Mega Drop-Down Navigation Menus Work Well

Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox for March 23 is now online at:
  > http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mega-dropdown-menus.html

Summary:
Big, two-dimensional drop-down panels group navigation options to
eliminate scrolling and use typography, icons, and tooltips to explain the
user's choices.
	
----------------------------------

Usability Week 2009 conference

  > Washington DC, April 5-10 
  > London, May 17-22 
  > San Francisco, June 22-27 
  > Sydney, July 27-August 1

In-depth training:
  > 3-day camp on Usability in Practice

Specialized topics:
  > 14 in-depth tutorials

Full program:
  > http://www.nngroup.com/events

----------------------------------

LEVELS OF INNOVATION IN MOBILE DEVICE UI

Christian Lindholm (formerly Nokia's head of UI design) wrote one of the
best analyses I have seen of recent UI paradigms for mobile interaction:
  > http://tinyurl.com/cvpe73

Lindholm's conclusions match the findings from our current user research,
even though we come from a different angle (we're testing how to make
websites better for mobile access, not how to make better mobile devices).
It's always comforting when different perspectives lead to similar
conclusions.

  > http://www.nngroup.com/events/tutorials/mobile.html

----------------------------------

THE THIRD WAY: BETWEEN NUMBERS WORSHIP AND ARTISTIC INSTINCT

One of Google's visual designers apparently quit in despair over having to
prove every tiny graphics decision with clickthrough data, instead of
having management rely on his artistic instinct:

  > http://www.kottke.org/09/03/google-and-design

I'd argue that both approaches are wrong. Moreover, it's a false dichotomy
to choose between numbers and art.

The third way is called insight, and is found through qualitative
research.

Of course, in reality, the very best design blends all 3 methods:
qualitative insights, hard numbers, and pure aesthetic taste. But I think
that qualitative should be the driving factor.

It's obvious why taste shouldn't be the overriding factor: countless
websites look great but don't sell. You have to moderate pure art with
what customers need.

It may be less obvious why the hard numbers should be secondary to soft
insights. The reasons are that (a) you may measure the wrong thing, and
(b) even if you measure the right thing, such as conversion rate, you can
sub-optimize individual screens while undermining your long-term strategy
and overall user experience.

Putting A/B Testing in Its Place:
  > http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20050815.html

Risks of Quantitative Studies
  > http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20040301.html

To take the example of which of 41 gradations of blue to pick for a design
element: yes, one of these will have the highest clickthrough rate, and
thus be the local optimum for the design of that one page. But it's quite
possible that another shade would be better for the overall look of the
site and make the complete set of pages feel more like a coherent user
experience, which would enhance user confidence and the site's
credibility, and lead to long-term loyalty, as more people return to buy
next year.

And more important, while the best shade of blue might generate 0.1% more
business than the second-best, it's almost certainly the case that there
is some other aspect of the design that would lead to 50% more business if
you could identify it. To do so, use qualitative research to observe deep
user behaviors.

The things you know to measure are rarely the ones with the big impact.
The things you DON'T KNOW are the place to focus usability efforts.

----------------------------------

2-D vs. 3-D, THE MOVIE TAKE

Interesting New York Times article about new trends in 3-D movies:
  > http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/22/movies/22barn.html

I was particularly struck by the comment that 3-dimensional films cannot
cut as quickly between images. With 3-D scenes, the audience tends to move
their eyes around the frame in a way they don't do when watching 2-D
movies.

This is one more example of the need to design for each medium's special
characteristics, just as writing for the Kindle is different than writing
for a newspaper or mobile websites should be different from PC websites.

This insight could also be one more reason 2-D is usually better for user
interfaces. Added editorial control and the ability to focus the user
strengthen usability relative to the confusion that often results from a
supposedly "richer" 3-D UI:
  > http://www.useit.com/alertbox/981115.html