, and maybe moreso, because the user trusts their friends more than a simple download number.

A Note of Caution

Finally, a note of caution. Over at Publishing 2.0 Scott Karp extrapolates this finding further, suggesting (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) that it explains other phenomena like Web 2.0 and the blogging A-List. He wonders if the A-List is just riding a wave of initial popularity.

We should be careful to push this that far, however, because some things that Karp mentions happen over a lot longer a period of time and have many other factors involved. The A-Listers, for example, drop like a rock if they don’t continue to post and get linked to. They quickly lose their advantage in the face of low post output and other changes over time. In the study Watts tested the ratings for song preferences. Songs, of course, don’t change over time. My guess is that the result will apply relatively well to things that don’t change…songs, movies, texts…and less to things that don’t.

If Watt’s experiment is solid, however, it should help inform anybody building a social web site. If people are unduly influenced by aggregate data, then we cannot make any assumptions about the quality of it. In other words, much of the success in social systems is based on that most horrible of reasons…luck.

CUE: A Usability Testing Bake-Off

Originally published: Aug 19, 2005

Practicing usability testing has great similarities with baking an apple pie.

If you've never baked a pie and you're like most people, you'll probably learn from a friend or family member, such as Grandma, or you'll learn from a cookbook recipe or TV cooking show. The first few pies you bake—while still tasting pretty good—probably won't come out as good as you'd like, but, with practice, you'll get better and better.

As you continue to practice, you'll experiment—sometimes deliberately and sometimes through creative accidents, like leaving out a key ingredient—and from each experiment you'll learn more about what makes a great pie. As your pie baking skills become more developed, people will beg you to bake more pies and will show great excitement when another one comes out of the oven.

At least, that's been my experience with baking apple pies. Also, coincidentally, it's been my experience with usability testing.

The Parallels

Many folks learn usability testing from a colleague or they read about it in a book or attend a course. The first few tests they conducted—while producing interesting results—probably didn't come out as good as they would have liked. However, with practice, they got better and better.

As they continued to practice, they started to experiment and from each experiment, they learned more about what produces a success usability test. As their testing skills became more developed, their coworkers begged them to conduct more and more tests and showed great excitement with every new test.

Solitary Activity

Both baking apple pies and conducting usability tests are solitary activities, for the most part. The baker and the test organizer typically produce the results by themselves.

Rarely do we get to see how someone else bakes their pies. Rarely do we get to work alongside other usability test organizers to see how they do their work.

Therefore, we develop our craft by ourselves, only really learning from our own experiences. Because of our own trial and error, our testing techniques and skills evolve in a unique direction

The Value of the Bake-Off

In the world of baking apple pies, communities of pie-bakers gather at events known as "bake-offs." These festivals give the bakers a chance to compare their results, often under the guise of choosing the best pie.

While it's great to win the bake-off, the real benefit comes from learning how others created their entries. Seeing the different techniques and ingredients they used can give great insight into ways to improve your pies in the future. The bake-off is an opportunity to compare and contrast your approach against the approaches of your peers.

CUE: A Usability Testing Bake-off

In 1998, Rolf Molich held what we could call the first usability testing bake-off. Instead, he called it a Comparative Usability Evaluation or CUE. However, the goals are the same.

So far, Rolf has held four CUE sessions, each one comparing top-notch practitioners demonstrating their skills. In each session, each practitioner evaluated the same interface, using his or her own personal techniques. The results have been fascinating.

In an apple pie bake-off, the chefs often compare their recipes to their own. In Rolf's sessions, participants compared their techniques, looking for interesting differences.

For example, practitioners each wrote a report that Rolf turned over to the client whose design they were evaluating. The participants could compare their reports to the other teams and see what they did differently.

In fact, all the teams produced very different reports. They also planned the projects differently, recruited their participants differently, and created different tasks, even though they were all testing the same interface.

Comparing Leads to Improvement

By comparing our work against others doing the same thing, we can easily see opportunities to improve our own work. For example, reading the various practitioners' reports, we can get ideas on new sections to add to our own reports and clever ways to describe certain problems.

Even if we didn't participate in the CUE session ourselves, there are still interesting things to learn. We can look at the instructions Rolf gave each participating practitioner and then ask ourselves, "How would we have executed this project?"

We can think about how we'd recruit users. How many users would we recruit? Would we exclude users already experienced with the interface, focusing only on newbies? Alternatively, would we try to balance the test for both experienced and inexperienced users?

How would we design the tasks? Would we focus purely on structured tasks, trying to collect timing information and success rates? Alternatively, would we look at problem discovery, trying to uncover every problem available?

By comparing what we would do against what the CUE practitioners actually did, we can see how our techniques differ and get ideas on how we could do things differently going forward.

Rating the Problems

Every apple pie tastes a little different. It's neat to taste a sample from multiple pies, one after the other. You can really see how different approaches produce different results. Some our more tart and some are sweeter. Some have a chunky filling, while others have a crisp topping.

The same is true when you compare the problems that the CUE practitioners found. You can look at a problem, such as a particular function seeming unintuitive, and decide if you would have rated that as a severe problem or as something not worthy of much attention. Reading the CUE problem reports will make you think about how you report problems and rank their severity.

It is fascinating to see how some practitioners rated certain problems as critically important, while other practitioners rated the same problems as low priority issues. Many colleagues, after looking at the CUE results, have revisited their severity ranking process, to make sure they are accurately rating the problems they discover.

Striving for Constant Improvement

Because we're often working by ourselves, having an external reference point to compare our work to is important. For apple pie bakers, the bake-off is where we can learn from others. In the world of usability testing, the CUE studies are quickly becoming the focal point for these comparisons.

If you're thinking about conducting or already conduct your own usability tests, you'll definitely want to attend this year's UI12 Conference, where Rolf Molich will present his highly-acclaimed session, Advanced Methods for Usability Testing.

Usability -- Not User-Friendliness -- Is The Key To ERP Success

A software solution that scores high in usability will shorten implementation time frames in turn enable a faster return on investment.

By Sharon Ward, Worldwide Manufacturing Industry Director, Microsoft Business Solutions, Microsoft Corp.

April 18, 2007 -- Buyers of manufacturing software have been looking for the "holy grail" of user-friendliness for years. User-friendliness is a frequent discussion topic when companies evaluate enterprise resource planning (ERP) but it is one of those things nobody can really define, but everybody knows it when they see it.

To begin to define usability, it is best to start with the anticipated benefits such software solutions can deliver. A software solution that scores high in usability will shorten implementation time frames and reduce the amount of training required to go live, in turn enabling a faster return on investment and delivering benefits more quickly. Such a system will result in a lower total cost of ownership, is likely to change and grow with your company, allows for easy upgrades and interoperability and makes it much less likely that it will need to be replaced to enable future business processes.

Software vendors are adept at making their ERP look user-friendly. Carefully scripted and well-prepared demos can mask the more cumbersome aspects of day-to-day business processes. Selection committees are not usually made up of people who process transactions all day, so extra screens, background processes or required keystrokes may go unnoticed. And matching up the software business flows with your in-house business processes doesn't really tell you anything about the system's ability to support your future needs. Even a hands-on session won't help you make the right choice in this crucial decision.

So how can you judge whether software is truly usable?

Flexible IT Architecture

Surprisingly, the vendor's IT architecture is just as important as the functionality of the system to your future success. First and foremost, the architecture should use industry standards. In addition, a good IT architecture should be lean, just like a manufacturing facility. It should have everything that you need -- including strong security features -- but shouldn't include or require you to purchase a lot of stuff you don't need.

Next, look for application flexibility. Your business will change; how easily can the software change with you? A role-based development process and real-life usability testing are two key things to look for when interviewing a vendor. Business processes should be easily changeable through switches or table entries. The underlying design philosophy should make it easy to customize the application if necessary to support a differentiating business process, and the application should be easy and inexpensive to upgrade as new releases come out, even after customization. In addition, there should be built-in workflows, analytics and a world-class portal with role-based metrics available. If your prospective vendor can't show you evidence of these, then it is not likely to make the grade in terms of usability.

Works The Way You Do

We all know that business processes don't remain static for very long. Who reading this article does business in exactly the same way they did even five years ago? Nobody -- or you wouldn't still be in business. So much has changed so rapidly that companies are continuously reinventing themselves -- and you need systems that can keep pace with the changes.

Even recently it was inconceivable that customers would enter their own sales orders and configure products themselves over the Web. Today they demand this ability. Suppliers release their own purchase orders against contracts, or participate in vendor-managed inventory programs. Who knows what changes will occur in the future? Software needs to be flexible and adaptable as new ways of doing business emerge.

Today more and more companies compete based on the speed of their supply chain. Flexibility, communication, collaboration and visibility are the most important enablers of supply chain velocity and transparency. How can you ensure that you provide supply chain transparency?

In most cases, it means providing portal access and other collaboration tools to customers and suppliers. A portal is the best and fastest way to share documents and to collaborate around the world at all hours of the day or night, every single day. A portal must be easy for users to access and set up without requiring a lot of IT help, and yet must include strong security.

Also look for pervasive workflows that notify users, customers or suppliers of events or delays that can affect business results. Workflows should be able to communicate across company boundaries, have easily set thresholds and be easy to create or modify without requiring IT intervention.

Familiar Interfaces

It is important that systems are easy to navigate for people who may use them only occasionally as well as for power users. Information workers today spend a large portion of their workday using their e-mail applications, probably the most widely deployed applications in the world. Messages from co-workers, customers and suppliers constantly flow through e-mail inboxes. Rather than jump from an ERP system to e-mail, it's simpler if business applications not only look and feel like e-mail but are actually integrated with it.

A familiar interface enables workers to feel comfortable with an application immediately. And since industry analysts agree that one of the biggest costs involved in implementing new ERP systems is training, which often equals or exceeds the cost of the actual software purchase, eliminating the need for some training can speed up the implementation time frame dramatically, leading to faster ROI and time to benefit from the ERP investment.

Confident Decision Making

One of the lesser-known disadvantages of earlier generations of ERP is that software rarely communicated information to users about upcoming problems, unless the user was savvy enough to ask the right question at the right time. If the user was lucky or smart enough to stumble on a problem, deciding how to solve it was more often a matter of intuition than data analysis. The tools available were simply too slow and cumbersome, especially as the pace of business got faster and faster. Data warehouses and other analytical tools usually rely on periodic updates, forcing users to work with less-than-current data. Disparate systems often yield conflicting information. No wonder most manufacturers ran by the seat of their pants. They simply had no tools.

Today it's possible for analytics engines to be embedded in applications or in the IT stack. Engines can access information from multiple disparate systems instantly and present the user with up-to-date information in a graphical format. Some engines and search tools can combine both structured data, like that found in ERP databases, and unstructured data, like that found in documents like contracts or RFPs (requests for proposal), to present the user with an immediate and complete picture.

Conclusion

It's rare today that a company has no IT systems in place, so it's important to select applications that run on industry-standard platforms so that applications can easily interoperate. Investigating the technology that surrounds required business functionality can be even more important than the functionality itself. After all, it's relatively easy to add new features to a system, but it's often impossible -- or at least difficult and expensive -- to change your IT architecture.

Sharon Ward is worldwide manufacturing industry director for the Microsoft Business Solutions group at Microsoft Corp. In this role, she is responsible for setting the global industry strategy and ensuring communication throughout Microsoft's global industry community. http://www.microsoft.com/dynamics

Yes, you should be using personas

Personas seem to go in and out of fashion. Not long ago, people were advocating hyper-researched personas done in painstaking detail, these days designers seem more inclined to leave them out of the process.

So, are personas actually useful or should we stop wasting time and ditch them?

I first came into contact with personas in an academic context. They seemed like a nice idea but I tended to use them to justify my design rather than to guide design, which seemed kind of back to front.

Since then, I’ve worked in places where personas are more or less embraced as part of the process, and then longer I use them, the more I’ve come to the opinion that personas are incredibly valuable, but not for the reasons that many people think they are.

If I’m working on a UCD project (and thankfully, these days that is pretty much every project I do), then I would much prefer to include persona development in the process than not.

But, having said that - I find personas virtually useless when it comes to design, and I very rarely reference them in making design decisions. For me, personas aren’t about design, but that doesn’t mean they’re not incredibly powerful in other ways.

Personas communicate the user centred process like no other method

Having your clients view user research and testing is incredibly powerful in helping them realise that there is a problem in the way they’ve been approaching things to date (if you’re not encouraging stakeholders to actively participate in observing research and testing you’re missing out on a lot). But to get them to actually understand what user centred design is about - you need personas.

Personas should always be developed collaboratively with key stakeholders - as many as possible. They can often be derived from existing marketing personas or profiles (but, don’t be mistaken that personas that the marketing department gives you are personas you can use without any work). You should try to validate your personas with some kind of user research if at all possible - this can be in the form of some contextual interviews, lab based studies, or by talking to people in the company who interact with user directly on a regular basis (I’ve found people who work in call centres can often provide invaluable insight to what users are really like).

Personas should define the boundaries for which you will design. It’s a common misconception that personas are about creating a set of ‘typical’ or ’stereotypical’ users. Much more useful is to use personas who are edge cases. Creating ‘edge case’ personas and then prioritising personas and their goals is much more useful in helping decide what functionality goes in and what doesn’t. And which of the tasks or outcomes are most common, or more important. Decisions which are critical foundations to allowing good design work.

Personas are powerful in guiding requirements definition.

Even before you start designing you need to know what the product is and what it does. What are it’s core feature and what are it’s advanced functions. Personas really help guide discussion and decision making on requirements.

It’s generally agreed that one of the biggest factors for bad user experience is featuritis. Products that do too many things, or that prioritise advanced functionality over core functionality.

Putting each function to the test using personas before letting it in the door is very helpful. Then giving features relative priority using the number and importance of personas who are using them helps guides the overall application or site’s design priorities.

Using this evaluation process makes putting the user at the centre of the design process habitual and natural, and is also very helpful in reaching concensus within a project team.

Personas kill the ‘elastic user’

If I’m managing to inspire you to use personas more or differently, and you haven’t read it recently, let me encourage you to take the time to read Allan Cooper’s ‘The Inmates Are Running The Asylum‘. It’s a classic text that is renown for making programmers angry because Allan isn’t particularly flattering to them, but it gives real insight into the original ideas behind personas and I think you’ll find yourself even more inclined to use personas regularly.

I re-read it earlier this year and I particularly took away the idea of the Elastic User. This is where stakeholders make statements about what ‘users’ want, what ‘users’ do, what ‘users’ prefer, and because the ‘user’ in that context is so undefined and broad, they are able to say almost anything they like and there is no real way to contradict that opinion.

The creation of personas means that user groups are much more defined, so broad sweeping statements about what users want can actually be tested against something. Rather than having a free pass to do anything to the requirements or design by just using the word ‘user’, these assertions can now be tested and validated against more closely defined user characteristics and goals.

Use what you’ve got to build personas

Sometimes you’ll have a whole lot of research, sometimes you’ll have practically nothing. Either way, personas can be useful. Obviously the more you know the better, but even just a quick verbal sketch can be extremely powerful.

Not long ago I used the following persona in a design workshop:

‘Betty is a pensioner who lives in suburban Newcastle and is in charge of the local Neighbourhood Watch chapter’

That’s it. But it made a huge difference because it created an edge case persona for a site that was originally targeted at statisticians. ‘Creating’ Betty allowed the team to see that designs would work perfectly well for people who understood the language of statistics would be completely useless for Betty. And we found that pages that were really *for* Betty hadn’t actually be designed appropriately for her at all.

Sometimes, a pencil sketch persona can provide massive bang for buck.

You should care what car your persona drives

One of the things that make personas easy to criticise is that sometimes they feel like an exercise in creative writing.

‘Clare is 28 and lives in Primrose Hill. She drives a Prius but only on the weekends and she has a puppy that she takes walking twice a day. Clare is single but dates frequently and likes to travel.’

For as long as you think personas are about design you’re right - what does this have to do with design? When you use personas predominantly as a communication tool, then these small details become all important. After all - what you are trying to do is humanise the ‘target audience’. As humans, it is exactly these little details we care about, it’s what helps us to relate to other people and what makes them real. Does it really *matter* what car Clare drives? Well… kind of. People choose things like cars to drive and places to live as a means of communicating who they are. It adds depth to Clare’s personality. But, I’d never advocate actually *researching* those details. They’re communication devices, if people don’t know what Prius *means* then there’s no point using it. Make sense?

Don’t design for personas

As I mentioned before - personas should be edge cases. From your personas you can work out what functionality is included and what is the core functionality. Once you’ve got that information - and you’ve immersed yourself in understanding the users through the creation of the personas - put them away and use your skill as a designer.

If you use the personas to closely guide your design you will end up supporting a series of edge cases. This will invariably mean that your CORE functionality is compromised. That’s bad design.

Once you’ve designed the product, you can then use the personas to evaluate the design, and to help communicate to your stakeholders how and why your design supports the goals and tasks of your personas.

Don’t be tempted to use the goals and task lists you generate for your personas as a jigsaw puzzle to layout on a page. That way failure lies.

So. Personas. I’m a fan, but you have to know where their power lies and use them appropriately, and don’t get too caught up in the process of their creation - do what you can with what you’ve got, bring your stakeholders on board and teach them how to be user centred, and get on with the important business of designing great user experience.

(Need more background on personas. Austin Govella has collected a bunch of useful links)

Monday, March 26, 2007

The secret to user-experience success is fostering trained introspection. Lessons from Apple, Google, and psychology (Philosophistry)

The secret to user-experience success is fostering trained introspection. Lessons from Apple, Google, and psychology (Philosophistry)

View from the Top

Shaul Hochstein and Merav Ahissar

We propose that explicit vision advances in reverse hierarchical direction, as shown for perceptual learning. Processing along the feedforward hierarchy of areas, leading to increasingly complex representations, is automatic and implicit, while conscious perception begins at the hierarchy’s top, gradually returning downward as needed. Thus, our initial conscious percept—vision at a glance—matches a high-level, generalized, categorical scene interpretation, identifying “forest before trees.” For later vision with scrutiny, reverse hierarchy routines focus attention to specific, active, low-level units, incorporating into conscious perception detailed information available there. Reverse Hierarchy Theory dissociates between early explicit perception and implicit low-level vision, explaining a variety of phenomena. Feature search “pop-out” is attributed to high areas, where large receptive fields underlie spread attention detecting categorical differences. Search for conjunctions or fine discriminations depends on reentry to low-level specific receptive fields using serial focused attention, consistent with recently reported primary visual cortex effects.

Life can only be understood backward, but it must be lived forward.
—Søren Kierkegaard

Saturday, March 24, 2007

还原破坏国家统一的罪魁诸葛亮本来面目

廖伦焰

  公元207年,曹操讨乌桓取得胜利,基本统一了中国北方,184年黄巾起义以来的中国北方内战基本上结束了。三国时代,北方是我国政治、经济、文化、军事的中心地区,占有绝大多数的中国人口。全国十三个州,其中有九个州都在中国北方。曹操在“三分天下有其二”的情况下,继续“奉天子以令不臣,修耕植,畜军资”,以绝对强大于南方的的政治、军事、经济实力,积极准备着进行一场统一全国,消灭南方荆州刘表、扬州孙权两个主要的割据势力的战争。中国统一的曙光,经过20几年内战后,终于出现了!
  曹操要坚决地通过统一战争,消灭南方地方割据势力,结束内战,实现国家统一;南方江东的孙权集团,却在公元200年,就按照鲁肃与孙权“榻上策”的战略规划,制定了“先两分后统一”的建国方针,并且,在207年、208年继续按照这个战略规划,向其西部刘表所属的江夏郡发起进攻,扩大实力,顽固地对抗北方的统一。诸葛亮于207年又在“隆中”向刘备提出了“先三分后统一”的建国方针。这样一来,中国的统一在207年就出现了三个方案,即:曹操的通过统一战争,消灭南方割据势力、尽快结束内战、实现国家统一的方案,和孙权、刘备的通过战争,先达到两分、三分天下目标后,再通过战争,结束两分或三分局面,实现国家统一的方案。公元208年爆发的、关系国家是尽快实现统一、结束战争,还是继续长期分裂、长期内战下去这一命运的赤壁之战,就是在这三个统一方案的矛盾水火不相容的形势下不可避免地发生的。这场战争以北方曹操的失败,南方孙、刘联军的胜利告终。赤壁之战北方曹操的失败,使得中国统一的进程遭到了严重阻碍,它所产生的影响为后来的“三分天下”奠定了基础,分裂使得战争更加频繁,人民继续为之生灵涂炭。据《三国志》记载:公元209年至公元222年三国鼎立正式形成期间,国内战争达36次之多;三国鼎立形成后至公元280年晋灭吴、三国鼎立结束的59年间,国内战争达110次之多。据《三国食货志》记载:东汉末年,全国人口5648万,公元263年魏灭蜀时,全国人口仅存767万。三分天下,天下多了几十年战争,中华民族到了濒临灭绝的边缘。孙权、刘备集团“先分后统”的建国方针,是破坏国家统一,着眼于个人利益、地方集团利益的罪恶方针。历史不以成败论英雄,赤壁之战中,发动统一战争的北方是正义的,是汉丞相奉天子之命,顺应统一的历史潮流发动的全国统一战争;顽固抗拒统一的南方割据势力是非正义的,是逆统一的历史潮流而动的,是应当予以否定的。
  诸葛亮是在国家统一形势极其难得出现的时候,联吴抗曹三分理论的提出者,又是赤壁之战中,代表刘备集团积极实践自己的“隆中”对策,到江东游说孙权,促成孙、刘联盟,促成赤壁之战爆发的重要人物,理所当然地要对自己危害天下、破坏国家统一,给国家和人民造成的深重灾难,承担不可推卸的责任。在国家经过20几年内战,统一形势极其难得出现的时候,积极献计献策促成国家统一,尽快结束内战,结束人民饱受的战争之苦,才是符合历史进步潮流的,遵循社会历史发展客观规律的。反之,则是逆历史进步潮流而动的,违背社会历史发展客观规律的。
  赤壁之战后,刘备势力逐步向益州发展,经过212至214年三年和益州牧刘璋的战争,夺取了益州。刘备于公元221年在诸葛亮等人的积极支持下,在仅有一州之地、九十万人口的益州称帝,诸葛亮被刘备任命为丞相。至此,诸葛亮三分中国有其一的分裂主张,从内容到形式上都彻底地实现了。(刘备建立的政权仍称汉王朝,后人称之为蜀汉,以区别于西汉、东汉。)
刘备建立的“国家”是“三国”中最弱小的,但向北方挑起的战争次数却是相当可观的。诸葛亮在公元223年刘备去世后,于228年至234年对曹魏发动了五次带有攻势防御性质的北伐,错误的战争决策,加重了人民的负担,加深了人民的苦难。北伐失败的根本原因,在于三分天下就开始的逆统一的历史潮流而动。正如诸葛亮《后出师表》中所说:“然不伐贼,王业亦亡。惟坐而待亡,孰与伐之?……顾王业不可偏安于蜀都,故冒危难以奉先帝之遗意。”
在前三次北伐失败后,公元229年,孙权在江东称帝,建立吴国,诸葛亮派卫尉陈震前往祝贺,并与吴国订立了两分中国的盟约。这个盟约,在《三国志.后主传第三》、《三国志.吴主传第二》、《三国志.陈震传》、《三国志.诸葛亮传第五.注引》四传均作了记载。盟约约定,盟约订立后,属魏的“徐、豫、幽、青属吴,并、凉、冀、兖属蜀,其司州之土,以函谷关为界。”对曹魏统治的九州作了分割。盟约中还信誓旦旦地写道:“且古建大事,必先盟誓,故周礼有司盟之官,尚书有告誓之文,汉之与吴,虽信由中,然分土裂境,宜有盟约。诸葛丞相德威远著,翼戴本国,典戎在外,信感阴阳,诚动天地,重复结盟,广诚约誓,使东西士民咸共闻之。故立坛杀牲,昭告神明,再歃加书,副之天府。天高听下,灵威 谌,司慎司盟,群神群祀,莫不临之。自今日汉、吴既盟之后,戮力一心,同讨魏贼,救危恤患,分灾共庆,好恶齐之,无或携贰。若有害汉,则吴伐之;若有害吴,则汉伐之。各守分土,无相侵犯。传之后叶,克终若始。凡百之约,皆如载书。信言不绝,实属于好。有渝此盟,创祸先乱,违贰不协, 慢天命,明神上帝是讨是督,山川百神是纠是殛,俾坠其师,无克祚国。于尔大神,其明鉴之!”
这个盟约的订立,是中国历史上极其重大的历史事件,究其诸葛亮的罪恶,真是罄竹难书,天下无二,这个以书面形式出现的“政府”间具有“法律效力”的盟约,产生了以下后果。
第一. 以蜀汉承认吴国的合法性换取吴国对蜀汉政权合法性的承认。蜀汉东吴两个政权的皇帝都是自封的,而魏政权形式上是汉天子刘协禅让的。魏帝坚持自己是国家唯一的具有合法性的政权,天下属魏,中国只有一个,蜀汉、东吴占据的领土是魏天下,即中国不可分割的部分,不承认蜀汉政权和东吴政权的合法性。盟约的订立,使蜀汉政权的合法性得到了东吴的承认。同时,东吴的合法性得到了蜀汉的承认。盟约以承认换取承认的形式,授受两个分裂国家具有合法地位,这是盟约政治意义的核心所在。
第二. 盟约的订立是两个弱小的、逆统一的历史潮流而动的反动小朝廷维系其生命存在的反映。面对强大的魏中央政权,汉吴不密切联合,最大限度地步调一致,就可能很快地被魏逐一灭亡,蜀汉东吴间生命存在关系是唇亡齿寒的关系。盟约强调魏是共同的敌人,必须“戮力一心,同讨魏贼”,就是因为魏严重威协着两个弱小朝廷生命的存在。
第三. 蜀汉“先三分后统一”和东吴“先两分后统一”的统一主张,从形式上也被彻底放弃。蜀汉和东吴之所以以“政府”间具有“法律效力”的盟约形式,放弃统一的主张,是因为面对强大的北方,都知道要单独地去实现灭魏是无能为力的。只有放弃统一,“同讨魏贼”,走两分中国的道路,才有可能是现实的。两个小朝廷重新确立的建国方针,把两分中国作为了各自的最高奋斗目标,最高的建国纲领。恢复汉室的旗号,从法律上被废除。完整的刘氏汉天下的的意义至此不再存在。
第四. 为国家统一制造了更严重的障碍,更加延长了内战时间,严重地阻碍了国家统一进程,增加了人民的苦难,破坏了社会生产力的发展。盟约不仅在诸葛亮在世时产生了“法律效力”,在公元263年魏灭蜀之前的整个时间里都产生着“法律效力”。三国时期人民是为战争而生,为战争而存在,为战争而消亡的,人民成为了一种特殊的战争资源。生产力中最关键的因素是人,没有人,就没有社会生产力,就谈不上社会存在。而少量的一点人的存在,其活动也主要地是为了战争需要,生产力发展和社会全面进步所受的破坏情况是不言而喻的。
第五. 盟约的订立最终逃脱不了分裂国家者灭亡的命运。由于两分中国的主张发源于“先两分后统一”和“先三分后统一”的逆统一历史潮流而动的错误主张。两分中国的主张既是“先分后统”主张失败的历史见证,又是“先分后统”主张失败的产物,是“先三分后统一”错误主张的发展,继续分裂既不顺天意,不符合中国历史,又不合民心,更增加了北方理直气壮统一中国的责任感,增加了北方实现国家统一、发展壮大实力的紧迫感,增加了北方不坚持统一、自身也会被灭亡的危机感。两个弱小朝廷的联盟,政治上是失败的,军事上仍是弱于北方的,经济基础上,北方黄河流域,是中华民族文明的发祥地,在三国时代,生产力水平遥遥领先于南方。因此,两分中国的主张只是逆统一历史潮流而动的梦想。在强大的北方政权存在的同时,逆统一历史潮流而动的两分中国的盟约必然地会破产。统一的历史潮流浩浩荡荡不可阻挡,中国几千年历史是在统一大趋势中向前发展的。自夏至汉至三国,乃至于近代,谁也不可能阻挡这个一如既往的历史趋势。蜀汉与东吴订立的盟约,虽然把诸葛亮也划成了外国人(诸葛亮是琅琊阳都人,琅琊阳都在今山东沂南县一带,属徐州、徐州按盟约属吴国),但诸葛亮要做外国人的打算注定要失败。分裂只会导致战争,在战争之后历史再曲折地走向统一,中国领土不可分,首先是中华民族是一家人的血缘关系及共同的民族意识、历史文化不可分。分裂是中国内战产生的一个重要根源,坚持分裂,除了导致战争以外,不会有其他任何政治上的后果。
第六. 两分中国的盟约,对于改变中国历史的发展状况,起了无比恶劣的作用。从公元184年黄巾起义至公元280年三国结束,中国经历了近100年的内战,汉民族人口锐减,元气大伤,为少数民族势力入主中原,统治中原近300年和国土分裂近300年埋下了一条严重的祸根。589年,隋统一中国后,才又重新恢复了汉族在中原地区的统治地位。
231年,诸葛亮第四次北伐曹魏,失败。234年,诸葛亮联吴共同伐魏,失败。殒命于五丈原,结束了罪恶的一生。
诸葛亮的一生是“鞠躬尽瘁,死而后已”地分裂祖国的一生,对国家统一所起的破坏作用,对生产力发展和社会全面进步所起的破坏作用,是罪在当时,害及千秋的。那么,这个破坏国家统一的天下第一罪魁,在历史上是怎么演变成了一个被千秋讴歌的神人了的呢?
诸葛亮要成为被千秋讴歌的神人,必须具备的一个重要前提条件就是,在魏、蜀、吴三国之中,蜀国必须代表着封建“正统”。陈寿撰的正史《三国志》,是以曹魏为正统,蜀吴为僭国的。如以这种“正统”论,诸葛亮这个蜀汉的丞相,就是僭国的丞相,当然便是后人所不耻的。可历史给后人开了很大一个玩笑,西晋在36年的统一中国后,北方发生了“五胡乱华”,即匈奴、鲜卑、羯、氐、羌等五个少数民族先后入主中原,晋政权南迁的情况。少数民族入主中原的情况,在三国前是从所未有的,这对汉民族的打击之沉重,被人们称之为“神州陆沉”。由于华夏民族发祥并成长于黄河流域的中原地区,所以,传统的“正统”论,是以取得中原统治权为正统观的。少数民族入主中原后,南渡的东晋王朝的合法性按“地域观”划分就成了一定的问题,为了给东晋司马氏政权的正统地位张目,也出于自身深刻的民族感情,东晋史学家习凿齿著《汉晋春秋》予以矫正,以“宗室血统正统观”确定“蜀以宗室为正,魏武虽受汉禅晋,尚为篡逆”,并且,在向朝廷的上书中,也坚持“吴、魏犯顺”、“蜀人杖正”的观点,这个观点,也很符合占人口绝大多数的汉民族反抗北方少数民族统治的普遍的民族心理。北宋司马光修《资治通鉴》时,由于历史情况发生了变化,“正统”观继续坚持陈寿撰的正史《三国志》,以魏为正统。可历史发展到南宋时,又出现了赵氏王朝偏安江南、与东晋王朝相类似的情况,历史为政治服务的现象在中国封建社会始终是一脉相承的,大理学家朱熹修《资治通鉴纲目》,又以蜀为正统,魏为僭国,蜀为正统的地位就这样确立了下来,没有历史的这些曲折,诸葛亮的历史形象,是决不可能发生严重扭曲的。
蜀为正统的正统观,仅是诸葛亮得以千秋被讴歌的前提条件,中国历史上那么多正统的王朝,那么多的贤相,在历史上的地位为什么远不及诸葛亮这个天下第一罪魁那么崇高呢?回答这个问题,还是要追溯到三国那个特殊的历史阶段上去。三国的历史虽然很短,但在中国封建社会的历史上,却十分引人注目。少数民族开始统治中原的历史,潜伏于三国后期,爆发在西晋时代。在西晋统一中国24年后的公元304年,匈奴族人刘渊就在北方建立起了后汉(即前赵)政权。从所谓的“五胡乱华”开始,经东晋、南北朝,少数民族统治中原和国土分裂的时间长达约300年,至隋统一中国,才重新恢复汉族对中原的统治。由于三国时代上承汉民族单独地统治中原的终点,下连少数民族统治中原的起点,历史的这一巨大变化,自然会引起后世人民和史学界对三国的历史事件和历史人物产生特殊关注。在《三国演义》成书前,民间受“宗室血统正统观”的影响,“尊刘抑曹”的关于三国说唱形式的文学作品及杂剧就已普遍地出现了。元末明初诞生的《三国演义》,作者罗贯中仍遵循蜀为正统的创作观念,小说的意识形态服务于了政治需要,《三国演义》中塑造的诸葛亮形象,对神化诸葛亮起了非常巨大的作用和影响。演义中大量的毫无史实依据的,如:借东风、草船借箭、舌战群儒、三气周瑜、空城计、智料华容道、识魏延反骨、智取成都、巧摆八阵图、锦囊杀魏延、骂死王郎,死了还以木偶退兵等等纯属虚构的情节,到现在,也还有不少知识分子把其中一些内容误以为真。而诸葛亮的一些真实情况,如蔡瑁是诸葛亮妻子的舅舅,刘表是诸葛亮妻子的姨父,诸葛亮“出山”前在荆州一所由儒学大师执教的学堂里学习、系统地接受过儒学训练,小说可能是为了神化“隆中对”的策略,没有对诸葛亮的这些背景资料向读者介绍,只把诸葛亮创作成为一介典型的村夫,让读者读了小说后,对“隆中对”产生神奇感,对诸葛亮产生神奇感。再如,《三国志》卷36载:刘备打下成都后,“赐诸葛亮、法正、飞及关羽等人金各500斤、银千斤、钱5000万、锦千匹,其馀颁赐各有差”,刘备集团对劳动人民财富的这种大瓜分、大抢劫,小说中也仅用“遣使赍黄金五百斤、白银一千斤、钱五千万、蜀锦一千匹,赐与云长。其余官将,给赏有差”一句敷衍过去。诸葛亮在历史上不仅不是《三国演义》中描写的那种“智绝”的典型形象,也不是大汉王朝中央政权的忠臣,因为大汉王朝中央政权从未授予诸葛亮任何官职。诸葛亮在历史上仅是一个被分裂国家的丞相,被分裂国家皇帝的利益,便是他的个人利益。隆中对策既是诸葛亮给刘备称帝的献策,又是他自己与刘备同恶相济的人生打算和愿望。当我们评价一个历史人物的功过是非,用他一生的作为对人民幸福、对生产力发展和社会全面进步造成了什么样的影响这把唯一公正的尺子作为度量器去度量时,一切历史人物的真实面目就都真实地浮现在了我们面前,一切历史的迷雾,便都自然地烟销云散了。我们人类社会是由人组成的,谁给人类制造了不应该有的痛苦和不幸,谁剥夺了人类应该有而没有了的美好生活的权力,谁就是人类社会的敌人,这就是文章作者的历史观,也应该是绝大多数现代人共同的历史观!

2007.2.25
作者简介:廖伦焰,笔名龙康,1963年4月出生于四川省盐亭县,作家,诗人,毕业于西南政法学院并在中国政法大学及深圳大学短期学习,曾受聘担任北京《发现》杂志理事、中国管理科学研究院研究员,著有长篇小说《极点》、《性罪》、《龙康中短篇小说集》,主编并出版了《还原天下第一罪魁诸葛亮本来面目》网上讨论集。