S60 Open to new features

As you know there is an endless debate going on: should it be User Experience or Usability. My question is: does it really matter? If the user’s needs, satisfaction and requirements are met and fulfilled, the whole issue is irrelevant. In this case the user-centered design has proved its place. It could have been some spontaneous feeling that hit the target but in most cases we are not this lucky. Some people just have the hunch and probably they are billionaires; unfortunately this isn’t the case always. Anyway, to be able to execute these issues in project work and to make the ideas come true it is strongly recommended that there is some kind of available definition. This could even save some time (money, in other words) and make the cooperation between different experts more enjoyable … :) However you can begin to ponder the issue with an excellent article on Usability News. Hey, isn’t that great that someone really measures these two separately.

My personal opinion is that there is and should be a clear difference between these terms: for me, usability is part of User Experience. The experience could be really subjective (or not) but as we know you can create standards in the usability world. Is it really possible to standardize the experiences that people are gathering? I’m afraid not. If the term is understood broadly the thin line between market research and user experience research is almost gone or, at least, it could be. The methods, study objectives, tools etc. are pretty much the same. It’s just our habits and working practices that keep these two on different sides of the table. Does it really have to be like this? I know…there are some differences between the perspectives but still, it’s always the same: before you try to satisfy client, end-user, or someone else, start to satisfy the person!

So, is it experience or usability that makes the difference? Hmmm, it could be the case that a not so usable or easy-to-use product hits the big time. Think about the famous iPod: let your grandmother use it and ask her whether it easy or observe how traditional PC user gets familiar with iTunes! Still, we’re witnessing one of the greatest success stories in this decade. I’m not saying that usability does not matter at all, just the opposite. In my ideal world it’s the combination: an application that will inspire me and which is easy-to-use. This isn’t always a compromise.

I have seen the light with some Flash applications: well-known and standardized UI logic, boosted with innovative and good looking UI design. So what we need is a well-working platform which allows developers to release their creativity. The S60 is on the right track, when the platform supports an economy of scale (provides the possibility to make scalable applications and remove the need to tailor every piece), we are almost there.

Something important that we have not yet appropriately addressed here in this blog is the issue of context. At the heart of user experience research is context. Many of the complexities related to gathering data about mobile technology use emerge from the fact that the real life is “out there”– it’s not enough to gather information in a fixed environment. The physical movement and ever changing geographic location found in the modern mobile lifestyle suggests the need to use a more fluid, hence less static, method of analysis. Hence, the user in context.

Basically, those research methods which hold the most promise for mobile usage and user research are those conducted with the actual use context in mind (IMHO). As we follow and observe users within their everyday environments, e.g. driving to work, eating lunch, meeting a friend at a café, we may be able to capture much more detail than if we asked users lots of questions about their behavior during a testing session, in a lab-like setting (e.g. focus group, usability tests).

Context is essential to the user experience. Context provides insight into not only who users are (demographics) but what is important to them and what motivates them to act and make decisions (psychographics). Think about those things you have come to wish for and desire on your mobile based on your unique ways of using it. Think about your frustrations (and your curses) when your mobile does not work the way you want or need it to…these frustrations, wishes, desires can all be translated into development ideas and then, perhaps, into device changes. However, this can happen only if the experts and those who can make it happen are willing to listen!

There is something in this entry for everyone. For developers, you can read about how to create a mobile game that results in a positive user experience. For the rest of you, there are good tidbits about general ways to improve mobile usability.

Navigating in the waves of a game experience

When playing a game, users should experience the game world. In order to do this, the game navigation structure should support the experience. Use of high-level UI components should be avoided. Game menus should look and feel like the game. If high-level UI components are used, they should support the game experience seamlessly.

Designing for interruptions

Mobile games are played in a context where interruptions often occur: somebody might call or send an SMS message, or the player might need to pause the game to buy a bus ticket. Therefore, the game design should support saving and pausing.

Until recently, only traditional research methods have been used to understand the use of mobile devices and applications. These include, for example, focus groups, observations and interviews that are conducted in controlled laboratory-like settings. In reality, however, these methods possess several challenges and even problems. Most importantly is the fact that these methods do not consider or measure the influence of context. The fact is this: a user does not exist in a social or physical vacuum.

Many of the complexities related to gathering data about mobile technology use emerge from the fact that the real life is “out there”– it’s not enough to gather information in a fixed environment. The physical movement and ever changing geographic location found in the modern mobile lifestyle suggests the need to use a more fluid, hence less static, method of analysis. Therefore, the methods used to study mobile use and usability need to be context-centered.

In typical application development processes, a significant portion of the expenses occur after the release of the product. The product may require changes or updates, different language versions, porting to new devices, or a new episode.

• Group testing: How would users modify the application, what more do they want from it, what would get them to update or buy another version?


• Satisfaction survey: After the application has been in the market for a while, competition may affect users' attitudes and requirements. Also, they will have had a longer time to evaluate the application.


• End-user analysis: See how well the product fits into the market for which it was intended.

When the product has passed the testing phase, it is time to release version 1.0 to the public. Research is needed to find out about market acceptance, and what parts of the application can be improved for future releases.

• Satisfaction survey: To find out with any statistical accuracy which parts of the application users like and which need improvement, a satisfaction survey is needed. Also, the effects of possible usability problems can be evaluated.


• End-user analysis: See how well the product fits into the market for which it was intended.

A number of methods are currently available to assist in developing and testing applications. Group testing kills two birds with one stone. A mixture including focus groups and usability delivers the best of both worlds and provides an efficient way to gather important data on users and their behaviours.

What method is best for you, focus groups or usability testing?

A focus group can be very effective at gathering opinions, but it has nothing to say about performance. According to usability guru Jakob Nielsen, http://www.useit.com, the proper role of a focus group is not to assess interaction styles or design usability, but to discover what users want from the system. The opposite can be applied to usability testing: It is an excellent technique for evaluation, but inadequate for assessing user needs. Knowing this, imagine what these two techniques could produce together!

In this phase, the application is tested thoroughly to make sure it meets the requirements set at the beginning of the process. If it fails, the product is taken back to the implementation phase to be fixed. New requirements may have arisen during the development process and it must be verified that they are met as well as the original requirements. In usability issues, however, it may not be evident how to improve the user interface, even if the problematic part is identified.

This is the first phase where the product is sufficiently complete to show it to final end users and see how they react to it. Changes will probably be necessary after the first iteration of testing and quite likely after subsequent ones as well.

Expert analysis: Make sure the user interface is functional, without severe flaws, and receive concrete suggestions on how to improve it.

Individual testing: Find out how real end users use the application and where they have problems. Also, record information about which keys they prefer to press and which views they like.

Group testing: By using the application in a real group situation, multiplayer features and the ways users use them can be tested. The results may be significantly different from what was expected. Also, users may find ways to cause errors in the application use.

In the implementation phase, the first version of the application is programmed, the user interface is implemented, and a better picture of the final product can be formed. In the first phase, the product is probably not good enough to be tested by real end users, but a usability specialist can evaluate the user interface and comment on it from the user’s perspective. This phase is returned to multiple times after the testing phase, until the product meets the requirements set for it. In the other hand, I have lately witnessed success stories where the UI is demonstrated (with Flash prototypes) to potential end-users in the very early stage of development cycle. In these cases, the prototypes have been very effective tools in the hands of UE specialist. So, the users can be a valid source in this phase also.

Consulting: Avoid delays in the development process by asking a usability expert about the implementation of certain features. Costly errors can be avoided with minimal cost.

Guidelines: Find out standard ways of implementing certain methods and make sure the selected methods are not likely to be problems for the users.

Expert analysis: Receive comments on how to improve the user interface and avoid designs that will likely pose problems for the users.

This is getting weird. Last night I saw couple ve-e-eery interesting dreams (no, I'm not going into details;) but what make me little bit worried about was that I saw my dreams in Flash. Flash Lite to be precise. The right side of my brain's new format of seeing dreams was actually quite interesting (very light file sizes, short download times, smooth transitions, pixel perfect fonts etc;) and gave me a couple of new ideas. But, what I really had begun to think about was the usefulness of Flash Lite for the developers. I mean, although Mr. Nielsen has tried very hard, most of web Flash animations are still intros and GUIs that are made for other Flash people and mostly make the web more difficult-to-use than nice and functional. To be honest, I've been dreaming about the revolution of mobile flash for years, especially of the possibility to create complete UIs with Flash and, as it becomes a reality, it's reasonable to think what will happen to quality and usability. One would think that because the same people who make Flash for the web will also work with mobile flash they may create hard-to-use, messy, wannabe-coolness without functionality.

But surprise, mobile Flash seems to be just fine! Most mobile Flash applications I've seen or been part of are much more useful and practical than 90% of the Flash on the web. How is this possible? Is the reason so obvious: small screen and limited input system? Or could it be because the mobile world has taken usability and user experience issues quite seriously from day one (no-one's perfect but S60 is actually a really good example) and developers have learned to do the "right things"?

Another reason is practicality among mobile Flash development. For example using Mobile Flash for rapid development & prototyping makes it a cool tool. The relatively easy-to-use Flash animations that simulate interesting UI concepts for the S60 phones and many of the cool innovations seen in web flash are now becoming a reality in mobile platform, mostly because there are many business and user needs for it.

Wanna see some examples? Nope. Another challenge for the growth of mobile flash developer community is that 99% of the stuff within the Mobile Flash world is under various NDAs and designers would need to cut their left arm before showing their portfolios. I just saw one site that really is making some progress by giving more than it is getting: Protohaus. Thumbs up! If you know other good ones, let us all know.

Bottomline: Yeah we know 99% of web flash sucks...but let's keep the "just-brilliant" factor of Mobile Flash over 99%. Because we can.