I wasn’t sure how it would work with our business blog (soon to be released) which uses BlogEngine.net.

On the MarsEdit FAQ they suggest that the best way to see if MarsEdit is compatible with your particular blogging engine it to type in the URL of the blog into the ‘Add Weblog’ dialogue and see what happens.

My assumption was that, BlogEngine.net being based on a Microsoft platform, the Mac-ness of MarsEdit wouldn’t allow it.

Within seconds it asked me for my password and then opened it up as if it were WordPress or Typepad.

The simplicity of a product like that really improves my enjoyment of it. It’s that kind of simplicity we should be working into all our products. If a product has a complicated process, look at that and ask why.

• Does it need to be complicated?
• If it’s so complicated, will it be used?
• If it’s not going to be used, can we get rid of it?
• If it is going to be used, how can we make it simpler?

A little bit of thought can go a long way to making a user happy.

Sure the designs on these menus were nice but there was something else. Something that made them really simple. Almost none of them have drop-down secondary menus.

The drop-down secondary menu is a killer when it comes to usability. So often the menu will disappear while navigating towards it, for example.

As far as accessibility goes it also causes problems. The main navigation menu for a site often appears above the content. This makes sense. But if there are 5 main menu items and each item has 4 sub-items, now there are 20 items for a screen reader to get through before getting to the content. If someone is navigating by keyboard instead of mouse, what are the rules for where each menu item appears in the tab list?

Do you need all of those lists of what’s on the site at the top of the screen? Isn’t that what you’ve got a sitemap for in the first place?

The difficult task is to still relay the information that can be accessed in each part of the site.

Remember when department stores had elevator operators? You might only know of them from the opening credits of Are You Being Served? but they really existed.

The elevator operator would stop the elevator at each floor and announce what was on that floor. Nobody expected to be able to go into a department store and access men’s underwear instantly. They knew they had to go through the process of entering the store, going to the elevator, go up to the third floor and walk through slacks, shirts and ties before they got there. And they knew that all of that was available on the third floor because the elevator operator told them so.

So my suggestion is to include a little bit of text underneath the menu, like the area where the submenu currently is on DesignSensory‘s site, but instead of having a submenu there, just have a bit of explanatory text. For DesignSensory’s “Services” menu item it could be something like: Information about all our web, print and branding design services.

As long as a user knows that they are heading in the right direction, they’ll follow the path. They don’t need to be able to magically appear at their destination and don’t really expect to. Just give them as much information as they need to take the next step.

Back in the days before browser tabs, a whole new window would open either above or below the window you were currently working on. It was terrible and unstoppable. People kept up this practice because they thought it was a good way to get a user to keep their website open. It was seen as an audience retention device.

The browser belongs to the user. The website belongs to the creator. The website should not perform any actions on the browser that the user cannot control. That should almost always be the situation.

By keeping things uniform we can set expectations with the user that links will always open in the same window and if they want to open the link in another window they have options like middle-clicking or context-menus.

Of course there are exceptions to this. Banks often open up a seperate window for logging in and doing actual banking because they can ensure an extra level of security if, when logging out, they can close the whole window.

The best way to keep a user coming back to your site is to have compelling content. They can always come back by pressing the back button if they meant to open in a new window but forgot.

Another problem with opening links in new windows comes with reporting. Reporting and analytics is another post for another time but many people still use the metrics of a visiting time. The time a user stays connected to a site become a dirty statistic if they actually navigate away from the page but it stays open in a seperate browser window. The website owner doesn’t really have an indication of how useful/entertaining/compelling their site is, all they know is they could fool some script into thinking that people were still there even when they weren’t.

These are just some thoughts. Many theories abound in my workplace of just a few people so I’m sure yours has even more. Feel free to let me know in the comments.

UPDATED: This post was inspired by a discussion, in turn inspired by an article in Smashing Magazine.

WordPress, for example, gives very little control to the end user. There are styles set up in the css for paragraphs, lists, block-quotes and the like. Basically only giving structural control of the content to the user.

This is safe and simple and limits user contribution to content only and it doesn’t matter what they do, the way it will look is predetermined.

At my previous job for a major institution I came across a content management system that gave its user a lot of control. Essentially it used TinyMCE, a WYSIWYG editor written in Javascript to give the user a format they were more familiar with. Specifically it emulates something like Microsoft Word so that the concept leap from writing a document to creating web-based content was managable.

In a commercial situation, sometimes the client wants to have more control over their content. Maybe they can think of all sorts of reasons to need to create a different looking page beyond just adding words and pictures. Giving the client the power to manipulate the design of the website through the content manager is simultaneously helpful and dangerous.

I’ve seen pages royally screwed up by people who had no idea what they were doing and had no concept of how to work within the limitations of the visual editor. Anyone who’s worked at the helpdesk of a company with a similar product knows how hard it can be to explain CSS to someone who has no idea over the phone. It just shouldn’t need to be done.

There are great business cases for giving control and reducing it. In either case, though, problems will always be avoided or at least easily explained away by providing documentation and training. If the user knows what they’re in for, the freedoms and the limitations, then whatever system it is can be used efficiently and effictively.

Recently I started a new job that actually required me to know all of this information. Hooray for creating one’s own fate. As a result of this, I decided to download Microsoft’s new Office 2007 beta (no longer available) to test out the service and learn everything I could so that I could answer questions at work.

It’s a nice looking system. 2007 will definitely, at least, change the way we think about MS Word as well as including vast improvements to the way Outlook uses screen real-estate to give the best view of what’s happening in your world at any one time.

Yes, it’s true. As I started to search my way through the suite I was quite impressed at many of the changes and how boldly Microsoft seemed to be moving.

Then I started trying to use it for my work. THIS WAS A BIG MISTAKE.

It turns out that MS Word is going to use a new file format called “.docx”. Great. Good luck to it. It’s not readable on any other platform without downloading some magical conversion device. My prediction is that it will never be used. People will set their systems to default save as the old “.doc” format so that other people can still read it. Better yet, maybe everybody will revert to “.txt”. (I live in a dream world.)

Outlook was a completely different problem. I use Outlook a lot and I use it hard, beating out as much functionality as I possibly can. Yes, *shock**horror* I use Tasks! I put the tasks in categories. I get them to give me reminders. I use them to show me how my day is bound to pan out and how it has gone.

I was in the Tasks window and I hit Ctrl-n for a new task. An alert window popped up telling me that this feature was not yet functional. Thinking that the message meant that keyboard shortcuts weren’t functional I tried to open a new task through the menu structure. Nope. There was no way to start a new task.

Fine. Maybe tasks aren’t actually a popular enough feature of Office 2007 to be incorporated into the beta. That’s fair enough. At least I could still use it for my mail and calendar.

I opened the Inbox view and hit “send/receive”. The alert window popped up again. Sure, it’s a beta, but I think it should still be able to complete the very basic functions of the suite. This was no beta but a chance to show off their brand new GUI.

Sure I could have just uninstalled it but, truth be told, this was a completely clean laptop with nothing important on it at all. Plus I was very angry. VERY ANGRY.

I chucked a brand new Ubuntu disk into the tray and happily sent Microsoft to the fires of Soddom and Gemorah. (A little melodramatic, I know, but isn’t that what IT’s all about?)

Any suggestions?

There’s a discussion about how to get around it at Boxcutters. It’s worth checking out.

It’s true. There are myriad blogs that cover this stuff and probably cover it a little better than me. What I wanted was a repositry of ideas and processes that I’ve gone through in my quest for the perfect use of technology in everyday scenarios.

That being said, I probably use computers for a lot more than most people. I have a lot more exposure to the things I wish they could do but can’t. I spend a lot of time searching for the best way to achieve something and this is the perfect place to document the process.

And if I save somebody some time along the way then hooray for me.

Things I plan to cover in the future include:

• Why I got rid of every Microsoft application (including Windows XP) from my laptop;
• How I toiled over finding the best way to publish a valid RSS feed for podcasts;
• Why I wish no one would use Microsoft Internet Explorer;
• My adventures in Linuxland;
• How I can tell exactly what’s on your hard drive if you don’t use protection;
• Why I spent three hours reinstalling Microsoft Windows XP on my laptop.

See? These can be some fun topics. Why not check them out as I detail these and more ADVENTURES IN TECH!