Simple user interfaces are not always easier to use

Posted by: Josh Walsh in User Experience.

Earlier this week I spoke at the Cleveland Web Standards Association on the importance of thinking before building.   The talk included a walkthrough of my UX design procedure, and why I feel it is a superior way of designing for interaction.

I’m frequently asked how to make interfaces simpler, as if we all already have pristine, usable interfaces  buried inside of our current cluttered interfaces.  Removing elements from your interface makes them simpler and easier to understand… right?  Wrong.

Common Misconceptions

Misconception: Fewer elements on a page means there is less to wrap our heads around.  The less there is to evaluate, the easier it is to understand.

We certainly should not put unnecessary elements onto the page which could be distracting to the people using the page.  However, removing elements that are expected to be there makes things just as confusing, frustrating and unusable.

Misconception: If I collect and store less data, there are fewer opportunities to confuse people with that data.

We should not collect data we don’t need.  But, failing to collect data that we do need leads to the same dissatisfied conclusion.  There’s nothing wrong with collecting data if you need it.

So, what’s the solution?

Ease of use, simplicity and the design of usable interfaces are all about perception.  It’s not  about making interfaces so stupidly simple that they are automatically intuitive.  Rather, it is about presenting them with the information they expect in a way that they understand it.  It is about guiding them through the interface in a way that’s completely comfortable.

GMail is a superb example of this.  They collect gobs and gobs of data.   Unless you tell them otherwise, they remember every piece of email you’ve ever received.  They collect it all in a single folder called “All Mail.”  Looking through the “All Mail” folder isn’t intimidating because they give you a simple ways to find the data your looking for.   Apply labels manually/automatically to email as it comes in, or use search to find something specific.  Star emails which need response.

The data isn’t simplistic, the way you interact with the data is.

GMail guides you through a procedure which makes you more productive, without you even noticing.  It encourages you to use Inbox Zero by starring emails that need response, and archiving them… they’ve made it easy for you to find starred emails.

When you get a new email from someone, they find related emails and group them into a conversation.  There is no work on your poart in remembering what your conversation has been about, when it took place, or who else was involved.  Even if the emails are old and archived long ago, the important information is automatically brought back to your attention.

The keys to making this all work are:

1. Knowing what data is needed (User Research)
2. Knowing when that data should be collected (Not necessarily all at once)
3. Knowing when it’s valuable to show that data to the user.