26f2 Jibbering Musings » Standards

Archive for the 'Standards' Category

The cult of consumerisation

Friday, February 3rd, 2006

Internet Explorer Beta 2 was released for review recently, and like Windows XP before it, it got a default mickey-mouse theme, with giant icons and completely different UI conventions from the business software that windows always has. With Windows XP though, it’s a few simple clicks and you’re straight back to the classic simple, professional view, IE 7 doesn’t have that capability, in fact in the classic view the new UI looks absolutely awful, I simply couldn’t find out how to work the thing, please MS don’t forget some people use the browser as a business tool.

The simplification and consumer focus is possibly a good idea, there’s certainly a market there that needs to be met, Windows Media Player is a consumer application so looking like it just fell off of the disney channel is perhaps not a bad thing, the browser though isn’t so simply a consumer application, it’s used daily on intranets by professional users, changing UI’s are a dangerous thing, simplified UI’s are simply not what this group need, they want consistency with their other applications. I fear it may be that Excel will have a nice mickey-mouse UI that forces existing users to completely re-learn their workflows. I fear this is purely a desire for the UI to look cool, completely ignoring the actual users.

This same problem has hit notebooks, it’s almost impossible to buy a laptop now that doesn’t have a widescreen, covered in logos and looking space age. To me these look completely unprofessional - a widescreen is only useful for watching DVD’s on - word documents, web pages etc. are portrait, minimising height is not helpful here. I would feel very uncomfortable walking into a pitch carrying one of these laptops, the only laptop I would comfortable with is of course the ThinkPad, but if lenovo decides to follow this consumerist targetting since leaving IBM, I’ll have nothing at all, and I might as well walk into meetings with the full mickey mouse ears and hope people can see the message behind the presentation.

Despite everyone on the web talking about the “long tail…” what actually is happening is everyone is chasing the biggest market - the consumer market. I recently needed a USB hub, they all were covered in bright flashy lights and big colourful buttons and … they simply weren’t something I could bring out next to the nice professional looking RFID readers they were going to sit next too.

Maybe I’m wrong and no-one makes judgements in the first moments of meeting you, perhaps it is purely the message and the presentation is immaterial, but I fear it’s not, and without the right presentation, I feel uncomfortable.

People, please don’t forget the professional user as you try to make your product more appealing to the incidental consumer - certainly there are more sales for the consumer, but the professional will pay more, and is much more likely to be loyal and upgrade more often. Don’t forget the professional, please!

The PING attribute

Friday, January 20th, 2006

Firefox have decided to implement the PING attribute, the idea of it is to ensure that what people click on can be tracked with minimum impact on the user. Currently tracking is done by a link to a url which then redirects to the correct site. This takes a fraction of a second, but it does take time, and if the middle site is down the user can’t get through to the end site, even if it’s up.

The PING attribute attempts to solve this by moving the tracking from the critical path into a seperate attribute which the browser POSTs to when the user “follows the hyperlink”. This feature also allows one new piece of functionality, the ability to track links within pages so <a href=”#’top” ping=”http://jibbering.com/tops”> would allow me to track how many times people used goto to top links.

The use case described in the documentation is “allowing advertisers to track click-through rates without obscuring the final target URI”. It also stresses that following the ping’s are optional, this has an important fact for anyone actually deploying adverts, if you use ping rather than the current reliable tracking methods then they will no longer be counted as a click-through. So if your ad agency changes to ping, you will lose clicks that you’re entitled to. I don’t know of any online Ad agencies which are planning to use ping, but the WHAT-WG specification is controlled by a Google employee.

Of course reputable Ad agencies have their click-throughs audited by independant auditors to ensure they are accurate, so any that switch to ping will soon be forced to switch back to ensure the results - and therefore the monies are accurately reported. It’s clear the use case described by the WHAT people is not met by the attribute, the only other use case mentioned is “track which off-site links are most popular”, hardly a particularly important use case, but if there are no downsides to the method, then does it matter?

Unfortunately there are downsides, existing tracking methods must end up at the site the user expects to go to, otherwise they’ll be annoyed, this method you can ping any site, for example
<a href=”http://jibbering.com” ping=”https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/duplicates.cgi?maxrows=10000″> would ping a bugzilla page that causes a lot of processing on the remote server, and returns a lot of data. So this sort of simple Denial of Service method is made easy, users will never know it’s happening all they’ll just see a big slowdown in their connection as it spends its time requesting pointless resources. Then there’s the up-counting of clickthroughs itself, copy the ping attribute from your google advert onto your other links, then any link a user leaves the page from an advert click is clicked, this is hard to track as the ad provider is completely outside the link the only way to check is to see if the recieved links match the sent links.

Like much of the WHAT-WG proposals (but not all), this is a poorly thought out proposal and it’s disappointing that the browser vendors are not meeting it with the critical inspection they would any other proposal. PING fails to meet its own use cases and it introduces lots of potential for abuse, if you’re creating a user agent and thinking of implementing this - think hard about what it could be used for?

2037
0