Vincent Gable’s Blog

April 1, 2009

Microsoft Excel Does Not Excel at Graphing

Filed under: Design,Quotes,Usability | , , , ,
― Vincent Gable on April 1, 2009

I gripe about Excel a lot, as we’re more or less forced to use it for data analysis in the intro labs (students who have taken the intro engineering course supposedly are taught how to work with Excel, and it’s kind of difficult to buy a computer without it these days, so it eliminates the “I couldn’t do anything with the data” excuse for not doing lab reports). This is a constant source of irritation, as the default settings are carefully chosen so as to make it difficult for students to do a good job of data presentation.

…

Now, you might be saying “Well, of course Excel isn’t appropriate for scientific data analysis. It’s not really for scientists, though.” Which is true, but here’s the thing: the things I’ve complained about here aren’t good for anything. The color schemes and axis settings lead to illegible plots no matter what sort of data you’re working with. And I’m completely at a loss as to the purpose of the “Line” plot, or making it difficult to find uncertainties in fitted quantitites.

—Professor Chad Orzel, Why Does Excel Suck So Much?

There’s no question in my mind that a lot of serious analysis is done in(spite) Excel. I’ve worked with some very smart programmers, with PhDs in experimental science, who have “numerics” in their job description, and used Excel to make quick graphs.

The best solution I can recommend is reading The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. It’s probably the best guide to honestly presenting data graphically.

Unfortunately I don’t have a good recommendation for a better software program. The excellent redrawings at the chartjunk blog were done in Adobe Illustrator (more info in this comment). But Illustrator costs $599, and is a complex drawing program. Honestly the sticker price, and ease of use, have kept me from trying it.

What do you use to draw graphs?

March 25, 2009

“They’re Not Getting It”

Filed under: Usability | , ,
― Vincent Gable on March 25, 2009

Writing is communication. I’ve always considered the clearest writing the best writing, because it communicates better. That’s why I believe you shouldn’t have to “get” good writing; good writing explains itself.

There has been some criticism of the classic The Elements of Style, because it didn’t follow it’s own advice. Critics call it a mistake, but many people think it’s an intentional joke. Assuming it’s a joke, I think it’s still a black-mark, because educated people aren’t getting it. Jokes that get in the way of what you are trying to say aren’t funny enough to justify themselves. In general, if people don’t get what you are saying, it’s your fault for not explaining it well.

Here’s an offending passage, as you can see it breaks it’s own advice.

The subject of a sentence and the principal verb should not, as a rule, be separated by a phrase or clause that can be transferred to the beginning.

How droll.

Now, The Elements of Style is a classic that’s been informing writers for generations. That success can’t be argued against. If confusing meta-humor is the reason for it, then I can’t contest that.

But it’s not clear to me that the specifically confusing and self contradictory humor has been key. For example, John Gruber says he loves the book because it takes it’s own advice,

I think what makes it special is that it’s so self-exemplifying; it recommends vigorous straightforward prose using vigorous straightforward prose.

If people aren’t getting your jokes, the onus is on you — in exactly the same way it’s your responsibility to make sure your jokes are funny.

March 13, 2009

Reasons to WANT to Design For Accessibility

Filed under: Accessibility,Design,Usability | , , , , ,
― Vincent Gable on March 13, 2009

Accessibility is too often seen as a chore. But there are many reasons to be excited about making things usable for everyone.

It Just Feels Good

I know it’s cliché, but helping people does feel good. Making your website work with screen-readers is not the same as volunteering your time to read for the blind and dyslexic. But it still helps…

More cynically, accessibility means your work reaches more people. Even if it’s just an extra 0.6%, it still feels good to know you are having a bigger impact.

We Are All Impaired

As Keith Lang points out, “we are all impaired to some amount (or sometimes)”. Everyone is “deaf” in a library, because they can’t use speakers there. Similarly, if you try showing a video on your phone to a dozen people, many of them will be “blind”, because they can’t see the tiny screen.

Consequently, accessibility means designing for everyone, not just a disabled super-minority.

Accessible Design is Better Design

Usability improves when accessibility is improved. For example, a bus announcing stops with speakers and signs means you can keep listening to your iPod, or looking at your book, and still catch your stop. It makes buses easier to ride.

Maximally accessible design engages multiple senses. Done well that means a more powerful experience.

Early Warning

The flip-side of accessibility improving usability is that bad design is hard to make accessible. How easy it is to make something comply with accessibility guidelines is a test of the soundness of the design.

I don’t care about accessibility. Because when Web design is practiced as a craft, and not a consolation, accessibility comes for free.

—Jeffrey Veen

Accessibility compliance should be like running a spellcheck — something quick and easy that catches mistakes. When it’s not, it’s a warning that something is fundamentally wrong. That’s never fun, but the sooner a mistake is caught, the cheaper it is to correct it.

Challenge the Establishment

Accessibility might be the best “excuse” you’ll ever get to do fundamental UX research.

I think for people who are interested in user interface disability research is another area that gets you out of the Mcluhan fishbowl(??) and into a context where you have to go back to first principles and re-examine things. So I think the future there is very bright but we need more people working on it.

–Alan Kay, Doing With Images Makes Symbols

If anybody knows what he meant by what I heard as “Mcluhan fishbowl” please let me know!

Technology is Cool

Accessible design makes content easier for machines and programmers to deal with. This makes the future possible. For example, embedding a transcript in a video means that the video’s contents can be indexed by google, or automatically translated, etc.

BUt the really exciting stuff hasn’t happened yet.

Accessibility research is going to be a huge part of what advances the state of the art in Augmented Reality and cybernetics/transhumanism. The common theme is mapping data from one sense to another, or into a form that computers (eg. screen readers today) can process.

Why do You Like it?

I’d love to know what makes you passionate about accessibility. For me it’s that it feels right, and as a programmer, I am very excited about what it enables.

March 10, 2009

Dashboards on Steering Wheels Are Complicated

Filed under: Design,Quotes,Usability | ,
― Vincent Gable on March 10, 2009

Given that all 11 F1 teams have converged on a remarkably similar UI (for a dashboard on a steering wheel), independently, you would think that (the style) was a rational design, however its complexity possibly caused Lewis Hamilton the 2007 F1 championship, when he accidentally pressed the neutral button …

825b387026c6c81ef5a96970ccd12ee8-orig.png

What is clear is that there is no clear accentuation of features (color, size) by how often the are used, merely by position. Even if drivers like Hamilton are experts and fully familiar with the UI, there is a tiny percentage chance of error. Our guess is that this trend in car UI would be a mistake if it filters through to everyday cars, and that F1 cars will revert to a more simple UI over time.

— oobject.com (article includes a gallery of F1 steering wheels)

Certainly I have made mistakes with traditionally mounted dashboards in every car I have owned. But the mistakes haven’t significantly impaired by driving. Accidentally turning on the air conditioner or radio aren’t a big deal — even with my old Volvo that couldn’t accelerate as well with the AC on.

February 23, 2009

Laptop Mats

Filed under: Announcement,Design,Usability | , ,
― Vincent Gable on February 23, 2009

I just really want somebody to make a good portable cooling pad for portable computers.

Laptops1 are too hot to be used on a lap. This Penny Arcade comic says it best, if a little crudely,

Using this Macbook is like putting my dick in a George Foreman Grill. Okay? It’s like making a penis panini.

There’s a real need for something to keep your your lap cool. You can buy gel cooling pads. But I have reservations about them. The biggest is the weight of the gel. And according to reviews, eventually the pad absorbs enough heat to turn into a hot pad.

My solution is inspired by sushi mats:

415ANWJ8X6L._SL160_.jpg

It’s a very simple idea really, instead of bamboo slats, you use hollow aluminum tubes in the mat. That gives you an extremely light pad that’s easy to roll up and carry anywhere. It keeps the hot computer off your lap, draws heat away from the computer. (Aluminum has been used to make heat sinks for decades.)

Oh, and just in case you were wondering I’m using a book to protect my lap as I write this. But books are heavy, so I only carry one if I need to refer to the book.

If you have a better way to stay cool while working on the road, please share!

1
I’m counting netbooks (inexpensive, ultraportable but slow computers) as separate from “laptops”. Certainly many netbooks work just fine on top of the lap. But some people will always need more powerful laptops.

February 19, 2009

Security vs? Usability

Filed under: Design,Programming,Quotes,Security,Usability |
― Vincent Gable on February 19, 2009

In most cases, how an authentication system works when a legitimate user tries to log on is much more important than how it works when an impostor tries to log on. No security system is perfect, and there is some level of fraud associated with any (authentication method). But the instances of fraud are rare compared to the number of times someone tries to log on legitimately.

—Bruce Schneier on balancing security and usability

I like thinking about security. But, inspite of all the dramatic headlines, I believe bad usability causes far more damage then the bad security.

A more usable system should make recovering from a security breech easier. It’s easier to make things right, when it’s easier to make things.

Usability limits what people can do with something. Is it just coincidence, or does that sound like a partial definition of security?

February 16, 2009

Simplifying by Adding Features

Filed under: Accessibility,Design,Programming,Quotes,Usability | , , ,
― Vincent Gable on February 16, 2009

One of the oldest canards in the interface business is the one that says “Maximizing functionality and maintaining simplicity work against each other in the interface” (Microsoft 1995, p.8). What is true is that adding ad hoc features works against simplicity. But that’s just bad design. It is often, but not always, possible to increase functionality without increasing difficulty at a greater rate. Often, added functionality can be had without any added interface complexity; note the difference between interface complexity and task complexity. If the added functionality unifies what had previously been disparate features, the interface can get simpler.

— Jeff Raskin, The Humane Interface (page 201)

Examples of this are the exception, not the rule. Usually, more features means more complexity.

The best example I can think of is Coda, an award-winning web development IDE.

text editor + file transfer + svn + css + terminal + books + more = whoah.

The story of Coda.

So, we code web sites by hand. And one day, it hit us: our web workflow was wonky. We’d have our text editor open, with Transmit open to save files to the server. We’d be previewing in Safari, adjusting SQL in a Terminal, using a CSS editor and reading references on the web. “This could be easier,” we declared. “And much cooler.”

(To really get a sense of Coda you should check out the website, or try it for free).

Even though Coda’s interface is more complicated because it does more then just edit code, it simplifies the task of web-design, by unifying tasks that used to be done in different applications with different interfaces.

What other examples of things becoming simpler through added functionality can you think of? Please share in the comments below.

February 11, 2009

Black on White, White on Black

Filed under: Announcement,MacOSX,Sample Code,Tips,Usability | , , , ,
― Vincent Gable on February 11, 2009

Command-Option-Control-8 will invert your screen. It’s a cool looking effect (and quite a prank if you do it to someone else’s machine), but most importantly it makes tiny-white-text-on-black webpages easier to read. Command Plus/Minus makes text larger/smaller, which helps too.

I’ve known for some time that dark text on a white background is most readable. But it until recently it was just “book learnin”. I’m young, my eyes are healthy, and I can read both color schemes just fine. I didn’t have proof I could see.

But I have trouble sleeping sometimes. A few days ago I had an “accident” with a 2L bottle of Mountain Dew and a late-night dinner of salty pizza. Look, the details of blame aren’t important here, the point is I didn’t get to sleep that night. Now, when you are very tired, it’s harder to focus your eyes — and having to focus them on a computer screen doesn’t help. About 3 in the afternoon it got downright painful to read trendy looking webpages with midnight backgrounds and petite white text. Remembering the color theory behind contrast, I gave Command-Option-Control-8 a shot, and holy shit, it worked! My screen looked like an adventure in black-lighting gone horribly wrong. But I could focus on those webpage’s text more clearly. Degraded vision from eye-fatigue gave me proof that I could see.

Now please don’t take this as anything but a biased anecdote. Trust the science, not me! But it was a neat (and painful) experience. I can see why Command-Option-Control-8 is there now. Give it a try sometime, and see if it helps for you. The most you have to lose is impressing any shoulder surfers with your computer wizardry. (Honestly though Command-Plus — make text bigger — will probably do more to enhance readability.)

Just in case you want to inver the screen programatically, this Apple Script will do the job:
tell application "System Events" to tell application processes to key code 28 using {command down, option down, control down}

February 10, 2009

Good engineering is necessary, but good design has a more direct impact on helping people do amazing things with computers

Filed under: Design,Programming,Quotes,Usability | , ,
― Vincent Gable on February 10, 2009

…the thinking that ultimately sunk Douglas Engelbart’s visionary but incredibly complicated OLS (online system): Engelbart didn’t consider it all that necessary to develop an easy-to-use interface because, he felt, people invested years in learning human languages, so why not invest 6 months in learning his system’s powerful, language-size command structure? It’s an interesting argument when you think about it that way, but it ultimately doomed his design to obscurity, while his proteges who left for Xerox PARC and designed a system people could learn to use in a hour went on to change the world. Frictionless user experience is paramount, engineering concerns are secondary.

—Buzz Andersen, summarizing John Markoff’s What the Dormouse Said, a history of the early personal computer industry

The title this post is something I’ve been saying as part of my personal statement on hirevincent.com for years.

February 9, 2009

Color Blindness

Filed under: Accessibility,Design,MacOSX,Programming,Usability | , , , ,
― Vincent Gable on February 9, 2009

Roughly 10% of men are color blind to some degree. You need to be sure your interfaces are accessible to them. (Unless you are designing exclusively for women I suppose, since women are about 20x less likely to be color blind.)

Sim Daltonism is the best way to test an interface on Mac OS X I’ve seen.

Here is a web-based colorblindness simulator. Here is another. Personally I prefer a native program though. It’s faster and more versatile.

If you are curious, you can test yourself for colorblindness. I have no idea how accurate that test is, but since different displays and operating systems usually show colors differently I’d be a little skeptical.

ADDITION 2009-10-11: WeAreColorBlind.com is a website dedicated to design patterns for the colorblind.

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress