The Emperor's New Apps

Apps are the new nirvana for companies and brands to communicate directly with their audiences and if you don’t have one then you have been left behind in the digital revolution.

Codswallop!

This year sales of non pc devices like tablets and smartphones have grown exponentially; it is also true that the number of Apple and Android applications available for these devices is also growing and is now in the hundreds of thousands.

However, how many of these are ‘killer applications’?

One of the most successful apps ever was ‘branded’; iPint by Carling was downloaded several million times when the Apple store was launched. We should consider that when this app was launched the market was very different, the market was in its infancy and there were far fewer apps available.

A recent report by Deloitte reported that less than 1% of all apps created by consumer and healthcare brands were downloaded more than 1 million times. Or to put the statistic another way 80% of branded apps analysed by Deloitte’s have been downloaded no more than 1000 times.

Suddenly your chance of success if far more limited and the idea of creating an app for the sake of having one is simply not an intelligent use of marketing spend.

Brands (and more importantly their Agencies) need to stop having a knee jerk reaction to the latest fad in digital. That is not to say that all apps are wrong but like any other form of communication they need to be carefully considered.

To be successful apps need to be targeted, useful and most importantly relevant.

A brief guide to taking your luxury brand online

Here at Bright Spark Digital, one arena we like to think we have a lot of experience and expertise in is the world of luxury.

Over the many years we've been in the online space we've worked for some of the world's biggest luxury brands and feel that we really know the do's and don'ts when it comes to successfully positioning them online.

So what does it take? Here are some of our thoughts on how to successfully take your luxury brand online…

[Read More]

Making it meaningful

If you're searching for a company's address on the internet, there's a good chance your chosen search engine will be able to find it by matching documents on the website containing the word 'address'. However, if that address information is 'tagged' as an address, search engines and directories can search specifically for that address data, or be sure that the content is indeed an address.

Being able to structure the information on your website in this manner will ultimately help your users or customers find what they are looking for, or differenciate your content from your competitors. This inference of meaning is what drives the semantic web.

Interest in the semantic web has gradually been spreading across the internet development community from a core of web evangelists and commentators to IA designers and developers building the next generation of websites and applications.

If you're new to the concept of the semantic web, it's essentially a web of data, readable by, and meaningful to machines rather than humans. In terms of the internet that we all know and love, it is being created by adding extra attributes and references to normal webpages so that humans or computers reading the page can understand the meaning and context of the content. Google's example is that of a page containing a recipe. Although Google might be able to guess that a page contains a recipe by its text content, semantic markup allows it to be sure that a certain section is an ingredients list.

Whilst many understand Tim Berners-Lee's vision for a web of data, evolved from human readable pages to machine readable ones , putting the concepts into practice can be a daunting prospect. The differing HTML5 and XHTML2 W3C specifications, as well as the somewhat competing standards of RDAa, microdata and microformats can be enough to put lots of developers off. As with the release of Betamax and VHS, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, none of the different standards for semantic markup in webpages have yet become de facto.

For those of us staying the course, designing for accessibility and search engine performance provides a good stepping-stone towards building semantic web content: it helps us think about the content we place in our templates as information, rather than purely what appears before our eyes in the browser. If we're comfortable with this , the next logical step then is structured or semantic mark-up.

One of our current projects is for a fine art gallery and we're using RDFa, a semantic format supported by the W3C. The Resource Description Framework (RDF) specification has been around for over a decade but it is only relatively recently that it has been possible to add this type of data to a normal HTML webpage. We've chosen the RDF format as it is also used by the Visual Resources Association, who provide a data standard that we can use to mark-up the pages that contain artwork.

Modifying the templates to include the RDF attributes has been pretty easy but we won't know how well the extra semantic data performs until the site is alive on the web. Obviously, we hope it will help search engines find the data and in turn, help users find the content they are looking for. Alternatively, it could have other benefits to art institutions or students using the data for their own research. Given the infancy of the format and its use in search, it may only have a relatively minor effect.

Either way, it's been a rewarding experience, both in terms of exploring the broader concepts of semantic markup and the specific standards used in the classification and description of art.

UXBrighton - A great experience?

I've just returned from UXBrighton 2010 - the first 'full blown conference' born out of what was in previous years just a meet-up of like minded ux folk.

So how was it? Well let me begin by saying I've become slightly disillusioned by the conference circuit over the past few years. On too many occasions have I forked out hundreds of pounds only to be presented with expert speaker after expert speaker showing the audience their portfolio of work. Well that's all well and good, but it doesn't provide much in the way of valuable insight. After last years Future of Web Design conference in London, I'm surprised it's even allowed to keep the name (It may have been better this year, I wasn't in attendance to find out - I hope it was).

I'm very pleased to say that UXBrighton has gone some way to restoring my faith. A few of the highlights...

The day started with an informative and entertaining talk by Eric Reiss on 'Web Dogma' which outlined 10 basic rules for web communications. This finished with the viewpoint that you should break the very same rules as you see fit for your needs, which certainly made it feel less preachy than the usual don't do this, always do that approach.

Next up was Harry Brignull talking about 'Dark Patterns' - user interfaces designed to trick people. This mostly focussed on the opt in, opt out model used by a number of companies to get users to buy into extra costs such as insurance policies. As commendable as it was to see the gauntlet thrown down on tackling the subject, I'm not sure I can see an easily solution anywhere on the horizon. Someone jokingly suggested an online version of Watchdog, which I actually thought was an interesting idea...

Later in the day Jeroen Van Geel gave a great talk called 'The childish washer and the happy website' in which he explained the importance of product personality and how it shouldn't be forgotten when making a site usable. It was refreshing to have somebody come at the issue from this perspective, especially at a conference aimed at 'designing for behaviour'. I certainly believe that the personality of a site is as much a part of the user experience as anything.

Not all of the talks were a success. I felt that Julian Hirst's talk was a little tough to follow, and others such as Claire Rowland were unfortunately plagued by technical gremlins which broke the flow and were rushed through as a result, but on the whole, it was a very successful day.

The final speaker of the day was Rory Sutherland, Vice-Chairman of Ogilvy Group UK. His presentation was called 'Of Clouds & Clocks' in which he talked about complex systems (the clouds) and mechanical, predictable actions (the clocks) and how they relate to the world of advertising. It was a great way to sign off the day but I would've liked the subject matter to be related more back to the world of digital.

One thing in Sutherland's talk really rang true however. He talked at one point about perceived value and showed the example of a packet of teabags priced at £6. Working out that this meant a cost of 24p per bag made it seem like less of a rip off, which in turn got me to thinking about the other thing that pleased me about the day. As mentioned before, I've been to other conferences that have cost me hundreds of pounds to attend. But UXBrighton? £69. So yes, a great experience and I look forward to attending next years event.

A very useful application

Last week I discovered what was an incredibly useful and potentially life saving application for my iPhone.

Normally, the limits of the apps that I download are either; mindless games, puzzles or other simple stuff to keep my mind transfixed on the tube or bus.

Last week my wife had our first child and on Monday I found myself timing her contractions with a very old wristwatch, pen and paper. Not accurate or very precise as our midwife pointed out. She asked that I take more detailed notes or she would never be able to ascertain what stage of labour Tash was in.

I scrambled for the iPhone and typed contraction into the app search. To my astonishment there were about 20 different apps. I downloaded the most popular, CtxTimer, and moments later I was able to time with certainty my wife’s contractions.

The application was incredibly simple yet provided a wealth of data not only on the length of the contraction but also on the period that elapsed between them (which by now was only minutes) It averaged this data over an hour and a twenty minute period and it meant that when I next called the midwife I was able to provide her with a comprehensive set of data stretching over 30 mins.

It was a very simple and one-off application, that was provided free and that I would use once maybe twice in my lifetime. However, it was quite possibly the most useful and worthwhile that I will ever download.

Let us guide you

Our latest project recently rolled out, but in a slightly different manner than we're used to. Why different? Well, you won't find it online but instead instore.

We were approached by Virgin Media earlier in the year with a very interesting brief which tasked us to recreate their EPG (Electronic Programme Guide) within a browser setting. The main reason for doing this was so that the Virgin TV experience could be demonstrated within electrical outlets across the UK, without the need for the actual service to be installed.

This was a very interesting project as it provided it's own set of freedoms and at the same time barriers. For starters, it was apparent that as it was going to be operating within a closed system, we didn't need to concern ourselves with multiple browser support, which is a rare treat.

On the flip side, this was new territory for us and re-creating an existing piece of software under a different set of rules was bound to throw up a few challenges, one of the biggest of which was achieving fullscreen HD video playback within the browser (without the use of flash). After overcoming such hurdles, and learning a lot in the process, the finished article started to come together quickly, but although the bulk of the work was in the bag, the project didn't end there.

Aside from the EPG itself, it also needed to look the part from a hardware perspective, and that meant having to install it onto a PC small enough to fit inside an actual V+ set top box. This was a fun job in itself, and we're happy to say that looking at the end result, you really wouldn't know the difference from the real thing.

It can currently be seen in the Lakeside 'Best Buy' store, so if you're in the area please take a look. We're now busy on the second phase of the project, which involves adding more content and functionality to the system. Case study to follow soon...

Not just a pretty face

I play videogames. In fact, I play a lot of videogames. My wife would probably tell you I play videogames too much, but I digress. The one thing I come across a lot with games is the amount they're judged by their visuals. Now, I'd love to say I was one of those gaming purists that believes that visuals don't matter, that it's all about the experience and how fun a game is to play, but I would be lying. You see, I believe that the presentation layer is incredibly important in a game. We're talking about a medium that is all about immersion and so if it doesn't look the part, it's not going to be doing it's job as efficiently.

So what point am I trying to make? How does this all relate back to the web? Well it got me thinking about user experience on the web and how important it is to look good.

The first thing that springs to mind is that it's a lot to do with context. I'm certainly not trying to to draw any parallels between websites and videogames here, they were simply the catalyst that provoked the question. But one thing I will say is that 'looking good', in my opinion, serves the videogame world a lot more than it does the online space. Let me explain.


Looking good is overrated

So, looking good, what's the deal? Straight off the bat, I'm sure you would brand me an idiot if I were to say that it wasn't important, because it is. To a point. Now I've always been of the opinion that as designers, making our work look good is a given (I won't get too much into this - subjective arena - can of worms and all that). What seems to pass a lot of folk by - not everyone - obviously some reading this will feel i'm preaching to the choir, is that design is first and foremost about problem solving, and this is especially important when designing for the web where communication and interaction are at the heart of what we're trying to achieve.

A majority of the time when you are engaged with a client on a project, what they want is to see a slick piece of eye-candy, a visual of their site to get them excited. That's all well and good, afterall, who wouldn't want to see that? But in contrast, one of the last things they probably want to see is a wireframe document, in all its grey box, functional glory. And herein lies the problem. The step in the process that is arguably the most important is also that which is most often overlooked.

You wouldn't expect an Architect to design a building with no foundations, or a football manager to tell his players to just show off and try and get the ball in the goal. When it comes down to it, it's all to do with sound structure and planning, and it's just as important when designing for the web, or any other digital medium.


Balance

Now before you think I've gone a bit 'Jakob Nielson', i'm not saying style and aesthetics aren't important. Looking good is important, it just isn't everything, or even (in my opinion) the most important thing. What would you say was better? A car that looks ok and runs like a dream or a car that looks amazing but runs like a dog. Of course the smart among you will say neither and that it's better to have a car that looks amazing and runs like a dream, and you'd be right, it's what we should all be aiming for. But it's important to remember, we're not in the business of creating eye-candy, we're in the business of creating experiences.

This is not the first time questions have been raised over the importance of aesthetic style. In 1896 American architect Louis Sullivan coined the now infamous term 'form follows function' that was a principle used throughout 20th century architecture and industrial design. Founders of the Modernist movement in the early 1900's even went as far to proclaim 'form follows function, ornament is a crime'. A step to far if you ask me, but then it's funny how the minimalist stylings that were born out of such thinking ironically became a style of their own, and can be seen throughout much product and web design today.

In a way, it saddens me that more and more these days the roles of User Experience professionals and 'web designers' seem to be becoming more polarised. In my mind, a web designer is only doing half their job if they're being asked to style up someone else's wireframes. Maybe as time goes on we'll use different terms for these roles, or preferably we'll see a return to a single role as information architecture becomes a more considered topic within design education.


IA is your friend

So, in conclusion, what do we need to do to make sure we don't lose sight of this essential part of the process? First of all, as designers we need to recognise the importance of good information architecture and embrace it. If it's a subject area that you're not overly familiar with, pick up a few books on the subject to get the ball rolling. You could do worse than taking a look at 'Don't Make MeThink!: A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability' by Steve Krug or 'The Design of Everyday Things' by Don Norman, which are both great starting points. The former is a particularly accessible (and short) book that you can pass onto colleagues that work in other disciplines or even clients. And let's face it, the more the word is spread, the easier the job becomes.