In a bid to usurp Google as the world’s most popular search engine Microsoft’s Bing has been continuously updated in the past couple of months. And it would seem that Google is taking notice if its introduction of a Bing-like background picture to its interface design is anything to go by. Bing’s interface design is attracting the sincerest form of flattery for good reason. Both search engines have a winning interface design that displays search results with minimal noise, but there are some differences between the two that deserve mention.

In what ways does Google have a better interface design?

At first glance I found Google to score higher on usability. Firstly the advanced search option was more clearly labeled on Google as ‘advanced search’. The blue letting immediately made it clear that it was a clickable link. On Bing this option was only labeled ‘Advanced’ and even though underlined it had the same font color as the text next to it. The news items results for my search input (which in case you were wondering was Snoop Dogg) appeared much higher whereas on Bing I had to scroll down all the way to the bottom of the screen. Google adheres to the quasi standard of showing the login option in the top right corner, while Bing puts the ‘Preferences’ option in that spot, requiring users to search for the login.

So why did such a seemingly good idea backfire?  Interface designers are often looking for new ways to improve their websites.  Yet, before implementing changes to an interface design, interface designers should think about the user’s reactions first.  The Google background flop is an excellent example of how to understand users and what they want.  And what users (especially search engine users) want is familiarity and universality within the interface design:

1.    Familiarity.  A web site as popular and (dare I say) archetypal as Google needs to be familiar to the user.  The plain white screen background is one of the hallmarks of the Google interface design.  It makes the user experience simple and is in no way distracting.  Over the years people have gotten used to Google’s basic design, and changing this learned pattern decreases the user’s comfort and familiarity with the site, a big usability no no.

2.    Universality. A site with such a diverse range of users needs to be equally accessible to all.  There were likely many users who enjoyed the artwork that graced the screen of Google’s homepage.  But many were probably confused, maybe even annoyed by it.  Lack of contrast or not knowing how much else besides the obvious background design had changed may have made users insecure.  The brilliance of Google’s homepage design is that it is so simple and uncontroversial that it makes the site attractive to everyone. Thus, the more universal the interface design, the more popular it will be among users.

There are many more factors that contribute to website usability, but Google’s new background image feature struck at the heart of the user’s expectations formed by two principles: universality and familiarity. Having a universal interface design that users are familiar and comfortable with is a great asset for a website that should not be put at risk.  As redundant as it is to say, interface designers must keep user needs and experience at the forefront of the interface design process.  However, this interface design platitude is worth eternally repeating because as Google’s background images faux pas shows us, even the big boys make mistakes.

A few weeks ago, Google decided to make a daring change to its interface design, one that was meant to make the site more aesthetically pleasing to its millions of users.  Google rolled out a set of backgrounds by well-known contemporary artists as a promotion of a new feature which was to allow users to choose and upload personal photos as a backdrop for the infamously plain, white search engine screen.  At the drawing table, this must have seemed like a fabulous idea to Google designers, a way to refresh their interface design and permit users to have more control of its settings.  However, like the plethora of ideas that are great in theory (but not in practice), Google’s new feature backfired.  On the day the new backgrounds were introduced, the number 2 trending search on Google’s trending pages was “Remove Google Background.”  Search engine searches speak volumes about what users want and are looking for.  Clearly, Google users were not looking for works of art to replace the white screen.  Within two days Google was back to its old design and users were happy to have the unadorned consistency back.

The Worldwide Developers Conference 2010 promises to be full of surprises when it kicks off on June 7 in San Francisco.  Apple’s chief executive officer, Steve Jobs, guarantees that the customers „won’t be disappointed“ by Apple’s newest developments. The focal point of the WWD will be the new iPhone 4G.  Apple was furious over leaked images of the iPhone a few months ago, but since the images did nothing but stir the public’s interest in the new device, the expected release of the iPhone 4G at the WWD will likely double the event’s publicity and excitement.  Here are a few things to expect from the new iPhone 4G interface design (these features are still firmly rooted in the world of speculation):

New Operating System

The iPhone 4G interface design will likely be powered by the new iPhone OS 4. The key new feature for this system is the facilitation of multitasking—users will be able to run apps simultaneously and switch between them with fluidity.  For example, users will be able to instant message a friend, look at photos and listen to their playlist all at once.

A quick example: Say your presentation is centered around 3 keywords or themes. These can be displayed as really huge items with further information on those themes much tinier and clustered around the keywords. As you go through your presentation you could zoom further down in which ever direction and angle. Prezi’s interface design for creating presentations is a breeze to learn and use thanks to very little noise and a few but powerful options (to adjust size for example). Prezi is also optimized for editing. Say you were going to perform your trusty presentation to an audience but wanted to leave something out: simply change the path to exclude the parts you wish to exclude rather than deleting slides. Just drag and drop all you may want to work with onto the canvas and the world is your oyster! Google wave users can look forward to embedding Prezi presentations allowing for non-locking, realtime collaborative editing between multiple parties on multiple devices. Considering that Prezi is similar in functionality to the Microsoft Office Labs pptPlex concept project, a look into my crystal ball tells me that the next iteration after Office 2010 will also include a zooming user interface design of some sort. But for now Prezi seems the leader of the new school.

Prezi is a Flash-based app that is also taking a revolutionary approach to presentation tools by employing a zooming user interface design approach. A ZUI is a type of GUI where users can change the scale of the viewed area in order to see more details or less and thus peruse through documents. Traditional presentation tools, such as PowerPoint or Keynote, use an interface design based around the use of linear slides modeled after traditional slide projectors. By using a zooming user interface approach, Prezi’s presentations are more like one giant slide or a blank canvas if you will. All the different components of a presentation (text, pictures, video, audio etc…) or added on the canvas and a path through different objects and frames can be defined non-linearly as a visual map that users zoom in and out as the presentation unfolds across the matrix of ideas on the virtual canvas (and making slide transitions so last century)!

Real-time collaboration capabilities

One of the main benefits of cloud computing is its facilitation of real-time collaboration among users. Cloud app mobility allows people to work and access their material from anywhere.  When designing your cloud app, think about ways to facilitate communication among users. For example, provide users with chat features or the ability to simultaneously access and edit documents (features already provided by Microsoft’s competitor, Google Docs, or by other more specialized tools like the wireframe tool Pidoco).  If your cloud app is related to gaming, make sure that players can easily communicate with each other.  The beauty of the internet is its capacity to provide the world with instantaneous forms of communication.  Don’t forget to make your cloud app a shining example of why real-time collaboration is one of cloud computing’s main benefits.

Interface design

It is important to have a cogent and executable concept behind your cloud app, but it is even more important to have an interface design that supports your app’s usability.  Cloud apps are completely dependent on internet access.  Many of them are accessed through a web browser. Think about internet connections. It’s great to have a high fidelity interface design, but is it usable for those with slow internet connections?  Think about the simple things like browser bars, the back button, page linking, even a possible search engine.  Do all of these seemingly simple features assist your user or do they detract from your interface design’s usability by making the user experience convoluted? Do they integrate well with your applications navigation flow and processes or are they misleading? Your interface design should be so simple to use and seamlessly integrated with the browser navigation options that your users don’t have to think about or notice it (well, maybe you can add some flair—it should look nice).  If you want users to appreciate the substantive value of your cloud app and what it potentially offers them, you have to make sure that the structure is clean and usable.

Google seems to have done pretty well on these points. Now it remains to be seen how the new Microsoft Office Web Apps will fare.

The editing toolbar has also been revamped with the Article & Discussion tabs now on the far left of the main pane and the editing tab on the right side. The editing page has also been simplified to reduce noise and clutter employing collapsible menu items. A link and a table wizard have also been introduced to simplify the editing process. The revamp has been finished off with improvements in search suggestions among other refinements. All these changes to Wikipedia’s interface design work together to boost the ease of learning for new users, the efficiency of use for repeat users and the subjective satisfaction users feel when using the website. Other usability advantages that are brought about through the new interface design are the memorability of the system (is the new interface design like a bicycle that – once learned – users will be able to remember sufficiently well, even after a long period of time, to effectively use) and a lowering of error frequency and severity. It is often said that less is more, and Wikipedia confirms this view with its new website design. But the new interface design of Wikipedia doesn’t just do away with options but instead also repackages them in a more manageable and presentable format that offers much more, but with less noise, clutter, alienation and frustration.

Importance of usability

The manifold improvements undertaken by Wikipedia show how important usability and its impact on the users of a website – even such a well-known one as Wikipedia – are, especially when the users come from a wide range of backgrounds. The new interface design certainly is a step forward, but it remains to be seen how active the older Wikipedia users will become in editing pages and contributing their fading knowledge to the “collective memory”. This is a great case to prove that there is also a social or societal aspect of usability.

•    One-way linking:  A one-way link is a hyperlink that directs the user of your website to a different website, but only in one direction.  There is no reciprocal link, meaning that the website you link to is not connected with your own website. One-way links can be beneficial for your interface design because they bolster your link directory, but they can often be more advantageous for the websites you establish links to since you are basically providing these sites with advertising in your link directory, thus increasing their popularity.

•    Reciprocal linking: A reciprocal link is a joint link between two websites to guarantee mutual traffic.  You can submit your website to reciprocal link directories in order to network with other websites and increase your search engine popularity. With one way linking you provide your users only with links away from your website, but if you utilize reciprocal linking, various websites can provide their users with links to your website.  This increases the visibility and marketability of your own website.This method is valuable because Google, for example, uses link popularity algorithms as part of their ranking process.  The more your website appears in the link directories of other websites, the more popular your website will be.

•    Resource linking: Resource links are categories of links.  They can either be one-way or reciprocal.  In essence, they are hyperlinks to or from your website to another website deemed to be relevant or beneficial to users of your website.  Since you are posting links that are helpful to your users, i.e. links that correspond to the relevant content of your website, this method is extremely useful for increasing your website’s search engine ranking.  Search engines have recently made it clear that the quality and relevance of links that you post on your website are major factors in your website’s search engine rating.

Link building will increase the visibility and popularity of your website, but you should make sure that the link directories do not clutter your interface design. It is important that you establish well-organized link directories on your website, and it is vital that you find ways to have your website included in the link directories of others as this increases your search engine ranking.  You want your website to be seen as a common building block used in the continuous construction of the internet.

Apple’s influence is such that several websites such as YouTube, CNN, Vimeo, Reuters, Time, the New York Times, ESPN and more have converted content on their website to be streamed through HTML5. This along with Microsoft announcing HTML5 integration within its upcoming Internet Explorer 9 would seem to point to a future where Flash’s ubiquity will be less pronounced. Despite being squeezed out of the world’s most successful and lucrative mobile platform there are other encouraging signs for Flash. Android keeps growing in leaps and bounds, RIM is still growing, Samsung is releasing the Bada OS, Nokia and Intel have teamed up to launch the MeeGo OS, and Windows Mobile has been revamped as Windows 7 already boasting exciting handsets such as the Dell Lightning due to come out. Flash plug-ins can already be installed in jailbroken iPhones which even have a dedicated App Store in Cydia where developers can sell their apps. Upcoming tablet devices such as the HP Slate, the Dell Streak and the WePad all boast flash compatibility.

Perhaps another way for Adobe to counter is by (drum roll please!) emulating Apple! By this I am referring to the open source Webkit project which started out as Apple proprietary technology but is now being used by Nokia, Google, RIM, Palm, the KDE Project and more. Surely, if Adobe were to make Flash open source and also allowed other developers to improve the code, Apple’s major arguments against Flash would be shot down. The first being that Flash is a proprietary technology would no longer be valid and the second that it crashes often would be tackled by numerous developers who would then adopt and improve the then open source code.

HTML5 has to power to effectively render Flash redundant as far as the web is concerned but it is still a couple years away from mass adoption. What Apple is effectively trying to do is to hasten this. Websites such as YouTube are already in the process of making all of its videos available in the .H264 codec mainly to allow iPhone (and now iPad, too) users to use their website. In addition to numerous others that are “iPad ready” we can see a sort of conditioning at work that will no doubt have Adobe, a company that has long shared a symbiotic relationship with Apple, worried for the future. The way I see it is that they can continue as they are right now by betting big on systems like Android or they could, by going the open source route, make Flash even more entrenched while its ubiquity is still dominant. Perhaps then Apple would have to yield and allow not only for Flash to be used to code apps for the iPhone but also allowing Flash itself to be on the iPhone.