connecting*the*dots

This post was meant to see the light of day a few days ago, but in the process of researching, I became completely caught up in some of the ideas surrounding shared data and a micro/macro analysis by using flickr’s blog interface. The damn thing sucked me in and I ended up with another Web 2.0 thread all together.

In this post, I’m going to pull back a bit to refocus on some of the meanings behind the term Web 2.0, touching upon aspects of the meme that have driven it to a certain tipping point within the web development community. And no, that doesn’t mean everyone is on board — as dedicated professionals are either embracing the moniker or slapping it down as a marketing gimmick — but one can’t deny the lexicon has begun to reach the mainstream business world.

The Way We Were

Each year, over the past 10 years or so, the internet has progressively behaved less like a mass of disparate domains — hooked into each other via simple hyperlinks — and more like a functioning network. If you can’t remember 10 years back, 1996 was practically the McCarthy era of the web. There was a good chance you’d be sued if your web site linked to a corporate site without permission. Seriously.

The behavior of the web as a macro entity wasn’t very smart as well. It essentially stagnated as an enabler for people (including developers) to interact (publish, reuse, etc.) with individual sites. The two-way web was there on paper, but an infrastructure forged across a critical mass of domains had yet to be accomplished.

Then along came Amazon, blowing the roof off of e-commerce by implementing collaborative filtering. Skip over a few other ingenious domains and Google completely changed the definition of information retrieval within both its own domain and others. The IQ of the web jumped as its big players became smarter, but across a majority of domains, the web was still more of a parking garage for individual vehicles, with individual owners and drivers. Carpooling hadn’t begun yet.

The Definition Of A Smart Web

Take my home office network as an example. Each day I easily share data between three machines in order to accomplish a multitude of different goals and a subset of numerous tasks. If I’m using my PC and want to alter an image found on my PowerBook, I simply use Photoshop on my PC to grab the data from across the network, manipulate the image and save it back to its original location. I perform similar operations when marking up HTML and CSS on my PowerBook, then hopping on a browser on my PC to view the data in a rendered form.

This is my personal realm of shared data; a collaborative, transparent, usable space called a network. It stitches together my various personal computers, allowing my software to access data openly and freely. The label isn’t fancy, because the concept is finite and comprehensible. I own everything, from the hardware to the software to the authentications allowing access throughout. I am the network.

I Am Not The Web… Yet

A transition to a user-centered web will only occur once we, the web development community, take the well established premise of a finite network and extrapolate its underlying philosophies of connectivity, transparency and usefulness across a potentially unlimited amount of “networked” domains — each with varying business objectives and often at best, a subjective understanding of user goals and tasks.

In doing so, the rationale for the 2.0 label will start to become clear, as we’re dealing with an enormous number of variables in a potentially limitless value equation.

We’re living in an entrepreneur’s dream world.

Web 2.0 is a useful moniker to latch onto. Without a set of guiding principles, progressive domains that eat, sleep and breath collaborative, transparent and useful user experiences might end up functioning within a bubble, as opposed to influencing the adoption of industry-wide hooks of shared data by less insightful domains.

As Amazon and Google previously raised the bar in the late 90’s and challenged their competition to innovate or fold, this philosophical approach is a rallying cry for the entire industry.

The Micro/Macro Example

I’m going to stick with my current favorite example from around the web. A subset of interface features on flickr reads like this:

• the ability to share images
• the ability to tag images with (potentially) common identifiers
• the ability to view other people’s images through contextual navigation of tags
• the ability to comment on anyone’s image
• the ability to save a shared set of favorites
• the ability to leave notes on images themselves
• the ability to quickly create a blog post of an image

Each of these features within the flickr domain could be studied to find analogous patterns from the macro arena around the web (e.g. posting images is the equivalent to publishing a podcast), but by focusing on one feature, user commenting, we can blow out the possibilities for usefulness across a Web 2.0 environment.

While commenting isn’t unique per se, flickr does provide a commenting feature that is very useful. In order to help a user keep up with discourse surrounding their posts, flickr provides a “Recent Activity” screen, which not only presents user comments in context to the images, but notifies you when your image was added as someone else’s favorite. There’s also an elegantly designed page which documents the history of comments that you’ve made across the domain. flickr makes this so easy to track, they even provide an RSS feed for peripheral awareness.

Now take this concept from the micro space of flickr and extrapolate it across the macro space of the web and you have the means to track numerous conversations you’ve either started or joined over n period of time. Blogpulse has a similar interface with its Conversation Tracker, but that relates more to trackbacks and the movement of a topical conversation across posts. Interesting, but not personally interesting.

The captivating aspect of the localized, recent activity screen from flickr is through the exposure of an involved conversation, not an uninvolved and evolving perspective.

The image above is a quick sketch of how I perceive the web around me as I open my browser. There are applications that I use to stay connected and informed, a small, somewhat rotating, network of sites that I consider to be daily reads and an infinite universe of daily new finds.

I add to the discourse of the latter two types of sites on a somewhat daily basis. When flickr was without the recent activity feature, I was never able to remember what images I previously commented on, so in turn, my participation level was much less. With the feature, I comment much more often, as the connection between me and other people’s information objects is now tangible.

Now, apply that same concept to the web. What would a recent activity interface centered on your comments from around the web do for your continued contribution to public discourse?

This is only one idea for how the concepts behind the Web 2.0 meme can change the way we look at the web, moving from a centralized group of branded domains to a functional network of decentralized, shared data, information and applications.

What are some of your ideas?

I’m really liking where the Amazon UI is heading.

Not to say that their interface has been devoid of good design decisions over the past 9 years. I mean, they were the first e-commerce company to truly leverage collaborative filtering, essentially taking advantage of The Long Tail of online consumerism, long before the terminology was officially anointed within the context of new media. Just getting those features into the interface — placing more eyes on more products — drove the business model and the promise of the New Economy circa 1998.

But crafting the balance between user search, participatory and discovery scenarios within the interface was definitely an afterthought. As a matter of fact, at one point in time, it seemed that Amazon had little concern for any interaction design considerations within the interface at all, satisfied to add features within a scroll-driven, hierarchical construct to no end.

Well, that has seemingly changed. Check out a new test version of the product page:

Am I the only one standing up and applauding? The interface now completely supports the common needs of all users at a point-of-purchase.

1. Clearly display the product price & savings
2. Show the product itself
3. Provide the ability to purchase it or add it to a Wish List
4. Then provide the ability to move into search, participatory or discovery scenarios

Amazon reduced the cognitive friction of the previous interface
by removing the bookend columns of contextual navigation and by moving only the highest priority scenario features (reading reviews and looking inside/searching the book) under the primary sales window. The affordance for the DHTML window on the product image needs to be increased, as it is currently one of purely learned behavior, but the simplicity of the new interface does wonders in focusing my attention.

Take a look at the old interface in comparrison:

For someone that has reached the conclusion of their search or discovery scenario, the shopping experience is now set up for the user to determine price feasibility, drop the product into their cart and either head for checkout or continue to discover.

For someone who’s in the midst of a discovery process, the interface hasn’t changed for the worse, as an anchor link still drops the user down to user reviews. It’s now just better placed. The interface continues to present other collaborative filtering information below the fold. With these smart design decisions, Amazon now finds itself in a position to add elegant customization, because elegant design parameters have been established.

The Amazon jungle is evolving, and in very smart fashion. In my book, that’s pretty cool.

I noticed something the other day about my online shopping pattern: I don’t browse and I hardly ever buy on a whim.

After contemplating such startling, introspective findings for awhile (uhm… finished), I started to wonder whether this could be the case with most people that shop online? That got me to thinking more, so I mosied on over to Amazon.com to perform an off the cuff user interview/usability study of myself and my tendencies, comparing them to the holistic user experience of the site.

I admit it wasn’t very scientific, but what I discovered was interesting.

• When I shop at Amazon, 99 times of 100 (I multiplied this session by 99) go directly to the search field and enter a product attribute.
• After landing on a results page, I choose a product description page.
• 4 out of 10 times (ballpark figures folks), I’ll review a few user comment reviews on the product as a the final check before deciding to make a purchase or not.
• If it’s a go, then WHAM! I’m in the cart experience and out the virtual door.

What I just described is the Amazon shopping experience from 1996-97. It’s a utilitarian approach and it fits me when it comes to shopping, especially in the real world (but that’s a whole other conversation.)

Online shopping, for me, is about keeping your recommendations to yourself, don’t clutter the page with collaborative filtered data such as ‘purchase circles’ or ‘listmania,’ and just let me find what I’m looking for and get me out of the store… fast.

My assumption is that this is how most people use Amazon. I could be wrong. I’ve been known to be… often. But if that were the case, even if the numbers were only 30% that followed my shopping pattern, wouldn’t the overall user experience be a bit too much? Wouldn’t Amazon be relying too much on quirky collaborative filtering techniques to become the next generation shopping experience?

I mean, first there’s a welcome page, then the Sean store, then a trailing history of what I’ve viewed, then recommendations built dynamically based on those views and presented throughout the UI. On top of all of this there is untargeted and targeted marketing messaging (hmm, sometimes in the form of recommendations?) presented to me at each turn…

Who’s handling the UXdesign here? How many marketing MBA’s are in a room with a cornered IA or DBA hatching plots to create cross-pollination of product silos? Come on, do I really care that people who bought my book also wear clean underwear from Target? Is this the smartest Amazon can be?

Amazon deserves credit for recently removing some of the superfluous features of the site from the main experience and placing them into the well hidden ‘explore’ category on a secret page somewhere in their navigation scheme. But the powerful information that this site could provide the customer should be generated at the customer’s whim.

Please, Mr. Bezos, we’re living in the realm of customization. Allow us to create our own product page. Let us choose if we want these extra features and how we want to view them. I understand there’s a fine line between satisfying the needs of your retail partners and pushing product, but when in doubt, bite the bullet and go with the us, the people, the customers.

Amazon is now six years old, the ancient mother of e-commerce sites. Now would be the time to design an experience for individual shoppers. Create a completely personalized shopping experience through customizable interaction design. It’s the next step in online shopping, and you know how the saying goes in the retail world: the customer is always right.