Improving Software Usability?

kevin_conaway asks: "Software usability is one of the hardest things to get right. Writing good, usable software is the holy grail of software development, yet few developers give it more than an afterthought. As a professional developer, I delight in writing software for other developers but shy away from writing an interface that the end users will see. What resources/books are recommended for improving your Human Computer Interaction (HCI) / software usability skills?"

here are a couple:

Don't Make Me Think [amazon.com] and The Design of Everyday Things [amazon.com]... two of my very favorite books.

"Think" is more web centric, but has many tips and insights, and is an accessible read cover to cover.

"Design" is a bit more pompous, and I don't agree with all points, but I give it high marks for making you take a different look at things you'd always taken for granted (Microsoft asked me a question at my interview from this book, btw).

A few more thoughts: don't confuse usability with user responsibility. If a task if tediously complex, it's going to be difficult to design a thin elegant easy-to-use interface. For example, photoshop can be amazingly obtuse to use, but there's a reason. Overall I give photoshop a "5" (out of ten) for their ergonomics, but I give them a "10" for what their application can do. I consider it partially my responsibility to climb that learning curve to do real work in digital graphics.

On the other hand, the unusable applications out there are infinite. My favorite example is Windows Media Player. I still have to figure out what to do just to play a CD with WMP. (And what's with the disappearing window?)

(Here's an interesting non-software example of horrible design: my parents have an RCA TV, not that old, but not HD. It has Videos 1, 2, 3 input, Cable/Air input, and VCR. There's a "SETUP" button on the front panel that lets you change the signal input from Cable/Air to VCR (or something like that), but the only way you can get Video 1, 2, or 3 is by tuning the TV channel to 91, 92, or 93 respectively. Until I found the manual and got to page 60 I was convinced the TV was broken.)

My favorite example of transcendental usability: Google.

(Some runners up: Picasa; Amazon.com (one-click), wish list, etc.)

(Also, I am opposite as to who I like to write for: I cringe when writing for other professional software developers, they're some of the biggest whiners about "what should be". I do however delight in writing software for clients. If you do it right, it's a genuine high.)

Re:here are a couple:

I consider it partially my responsibility to climb that learning curve to do real work in digital graphics.

For the stuff that is technically advanced, I agree, though it should still be intuitive for someone who is technically advanced in the field.

Photoshop and Illustrator are classic examples of what I consider bad user interfaces, because things that should be simple and obvious, aren't. For example, cropping a picture (Elements actually fixed this one): you drag the border as you'd expect, then you want to fine tune it. Bzzzt. You had to use some combination of shift-alt-click-something to adjust it, or do the add/subtract from selection thing.

On the other hand, Elements has broken something simple and basic: resizing images. Something even earlier versions of Photoshop did well. No more: "resize/image size" just changes some parameter it saves that says how big to print it, and the only options you get are printer units. OK, fine, leave "resizing" to the printer people, there's a canvas size option, but no, that is effectively a crop if you shrink it and adds blank space if you expand it. How about the scale menu item, that should work. Nope: "transformations should be applied to layers. do you want to make the background a layer?" Despite the word "should", your only options are to cancel the entire operation or to let it make a layer out of it. And I don't want to resize one layer, I want to resize the entire thing!

Sorry, but crappy non-intuitive user interfaces are a hot button, and I just recently tripped over this one. In my mind, the entire point of a GUI is that you shouldn't have to RTFM to do the basic functions of the application.

Just because a tool is powerful doesn't mean it has to be non-intuitive...

Re:here are a couple: GIMP?

I went and fetched the latest gimp, and it looks like it actually supports both X's now, that's an improvement, and there are things I like about it, like the markers on the edges showing where your pointer is.

The main thing I've always disliked about GIMP is that it's too busy and stuff is scattered all over. It's a bit overwhelming for someone starting with it, a bunch of icons that really don't mean much unless you already know what they mean or spend a lot of time mousing over. Since I've used lite versions of photoshop for a decade now, it wasn't worth the effort of jumping the hurdle.

On the other hand, it's really not much different than the little side menus photoshop puts up (which is another change I'm not sure I like in Elements, building them all into a frame around a hole where your image goes), so I'm not sure why they're more daunting.

Maybe it's just inertia... Now that I just spent the bucks on Elements a week or so ago, I guess I'll try using Gimp again ;-)

Interface design != Software design

As much as everyone here loves to create their own programs and websites, for professional jobs, it must be known that those that create the software should NOT be responsible for designing the interface. Its a challenging field. While almost everybody here can create a good design without thinking, creating a great design is alot harder. Its the same with everything. Using certain software, ANYONE can create a good website. It takes skill to create the great ones though. Using certain software, the company I work for has their interns creating press releases. They work, but they aren't great. Anyone can design a logo, but theres a reason the big companies hire design artists. The very same is true in interface design. If you are worried about it and your budget can afford it (it should be budgeted for anyway), hire an interface designer.

Gnome Usability Report

http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/ [gnome.org] This is definitely worth a read. Many people who are good programmers aren't necessarily good at user interfaces, or worrying about how people will interact with the software. That is an area that open source software really needs to improve on, both in efficiency in usability, and in aesthetics.

Re:Gnome Usability Report

If I didn't find Gnome software so damned difficult to use, I'd probably be a little more interested. But they don't even seem to be able to make an open-file dialog box that's intuitive and easy to use, let alone a complex application.

Making data export difficult or expensive

I can't stand software that makes it extremly difficult to get your data out of, that is one of the worst things about a lot of software.

Developers deliberatly giving people software, then making them "upgrade" to a premium version if they want to export their mail, documents, photos, or anything else should be shot on site!

Easy import and export of data should be the one thing your product should be easy to do, aggrevating your customer because you chose to take their data then try to extort it out of them definatley does not go well for easy usability.

Users are the best resource

The best resource for making sure your software is usable is to watch people use it. While large companies can afford professional UI designers and formal usability studies, even a humble F/OSS developer can do some simple UI testing.
When I'm working on software that is intended for users who are not developers or otherwise computing professionals, I usually try to get a regular user to sit down with my software for a half-hour or so and I watch them use the software. Generally, I just say something along the lines of "hey, wanna do me a favor? play around with this program for a bit and tell me what you think". Then watch over their shoulder. Generally this is a good way to get a list of what sorts of things are poorly placed "how do I...?", things that are confusing "what is this?...", features that users will like "can I ...?" and it's a good way to start finding bugs that only a user will discover.
A few tips that I've found doing this include
If any option is unavailable then it should be obvious WHY it's unavailable.
No matter how obvious your icons are, they should ALWAYS have text with them.
Avoid dialog boxes as much as possible
If you make your program look too much like another program, then you better make sure it looks and works exactly like that program. In other words, either stick completely with the standard way of doing things, or do it completely different. If you take some common UI element and tweek it, then you'll just confuse users. Menu bars tend to be the most common violators of this.
Understand color. A lot of applications throw colors around willy-nilly, if you are going to use color then study up on color theory and learn what colors go together, what colors are calming, etc.

suggestions

Jef Raskin's The Humane Interface [amazon.com]

I quite liked

I recently read "About Face 2.0" I found myself dis-agreeing with some of the details and felt there were a few ommisions but the definitions of software was sound

Also Joel on software has a great book excerpt online to get you in the mood

About face link [amazon.com]
Joel book excerpt [joelonsoftware.com]

Christopher Alexander is also a good read

There is information [wikipedia.org] about him on the web, and he has a few good books such as "Notes on the Synthesis of Form".

Why do I mention him? To a certain extent, especially to users of software, the interface IS the product. The interface is the only way they will ever use any of the features, so if something is hidden, hard to find, hard to use, or designed to be misused, then that feature will never be of any prominence.

So remember to design the interface around your users and your problem. Your program is literally the interface that sits between the users and the problem, a bridge as it were.

A textbook I used last semester does a good job...

Designing from Both Sides of the Screen [amazon.com]. Worked really well for the project I worked on, and it's a great process and implementation book.

Usability Studies are a must

I think too many companies focus just on heuristic evaluation [wikipedia.org]. That's basically paying a UI expert to tell you what to do and what not to do. A lot of companies won't even hire a usability expert, instead relying on their own engineers to "read a lot of books" and try to wing it.

This is bad.

Just like how software engineers should not be trusted to test their own code, they should also not be trusted to do "good usability". I'm saying this as a software engineer, who also has a Masters in usability engineering and has been in the field for a few years. Too often I'm surrounded by fellow engineers who think they know what's best for the user. Also, they'll claim that a certain design is best because it also makes for a "clean UI" and "clean code design". Then we sit users in front of the application, and all hell breaks loose.

Don't do this. Spend the money to hire a good usability expert, and have THEM perform proper usability studies. Good usability is NOT necessarily about a "clean UI" or "clean code". It's about a product that people know how to use. After this is established, it is then up to the engineers to make sure the actual implementation itself is clean, extensible, un-cluttered, etc. Not the other way around.

How about wyoGuide?

See http://wyoguide.sf.net/ [sf.net], it can be used with any programming language with any framework on any platform. So far it's the only guide which gives advice in a cross-platform fashion, has sample code and if you happen to use C++ a demo sample for use as your starting code base.

O. Wyss

A few simple guidelines

Just by following a few simple common-sense guidelines, you can drastically improve the usability of any given software:

• Simplicity: keep things as simple as possible. Fewer options/settings/etc means less to have to figure out. If you must provide an option for something, supply a reasonable default. The user should never have to configure a bazillion options before being able to just use the program.
  
  
• Sane hierarchical organization: The human mind can only processes and deal with the external world by grouping, categorizing, and thinking of a collection of items as a single "chunk". So sanely organize options in hierarchical menus; sanely organize navigation into a tree-like path; etc.
  
  
• Direct manipulation: users always expect to be able to direclty manipulate an on-screen object by clicking directly on it, dragging it, etc, so design your UI that way. (Example that violates this: a listbox with items in it, with buttons underneath that must be clicked to act on the selected item, rather than allowing the user to right-click on the item itself to get a pop-up menu.)
  
  
• Data transparency: there should always be a way in the UI for the user to clearly see the information they want organized in the way they want it, and it should never be a mystery to the user where some calculated field came from or how it was calculated.
  
  
• Terminology: keep technical lingo out of the program's UI as much as possible, and make all text and phrasing clear to non-technical users. Whenever an error occurs, present a dialog that clearly explains the nature of the error and which also suggests a course of action that might rectify the error.
  
  
• Real-time on-screen feedback: when a user performs an action, they need immediate feedback to know whether the action succeeded or failed. Real-time responsiveness is super important. If a user-initiated action will take longer than about 0.1 seconds to achieve the ultimate result, then you need to put up a suitable progress indicator that updates itself responsively as the operation proceeds. If the user clicks on something and they don't realize the system is just busy processing their request, they are likely to click on it again and again without realizing the first time succeeded. (Example that violates this: you launch an app from the Windows XP start menu... you don't hear the hard drive churning or see a hard drive light because you are remoted in via Remote Desktop... no visual on-screen cue is given that the app is actually loading up... so you try to launch it again... in the end you get 2 or 3 instances of the app).
  
  
• Don't assume user expertise: always assume your user knows NOTHING about computers.
  
  
• Scenario-based design: don't merely dump a bundle of functionality on the user; give them a program that guides them through all the steps needed to solve their scenario. It's the difference between handing someone a graphing calculator and handing them a math expert.
  
  
• Users won't read, and shouldn't have to: users don't read text -- it's a proven fact. Nor should they generally have to. For most people, reading is an unpleasant expenditure of valuable energy and time that could instead be used getting something done. If you need more than one brief sentence in the UI to explain something, then your UI is too unusable and you're just leaning on text (that won't get read) as a crutch. Users should be able to jump in and start being productive with your software without having to read a manual, README file, or any other long-winded explanation whatsoever.
  
  

Re:A few simple guidelines

Don't assume use expertise

I am one of the few people that have read the CUA guidelines, and they make at lot of sense, although many of the specific details are now outdated. The CUA guidelines say that you have to first decie if the UI is going to be a standard UI where it has the conform to system defaults and in general user's expectations; or if the UI is a so-called walk-up-and-use UI (such as ATM interfaces). The difference is that the standard UIs have to conform to standards but can contain many features, while the walk-up-and-use UI has to be simplistic and require absolutely no learning, but can break any standard as long as it makes it simpler to use.

So the guideline should be:

• Know your users: Don't assume your users have no expertise, but neither assume that they have. Find out. This impacts not only the program UI but also the documentation. If you do not know your users (or the intended target group) then the program is always too simple and to complex at the same time.
  

Re:A few simple guidelines

Just by following a few simple common-sense guidelines, you can drastically improve the usability of any given software.

You appear to be claiming that the guidelines you quote are universal and apply to every conceivable bit of software. I would beg to differ.

Simplicity: keep things as simple as possible. Fewer options/settings/etc means less to have to figure out.

Photoshop would not be a popular program if it only provided the five most common graphical operations and only let you configure three aspects of each. It's successful precisely because it's insanely configurable.

In other words, while there is indeed a place for simplistic software (witness the popularity of basic photo editing programs that literally only offer crop, size, and red-eye removal), it is by no means desirable for all software to be simplistic. Complex tasks require complex interfaces. Simplistic interfaces limit users to the options you have chosen, and I find it hard to believe that you can imagine all the possible ways a user will want to use your program.

Don't assume user expertise: always assume your user knows NOTHING about computers.

You cannot possibly believe this applies to all software. Are you seriously saying that the writers of a kernel debugger should assume their users know nothing about computers?

Scenario-based design: don't merely dump a bundle of functionality on the user; give them a program that guides them through all the steps needed to solve their scenario. It's the difference between handing someone a graphing calculator and handing them a math expert.

If a mathematician asks for a graphing calculator, you think they should instead be handed another mathematician?

Yes, simple tasks should have simple interfaces. Anyone should be able to answer emails, browse the web, write letters, keep an address book and diary, and print photos from their digital camera.

But that does not mean that simplicity should always be prized over functionality. Some things in life are tough. I've never driven an 18-wheeler: I would not expect to be able to sit down in one and take it across the continent. I've never filed a lawsuit: I would not expect to be able to waltz into a court and win a billion-dollar case. Why should I expect computers to be any different? If users won't read manuals, that is the users' problem.

Nielsen & Norman

These are two guys who have some good stuff to say about usability - Jakob Nielsen (http://www.useit.com/ [useit.com]) and Don Norman (http://www.jnd.org/ [jnd.org]) - Don Norman is the author of 'The Design of Everyday Things', mentioned above.
Also worth a mention is Joel Spolsky - http://www.joelonsoftware.com/ [joelonsoftware.com]

Apple got it right

If you want to that the basic principles, simply go with the Apple Human Interface Guidelines. Yeah I know, sometimes Apple do weird things too... But the first part of the book (the first 3 chapters) contains the basic information you need to create a good interface, totally platform-agnostic. It's been my guideline for years, since the System-Finder times. *sigh* back then the interfaces were easy and there was no brushed aluminum to foil the day.

http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExper ience/Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/index.html [apple.com]

That version contains updated and modern Part I for the super buzzword "U-Ex". But they decided they did not have sources anymore ... so I suggest you go for the "Original" Classical environment Human Interface Guidelines book for the first two appendices:

http://gemma.apple.com/documentation/mac/HIGuideli nes/HIGuidelines-2.html [apple.com] (on total bottom of page)

The resources are relatively adequate, but the bibliography extends to much more than the basics, it covers all the "why's" and "how's". It predates Mac OS, though, so the books were mostly rewritten, but the basics are still prevalent on many topics.

Jakob Nielson

Read Nielson's essays [useit.com]. Then do what they say. Specifically conduct usability testing in the manner he prescribes - anything else is a waste of time and money.

Inmates

I've recently read ' The inmates are running the asylum: Why high tech products drive us crazy and how to restore the sanity' [amazon.com]

Found it an interesting read, giving lots of examples on how usability should be approached and shows some good examples on how it can fail. It also introduces some techniques surrounding 'personas'. But for me, the most important thing the book did was triggering a certain way of thinking about usability, which I think is far more important than any technique a book can throw at you.

Usability is sometimes fighting windmills

For example, we tried several times to start using Ajax (forgive me for saying it) to make interfaces more like desktop applications.

Users completely rebelled. The general sentiment was, "Why doesn't that bring up a page when I click on it?"

The importance of "usability" is overstated by people who make money parroting it.

Yes, simplicity and obviousness are important. Just don't confuse those objectives with usability as it is now sold.

Usability starts with a set of normative values that most users accept. This often includes accepting that most users accept a version of the internet that is closer to 1996 than 2006.

The Golden Method

Just interface your program with an electrode in the control device. Then when the user does something stupid, you zap them! Problem solved.

Holy Grail

Good, usable software is not the holy grail of development, because it's been done. Holy grail means something everyone wants to find but no one has.

Alan Cooper's...

The Inmates are Running the Asylum [amazon.com] (disclaimer: Amazon link provided as a courtesy and is not a referral link to the best of my knowledge)

This is a good book by the designer of VB that has a nice model of user-oriented design and some pretty interesting case studies -- design of airplane entertainment units, scanner software, and others.

GUI Bloopers

If you're more interested in practical GUI advice, I highly recommend GUI Bloopers: Don'ts and Do's for Software Developers and Web Designers [amazon.com] (not a referral link). ISBN: 1558605827

The book goes in-depth on the basics of good GUIs laid out using your standard widgets (little, if any, talk of bleeding edge HCI theory). It gives tons of examples of what the author views as good and bad GUI practices. Some of the things he cites are more nitpicky IMO, but overall it's a valuable resource that'll make you more aware of the common pitfalls of GUIs and how really good GUIs are laid out. It also talks about proper messages to display to the user, like don't present a user with a yes/no question and give them OK/Cancel as their buttons...

First mistake

Thinking that reading a book and using the HCI (Human Computer Interface) buzzword will improve the user experience of your software.

Few software development managers give developers enough time to hone their user interface. In my firm, software developers are often involved in the back end code, writing complex algorithms or process functions. This is the meat and potatoes of the software, without it, there is no reason for the software to exists. When they need some UI associated with the back end code, it truly is a last minute implementation and an afterthought, but only because they are pressed to get the product released on some arbitrary deadline management and sales arrived at. What happens tends to be sloppy and poorly written UI for the sake of brevity.

Good UI just takes time to develop, and until your firm realizes that it should account for at least 40% of the development time, then reading a book isn't going to help you. Also, I have read those books, and its just a bunch of blowhards telling you what they think is good UI, its not necessarily what is going to be good UI for your applications.

You also should find and take the time to hire or cultivate at least one developer that is skilled in UI design. Having at least one good UI developer on your team frees up the other developers to focus on the internals and lets a dedicated developer focus on the UI. This also prevents the idea of "too many cooks in the kitchen" problem that many firms have, the idea that numerous developers are writing UI code and each have their own personal idea of what the UI should look like. You can create a UI guideline that is supposed to force developers to write UI a certain way, but in the end, they are going to do what they think is right, and your application will have a mismatched look and feel to it. Having one or two dedicated UI developers will ensure a consistency across the entire application.

It is a talent, its one of the few areas where creativity and talent comes into play when developing software. The talent is in understanding and putting yourself in the place of an end user. Its understanding your target audience and catering to their needs. This varies with every software project you work on and no book is going to cover all the bases.

In the end, if your a single developer responsible for both front and back end code, then take the time to USE your software. Most software developers only use their software in so much as to test their back end code. But using your software just as your end users would is the best way to ensure you UI works and flows well. Try to imagine all the stupid things your end users will do with the software, or all the different ways an end user will interact with the software. For instance, I don't use keyboard shortcuts, so I tend to overlook them when I develop a UI. Learning to realize that end users might exclusively use keyboard shortcuts instead of the mouse means that when I test my UI, I will notice the weakness before I release the software.

But it takes time to both learn what makes good UI and to develop good UI. You could read a book and it could offer a few insights, but the best way to learn to code and to learn how to write good UI is to do it, use it, and allow enough time to properly develop it. In the end, if you write software you hate or wouldn't want to use, then your not writting good UI.

Canceling actions

There needs to be a way to immediately cancel something if I want to bail out. Examples of this not working are in Safari. While a webpage is loading, I can click the cancel button, and it will not register until several seconds later. Sometimes when the button is depressed, it then takes 5 seconds to actually stop. Or in Final Cut Pro, canceling a render can take 10-15 seconds. My computer is by no means the fastest, but how hard is it to make a cancel button that actually works? How difficult is it to simply STOP?

User Interface Hall of Shame

I recommend The User Interface Hall of Shame [mac.com]. (Link is actually a mirror, and not my mirror. The original doesn't seem to exist anymore.)

Despite its age, it has plenty of valuable lessons. For instance, abuse of tabs is certainly as relevant today as it was eight years ago.

Tog on Interface

Haven't seen it mentioned yet, so:

Tog on Interface

Also, Computer Lib / Dream Machines by Ted Nelson has some valuable lessons in it.

an often untapped resource

Here's a good source of informal research that I almost never see mentioned. If you a developer for an existing product that is already in use at one or more companies, find out who the companies are (your sales department can provide) and contact their IT department. Helpdesk and desktop support people are on the front lines with users on a daily basis and know first hand what users struggle with. Talk to them. Pick their brains. Support professionals are often treated as the flunkies of an organization, and most I know would quite generously share their knowledge with anyone who treated them with an ounce of respect. Keep in mind that IT people often serve as usability experts in disquise, as they frequently must find ways to simplify and work with badly designed software and hardware that they have no power to change. So, some may even be able to offer some good suggestions as to how to correct the issues they've seen. Many IT organizations also keep detailed case records within their call tracking systems, and if you're real nice to them (ie.. feed them cookies), they might even get you some statistics on the number of calls related to a product or issue.

Though this method is not as effective as carefully designed user research, it is a good alternative when a company will not allocate any resources towards such a project. You may be able to gather a lot of information in a short amount of time, at no cost, and make a new IT friend in the process.

www.ok-cancel.com

http://www.ok-cancel.com/ [ok-cancel.com] is a great site for non-technical, insightful discussions of user interfaces; plus a great web comic on the subject.