Printable View
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-930301.html?tag=fd_topQuote:
The software company wants to change Flash from being "99 percent bad" to "99 percent good." And it's enlisted one of its harshest detractors to help lead the way.
I know Nielsen has some valid points about Flash design, but I can feel his ego swelling from here. It also would have been nice if the article mentioned the improvements designers were making already.
But then, I woke up cranky today...
;)
-monster.
I think what annoys me most about these kind of articles (and possibly Macromedia's marketing spin) is that it is always implied that MX is the very first version of Flash that you can do anything useful/user-friendly with - and that anyone using Flash 5 or lower is just producing "colorful but essentially useless graphics tricks" (sic) :(
just gotta go through it I suppose ;)
- n.
valid points. i think the last relevant article he wrote on flash was from 1996. i don't even have shoes that old.Quote:
Originally posted by monsterfx
I know Nielsen has some valid points about Flash design, but I can feel his ego swelling from here. It also would have been nice if the article mentioned the improvements designers were making already.
But then, I woke up cranky today...
;)
-monster.
and, in my on going quest to reduce general crankiness on the FK board, i offer you this:
http://www.untickalock.com/jakob/
it might be old news, but worth wasting a few monday morning minutes on.
d.
surprised he doesn't show up to the Bay CHI meetings in a limo and secret service. lol.
its annoying considering that flash is one of the extremely few app/plugins that provides users with a consistent(for the most part) UI experience regardless of OS platform and browser combo. Instead of whining at flash users, maybe mr brain should be whining at browser developers and annoying them to the point that they will all finally fully conform to the w3c standards.
David - thanks for the link, crankiness level reduced.
I guess it's very clever of Macromedia to snare in Jakey as a consultant. Now if he thinks Flash is any percent bad, he has himself partly to blame (but I'm sure he'll find an excuse for why he isn't - just like his excuses for why his site is usable).
New rule for usability (made specifically for useit.com):
If a site's design is so boring I'm not interested enough to read the content, it isn't usable.
The sad thing of it all is, I agree with focusing on the site's users first and making sure it is usable. I think Nielsen makes valid points about achieving that goal. He just rubs me the wrong way every time he makes huge sweeping generalizations about something that he doesn't like (remember Jakob - glasses that are half-empty are also half-full).
</rant>
-monster.
"Nielsen said his group will work on building sample applications with Flash MX and then test them on consumers, monitoring how easily people can complete tasks. "
I would really like to see the applications they come up with... A Flash version of (ab)useit.com? that would be a laugh.
I really think this kind of boring, ultra dull 'design' treats your web viewer as if they are dull, mindless saps themselves. Why can't there be a room for a deeper experience on the web than just text and jpgs?
Assuming that everyone goes on the web for just information is foolhardy in the extreme.
..and I always worry about people who call themselves gurus...
James
I have seen textbooks that are more fun to read than useit. I can appreciate his whole usability trip, but personally, I operate on a more visual level than that. I really enjoy a few pictures on occasion. He reminds me of the guys that thought gui was the downfall of the computer.
What a nerd.
All prior statements are simply my opinion and not meant to defame, libel, or slander in any way.
He mentions that components will help web designers keep a consistant look, but I would be more inclined to create a wackier weirder scoll bar if everybody else was to have the same ones.
I think he should blame authors and not tools. HTML and Flash can both make horendous things, but they can both make amazing things too. And, how can he complain about Flash, when he doesn't even relise there was't the big of a difference between MX and 5? Most stuff made in MX could be made just as well in F5 anyway.
He sounds like he's scared of Flash really.
<soapbox>
I've had a hard time with the entire "Let's play to the lowest common denominator" philosophy in Web design for a couple years now. Usability should be just that--designing sites that are "usable" by their intended audience. Which is why I end up disgusted with the gurus. (What makes someone a usability guru, anyway? What makes you an expert at what other people think?)
Usability DOES NOT mean 'sameness'. Standards and consistency DO NOT mean that everyone's stuff needs to look identical. All scrollbars are not (and should not) be created equal.
I wholeheartedly agree with the earlier statement that sites that end up dry as dust are just as unusable as sites where people can't figure out where to click.
Designers must *of course* make design decisions with their users in mind. But I think that questions like, "Can they find what they need to?" "Is it obvious what they're supposed to do to navigate?" "Can they read the text?" are the questions to ask, not whether every button and arrow and scroller should be the same and in the same place.
The type of content and the intended audience should be the driving factors, not the "rules".
</soapbox>
I don't care what mister big shot thinks, Flash, is in no way possible, to be 99% bad. That just doesn't happen. And if it does, could some one alert me? Or wake me up when men devolve. Then Flash will be worse....
I have been following his antics off and on for years.
He is a nice affable greedy opportunist pig. really.
His website is a single column of links - mostly trying to make himself appear significant.... however it appears that he has at least suceeded in getting himself called a guru after saying so himself for 8 years.
oh yah and he has bad teeth and worse breath,
really a poor appearance for anyone wanting to be in public.
http://one-network.com/anywhere/inde...jacket_big.jpg
bah. Jakob 99% bad
I think his views are as losided as his hairline. I used to think Macromedia was almost cool. The sleezy bastards. Neilsen is boring. Boring and and creative don't mix. He reminds me of Sigmund Freud. An expert in scientific sexuality but about as unsexy a man as you could get, with his flat top and cigar. I think Mr Neilsen is mean, self-proclaimed and scientific about passion. Flash is a process. Its like he critizes little children for not acting like adults. Sure we all need to grow up, but not with his brutal narcisistic view points. yes narcisistic. He boasts himself to be the customers megaphone. I beg to differ. He tells himself and others that he is simply telling the Flash kids to be quiet so they can learn to respect others but I think he is yelling at the kids to freakin shut up because he can't stand the noise. He has no use for healthy play that does not make him money. I don't like him and thats my opinion. This merger just makes me feel he is a whore. He will make love to the enemy for money. Macromedia is just trying to broaden their markets. I admire their ability to take such a risk and this may enhance their ability to broaden the market and replace more html, but I fear their direction.
Macromedia let me down. Jacob Neilsen gives me the creeps!
Nielson is an idiot.
Before my current situation, my last job was Senior Creative Strategist at Red Hat e-commerce. I have worked in e-commerce for the past 4 years. And before that dealt with "usability" issues on Fortune 500 companies. Although usability has it's place, it is not the end all of the web.
First off, Jakob's assumption that the web is just for business is just absurd.
What about art? Art unto itself is viable. What if an individual is just trying to make a statement? What if that individual wants to make the site hard to use to make a statement, or for art's sake.
I am so tired of e-commerce and usability it is ridiculous.
Don't fall into the Nielson crap!! Sure use it Nielson's crap around your boss. But in your own work, experiment, create something new.
Think about this, when MTV started, many thought that a channel with 24hours of Music Videos was useless. Love it or hate it you cannot ignore some of the innovations MTV made to television.
I am completely rambling, but I HATE that one guy, Nielson, thinks that the web should conform to his mindset. Does Nielson = HitlerWeb? Where everthing conforms to a single mindset?
Experiment, be free, push the envelope.
Macromedia better wise up also, cause the creatives are who got flash where it is today.
Peace and Soul!
[Edited by dingosmoov on 06-04-2002 at 05:49 PM]
Don't be wrong, we are talking about money, Nielsen is selling the same boring stuff for the last 5 years?, he is squeezing the orange till the last drop before every body will realize that always is the same argument. Do you receive his "free" alertbox "e-mail, it always comes with "if you want an extensive report about how grandmas of medium class living in locations with less than 1000 people under tropical weather climate in T1 connections are using Opera software to browse gardening web sites" download the PDF files for only $XX.
You can have Mr. Jakob in your company for the small summ of some thousand dollars or go to his seminars for tree times more than any other similar event and so on.
I'm sure the guys at Macromedia are able to do a research and write guidelines for a usable and consistent use of Flash, but they need a face to sell that.
Anyway, probably when these guidelines will be finish Flash 7 will be running, with the consequent mess around: users with Flash 3, 4 ,5 ,6 and 7 combined with a bunch of IE and NN versions, and these usability guidelines applied to some sites available to a small percentage of users.
Surprise, surprise Macromedia's got a 'bad guy' who poo-poos their software in their pocket.
If they read this thread they'd realise that Neilsen's had his day. He is a money grabbing moron who has made his money stating the obvious about design issues.
There will always be a good and bad web sites (no, really!).
I recently went to a Macromedia seminar on Accessability in London where they wheeled out a representative of the Royal National Institute for the Blind to say how great the new Macromedia MX products were despite the fact that compatible screen readers won't be available for 6-12 months!!
Macromedia then went on to poo-poo an open source Perl script which will translate web sites on the fly developed by the BBC (www.bbc.co.uk/betsie). Could it be cos they didn't think of it? Or because it addresses accessability issues now?
Don't get me wrong I use practically all of Macromedia's products, they are a great set of tools but how stupid do they think we are?
With pocketing so-called 'influential' opinions, bun-fighting other software vendors and not giving a toss about their customers, maybe they think they are the young pretenders to the Microsoft throne when Open Source topples them!!
If Macromedia intend to take flash downhill then working with Jakob Nielsen is the right way to go about it. I thought that one of the good things about flash was the flexibility of what can be done. Flash breaks down boundaries and throws down the rule book on what should and shouldn't be achieved by designing a great looking site with a great user experience. Jakob Nielsen is the wrong person to be filling this role that Macromedia are obviously trying to fill, the position wasn't made for Jakob Nielsen was it? I hope not. I know his site http://www.useit.com has no graphics and is built for speed, but a site still has to look fairly attractive, as opposed to looking like someone's crappy homepage. Because let's face it his site is. Someone earlier commented "Are Macromedia going to create a flash version of his site for him?". I can't see this happening as I've read some of his comments before and I know he wrote the "Flash 99% bad" episode long ago, but he hasn't wrote anything else about Flash from what I've seen and flash has evolved immensely, so have flash sites, since then anyway.
Jakob could look at the some of the excellent sites around now and could probably say that some of them are a joy to use as they are so user friendly and really give flash a great name. His own site isn't particularly easy is it. Macromedia are making a bad move here, I'm not saying that somebody shouldn't look at improving flash usability here, but there's others who could do a better job, someone who has actually used flash at a very high level would be a good start.
The other thing is that the guidelines they publish will have his stamp all over it. However we, the development community that is the intended target audience for those guidelines, don't respect him as an expert at all - some positively hate him. Not the best basis for a successful relationship really.
- n.
i think we only need to look around at the member sites and the ones on the site checks and see that a LOT of people could take something away from usability guidelines.
granted, Neilsen writes for corporate designers and developers, but there's something to be said for sites that are efficient, effective, and easy to find exactly what i want.
I think sometimes we need to separate the man from the message. Yes, Nielsen is an arrogant blowhard who, if he did print usability, would have us all using centered sans-serif headlines at 24 pt. and left-aligned serif body copy at 12 pt. and never anything else. He loves the cookie-cutter web.
However, that doesn't mean you can't get some helpful information from his rantings. The man (and his group) have done a ton of research and the findings are valid. People expect navigation on the left and/or top. People expect a logo in the top-left corner that links to the home page. Etc.
That doesn't mean you have to make a cookie-cutter site, but understanding what the user expects can help you safely push the envelope when experimenting with new layouts and interfaces.
And if nothing else, the guy has a lot of friendly ears, so like it or not, his opinion carries weight in the web development community. And just because Macromedia brought him on as a consultant doesn't mean that we can no longer push the envelope as designers and developers. I'm sure this will result in a list of "usability guidelines" that we are free to follow or ignore like any others.
My $.02.
-monster.
Neilsen has stated in the past that the web is not a place for art. Obviously he is a complete moron. To exclude a medium, any medium, as not being suitable for art is a pretty amazing statement to make. Some of the best art I have seen has been web-based. Neilsen just assumes that everyone in the world is a complete moron and can't figure out any other type of navigation system outside of a left hand clamshell nav. He may have that problem...I however do not. I agree totally with Joshua Davis in regard to him....if I ever meet him in person I think I might have to give him a nice hard smack. Not every Flash site is well done granted, but not every HTML site with a standardized navigation is great either. Usability depends on what the designer wants to accomplish, and there is always the availability of "instructions". I don't blame macromedia though, they are a business after all. I just can't wait to see the list of "Standards" they come up with. I imagine it will be something like:
1. Make Flash look like standard HTML sites, or
2. Don't use Flash
Fitz
P.S. I am still waiting for easy to use standardized flash game where you can muzzle Jacob in your spare time for fun. Now that is user-freindly!
I'm really suprised by Macromedia. You'd think they'd have a better understanding of their audience. This is like get Roger Ebert to write a best practices for creating a hollywood movie. I would have been much more impressed if they got someone like Edward Tufte to draw up some flash usability guidelines. Not only is Tufte a brilliant usability expert (though he does tend to be print-based), everything he designs is freakin' gorgeous, the exact opposite of Neilsen. And as a sculptor, Tufte certainly understands the value of art in design. Which makes me wonder, what usability experts do other flashkit members look up to?
Back when I was in a technical communications program, I did some user testing on about five different sites, with a random sampling of ten different users who ranked everywhere from Internet novices to experts. And of the sites I tested, the one that every single person rated as least usable was useit. People hated the lack of any sort of visual hierarchy, they had no idea where to click or what to do. They hated the scrolling, and they hated the two-column layout. When I asked the users if they appreciated the fast loading times of the site, one user responded, 'When I sit on the toilet, no matter how long it takes it's still crap.' Which, though vulgar, is my favorite comment about useit.
Problem with design is that it's easy to point out flaws in other people's work. Look at Vincent Flanders' Web Pages that Suck; anybody could write that book. On the other hand, getting agreement about what constitutes good design is much more difficult. Usability in my mind always comes down to audience and content. Neilsen likes to believe that if something is on the Internet, the entire population of Internet users is the target audience (which makes about as much sense as saying, 'if a book is in a library, then all library users must be that book's target audience). As far as content goes, the form has to fit the information. To use one form for all information (as Neilsen does) is to say that all information is inherently the same. Personally, I don't believe that it is. Going back to MacLuhan, the 'media is the message' is an overused but none-the-less true statement, and the Internet adaptation might be something like 'the interface is the content.'
I think erova's point is very valid about how a lot of the sites posted on flashkit could use some usability tweaking. Flash is probably going through the same phase right now that HTML went through about 7 years ago. There's a lot of flash design out there right now that appeals only to other flash developers. Which isn't a problem.
One of my key philosophies is that as information developers, we have a responsibility not only to convey information, but to expand users' cognitive skills, rather than always reducing our work to the lowest common denominator. If usability experts of the past had reduced themselves to the lowest common denominator, we wouldn't have the mouse, the GUI, or the Internet.
Obviously, any mention of Neilsen gets me as riled up as the next developer. So I'll shut up now and let the next person have their turn.
#
well, i read his book, and it contains some good information. But he also wrote about your target audience. I think if you did some research, and you see you aim for the younger audience, then a site in flash would be USABLE (for the target!). If you are making a site for a house for elderly people, then it's another story ;)
Man, that hits the nail on the head when it comes to useability. The "visual hierarchy" is what we as "Designers" are paid to develop and emphasize. Next to content, I would have to rank that inplementation as the most important aspects of web design. The ability to direct your targeted users to the most important features in a page is the design tool that I feel Neilsen is most afraid of, because this is exactly an ability that he lacks. If people figured out the importance of visual hierarchy, he would probably be out of a job.Quote:
Originally posted by octothorp
People hated the lack of any sort of visual hierarchy, they had no idea where to click or what to do. They hated the scrolling, and they hated the two-column layout.
I have always hated that page and your thread finally made me understand why.
nice post octo.
Nielsen likes to believe that if something is on the Internet, the entire population of Internet users is the target audience (which makes about as much sense as saying, 'if a book is in a library, then all library users must be that book's target audience).
That's a great insight there....if somebody doesn't like your site then they are free to go an look for content they are interested in. I personally wouldn't even look at a Mills & Boon novel for instance.
Therefore, the difference here between the book and the web is that you can ignore books from a distance, but you will always see the home-page for a web, before deciding on it's usefulness.
One of things to look out for here is when a member of your target audience has agrievances about your presentation...then you may have to take measures.
regds
James
ohh and have a look here : http://www.useit.com.au
I don't see how this guy can be a usability expert, definitely not a guru, this is the new millennium, and in this new age of ours we don't use static text, or columns of text and links that are in my opinion, (and yes I AM A USABILITY GURU), are difficult to navigate because everything is all squashed into one area.
People don't like to read unless they have to, in other words unless they have found the information they are looking for to read. I don't have to like to read every single line of text on Jacobs page just to find out that there is no useful information on his site at all. I feel I was robbed of the 5 - 10 minutes it took me to realize I just wasted my valuable time.
As far as Macromedia goes, well they are what they are, a corporate conglomerate, and they will do anything to make the extra bucks. If this is what they think is going to pull in the extra money so be it, but I don't see any seasoned and experienced flash developer following this lunatics advice as to what is right or wrong based on his opinion. You want usability and functionality Macromedia? Contract some independent design/developers to get the content out there and focus groups and get feedback to see what works. Don't put all your bread in one dirty, moldy, corrupt money hungry basket.
I personally think there are much better ways to create design guidelines and standards, but really, do you plan to enforce these guidelines by suing every individual that does not conform to them? Including the use of these guidelines in the User License? If the creation of design guidelines entails the end result of enforcing them, then that in turn will take so much away from such a good product, and in the long run cost more dough and a loss of respect as well as a loss of user base.
Flash = 100% good, depending on it's intended use. does that mean HTML = 99% bad as well, cause there are definitely more HTML web pages that are worse than the amount of flash pages.
People, get over Jacob, I have! If Macromedia plans to enforce these guidelines by offering certification by learning these guidelines, I would be interested in seeing how many flash designers apply. I am sure the ones that do, will be the ones who are unaware of the flash world and are pretty much newbies to the application.
http://www.u4c.com | http://www.ipro.com
[email protected]
LoL, I wonder how many users will start bouncing over to SVG if they manage to start doing that enforcement
Do you think they could stop everybody making childish music? I think it's a bit silly to try to get Flash designers to be more standard compliant and follow rules. I konw that would just encourage me to make somthing stupid.
And, as others have said useit.com is a awful site. I use 100% html, and I don't think it looks as bad. At least I can navigate my site.
http://www.edmack.com/flash/tuts
http://www.geocities.com/jakob_nielsen_is_boring
This game says it all!!!
yes, it does ;) it is hard to navigate, displays unstructured information, has poor graphics, inadequate user feedback... :D ;)Quote:
Originally posted by webmonkeymon
http://www.geocities.com/jakob_nielsen_is_boring
This game says it all!!!
- n.
By maligning Flash, it is almost as if he was planning all along to be hired by MM in this 'consultative' role - what better than to create a conflict, yet not be seen as an agressor, rather simply as one who wants the best for the masses, then after the war has been beaten to death, join your previous foe to work together for peace and harmony.
From what I've read, about and by Nielsen (that's a fair amount over the past couple of months), this guy has a talent, but it's not analyzing site usability. More, he likes to poke a stick into any available wasps nest to promote a reaction, creating a perpetual cycle which keeps his relatively worthless, self-important name in the top lines of site design articles. The Flash developer community is, I've come to appreciate, is an ardent environment which does not take kindly to criticism of its primary creative tool from a 'guru' who has seemingly yet to tween his first symbol. Nielsen then, recognizing this targets' rabid pro-Flash sentiment, knows that provoking a reaction will, ant-like, send the Flashers en-masse into a desperate fight against the intruder.
when someone get in your path ... Buy him ....
And that's waht macromedia did... Has for nielsen Is a freak that use Babyboomer technology stupidity for is own interest.. Let say is a "charlatan"... But nielsen time as already come to an end .. Babyboomer will soon be retired and a complete new world will be open to our young and creative mind ..
So long Nielsen i'll see you when black and white tv is back...
What i want from a web site is information or entertainment whats around the information is what make me thrust the content of the site ... Useit.com look for me as a website that any looser can do ... So the information it contains as no credibility to me...
[Edited by trionik on 06-10-2002 at 11:40 AM]
As a company, Macromedia has posted a recent loss financially, so I think it is ridiculous to think that they are playing games by hiring Nielson.
They can't afford the cost of hiring Nielson just to shut him up or make a statement.
I think Macromedia genuinely wants to improve the use of their product and by-products so it will further its use in real-world corporate environments.
Surely, they are less interested in teaching the teenage software pirate how to make his Clan site more usable, and more interested in creating wide acceptance in the corporate arena... both with the Talent and Name of Jakob Nielson.
I know Nielson is an arrogant bad-fashion-statement with ugly hair and a failable website, but his knowledge is incredible.
I'd say this is a good move by Macromedia.
jabez--
thanks for providing some insight that macromedia is bringing neilsen on not to quiet him or to irritate flash diletantes hanging around Flashkit, but to show to the corporate world (that means the people who buy Flash and who pay design/development firms to build Flash apps) that Flash is much more than *Skip Intros* that only annoy, not amaze, users.
Neilsen doesn't claim that the web is no place for art, rather, he's saying there's no need for art in an e-commerce site with a sole purpose to sell me a book or an airline ticket.
Bringing on a heavyweight like Neilsen is Macromedia telling its shareholders and potential customers that it realizes Flash has a bad rap throughout the Corporate stuffed shirt IT world, and it wants to address these concerns by bringing on the biggest name in the business.
And for the guy who asked for our personal usability gurus, i've met with and heeded the advice of Steve Krug, author of *Don't Make Me Think*, though he's really more a web usability guru, not especially flash usability.
think of the new IBM commercial where an IT guy is talking to his old gray haired boss, trying to pitch something "cool". the boss gets irate, saying that cool is why his son needs new shoes every six months, and that cool is why his daughter has green hair. when the IT guy tells him that what is cool will save the company millions of dollars, then the old boss listens.
the old boss here may be familiar with neilsen, and thinks that flash is only for animation and skip intros, whereas now the IT guy can say, nope, read this neilsen authored white paper, and you'll understand why we SHOULD use flash.
erova~
Exactly... well put words.
I've long been a subscriber to Nielson's "alertbox" newsletter and a fan of usability. While Nielson himself turns me off, usability and user interaction have both intrigued me and helped me win contracts over other developers.
Macromedia's pulling Nielson on board is telling the corporate suits that there is indeed room for Flash in their business plan. This eqates to more revenue for the Flash-savvy developer.
OK, JabezStone, I was letting it go but no more. As a conspiracy theory naysayer, it is far from 'ridiculous' to think that MM bought off Nielsen. OK. So what that they posted a quarter loss? So what exactly doea that mean? No new Jag for the CEO's missus? You don't think at all that whatever it costs would be worth bringing Nielsen over to MM so his overused jaw can flap MM-speak, Monty Python style? And anyway, how much can that self-important windbag actually cost in a consultative role. We're not talking moon shot money here.
Maybe they won't even give him anything to do. Just dump him in a windowless office and lock the door. Do us all a favor. You know, the world was still spinning before I heard his ranting, and it'll still be spinning long after he shall rant no more.
One more thing. If any designer worth their justice does not at least try to make sites (Flash or otherwise) easy to use, then why would they be called designers. Administrative staff and lawyers are usually the ones that make things difficult to understand, so perhaps these overly complex designers should consider career moves.
What is the deal here? Whatever is eating at you, I wish you would count to ten and cool down a bit. Everyone's entitled to an opinion here, and I respect yours.Quote:
Originally posted by hurricaneone
OK, JabezStone, I was letting it go but no more...
Sheesh!
jabez--
one step forward, two unlabeled, unconventional, unpaid steps back, huh?
:) I hate stepping backwards.Quote:
Originally posted by erova
jabez--
one step forward, two unlabeled, unconventional, unpaid steps back, huh?
(BTW, just checked out your site... nice work, Chris)
-Jay
I would have hired Flanders over Nielson... some of Nielson's Ideas aren't bad... his website is pretty bad thougth.
Everyone could do better by trying to improve usability. There is no harm done by MM hiring Nielson.
gosh a lot of people are short sighted here. JN has a point. And he was the first to successfully get his point across. Usability is important.
Those that make a living out this realise that cutting edge inovative stuff comes along rarely, and more often than not cannot pay the mortgage.
This is a business, not art school. Learn to talk like businessmen and you to will be able to pay the mortgage.
So JN site is not nice or usable, who cares. Learn the talk. Walk the walk. Then later you can do the egipician.