Don't Make Me Think, Revisited: A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability Read online

  This opens a screen with three big “Start Download” links.

  Not noticing the nearly invisible instructions, when nothing happens you click one of them to start the download.

  A new page appears with another “Start Download” link, so you click it...and end up downloading some software you don’t want.

  At its extreme, though, it can cross the line into true black hat practices, like phishing, scamming, and identity theft.

  Just be aware that if people ask you to do any of this, it’s not part of your job.

  The users are counting on you.

  A few definitive answers

  Before I wrap up, a little bonus for hanging in this far.

  Almost everything in this book has been about how much the answer to usability questions depends on the context and that the answer to most usability questions is “It depends.”

  But I know that we all love to have definitive answers, so here’s a tiny collection of things that you should always do or never do.

  Don’t use small, low-contrast type. You can use large, low-contrast type, or small (well, smallish) high-contrast type. But never use small, low-contrast type. (And try to stay away from the other two, too.) Unless you’re designing your own design portfolio site, and you really, truly don’t care whether anybody can read the text or not.

  Don’t put labels inside form fields. Yes, it can be very tempting, especially on cramped mobile screens. But don’t do it unless all of these are true: The form is exceptionally simple, the labels disappear when you start typing and reappear if you empty the field, the labels can never be confused with answers, and there’s no possibility that you’ll end up submitting the labels along with what you type (“Job TiAssistant Managertle”). And you’ve made sure they’re completely accessible.

  If you don’t agree, before you send me email please search for “Don’t Put Labels Inside Text Boxes (Unless You’re Luke W)” and read it.

  Preserve the distinction between visited and unvisited text links. By default, Web browsers display links to pages that you’ve already opened in a different color so you can see which options you’ve already tried. This turns out to be very useful information, especially since it’s tracked by URL, not by the wording of the link. So if you clicked on Book a trip, when you see Book a flight later you know that it would take you to the same page.

  You can choose any colors you want, as long as they’re noticeably different.

  Don’t float headings between paragraphs. Headings should be closer to the text that follows them than the text that precedes them. (Yes, I know I mentioned this is Chapter 3, but it’s so important it’s worth repeating.)

  That’s all, folks.

  As Bob and Ray used to say, “Hang by your thumbs, and write if you get work.”

  I hope you’ll check in at my Web site stevekrug.com from time to time, and always feel free to send me email at [email protected]. I can promise you I will read it and appreciate it, even if I can’t always find enough time to reply.

  But above all, be of good cheer. As I said at the beginning, building a great Web site or app is an enormous challenge, and anyone who gets it even half right has my admiration.

  And please don’t take anything I’ve said as being against breaking “the rules”—or at least bending them. I know there are even sites where you do want the interface to make people think, to puzzle or challenge them. Just be sure you know which rules you’re bending and that you at least think you have a good reason for bending them.

  Oh, by the way, here’s the rest of Calvin and Hobbes.

  CALVIN AND HOBBES © 1989 Watterson. Reprinted with permission of UNIVERSAL UCLICK. All rights reserved.

  Acknowledgments

  ...AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS LOUSY T-SHIRT

  ...and the men of the U.S.S. Forrestal, without whose cooperation this film would never have been made.

  —CONVENTIONAL MOVIE ACKNOWLEDGMENT

  [Insert some variation of the “It takes a village” meme here.]

  But it’s true. Not only couldn’t I have done this alone—I wouldn’t have wanted to. Again, I was fortunate enough to be able to round up the usual suspects who got me through the earlier editions and Rocket Surgery.

  I have relied deeply on their kindness and their extraordinary goodwill in the face of my writing habits.

  As usual, my peculiar relationship to time has made life difficult for everyone involved. (Have you ever heard the expression “If it weren’t for the last minute, I wouldn’t get anything done at all”?) Honestly, it’s just that someone keeps setting my clock ahead every time I’m not looking.

  Thanks—and in most cases apologies—are due to

  Elisabeth Bayle, who has been my interlocutor, sounding board, and friend for some years now, and—even though she doesn’t want to admit it—editor of this edition. If you’re ever going to write a book, my best advice is to find someone who’s smart, funny, and knows as much about the subject matter as you do, and then convince them to spend long hours listening, making great suggestions, and editing your work.

  It’s not so much that this book wouldn’t have happened without her (although it wouldn’t). It’s that I wouldn’t have considered doing it unless I knew she’d be involved. My thanks also go out to Elliott for always renewing her spirits after another long day working with me had drained them.

  Barbara Flanagan, copy editor and dear old friend. To paraphrase an old joke, “Barbara has never been wrong about a point of grammar in her life. Well, there was that one time when she thought she was wrong, but she wasn’t.” Before you write me about some error in usage, be aware that Barbara long ago beat you to it, and then said, “But it’s your voice. Your book. Your call.” That’s generosity of spirit.

  Nancy Davis, editor-in-chief at Peachpit, who stepped away from that desk just far enough to be my consigliere and champion. She’s one of those rare people whose praise means about ten times as much as normal praise. I will deeply miss having an excuse to chat with her about her ornithology-lovin’ boys.

  Nancy Ruenzel, Lisa Brazieal, Romney Lange, Mimi Heft, Aren Straiger, Glenn Bisignani, and all the other smart, nice, talented, hardworking people at Peachpit who have been so supportive (often while biting their tongues, I’m sure).

  My reviewers—Caroline Jarrett and Whitney Quesenbery—who volunteered some of their precious time to keep me from appearing foolish. In another time, the right description for them would have been “fellow travelers.” We see eye to eye on many things, and I’m just shallow enough to enjoy the company of people who agree with me. To protect the innocent, however, I feel compelled to note that inclusion in this list does not imply agreement with everything in this book.

  Randall Munroe for his generous attitude about reprinting his work, and for giving my son and me a lot to laugh about over the years at xkcd.com.1

  1 If you don’t “get” some of them, there’s a cottage industry of sites that will explain them to you, in the same way that Rex Parker does with each day’s crossword puzzle in The New York Times.

  Smart and funny colleagues like Ginny Redish, Randolph Bias, Carol Barnum, Jennifer McGinn, Nicole Burden, Heather O’Neill, Bruno Figuereido, and Luca Salvino.

  People who contributed specific bits of their knowledge, like Hal Shubin, Joshua Porter, Wayne Pau, Jacqueline Ritacco, and the folks at the Bayard Institute in Copenhagen.

  Lou Rosenfeld for moral support, good counsel, and for just being Lou.

  Karen Whitehouse and Roger Black, the spiritual godmother and godfather of the book, who got me into this mess in the first place by giving me the opportunity to write the first edition 14 years ago.

  The large community of usability professionals, who tend to be a very nice bunch of folks. Go to an annual UXPA conference and find out for yourself.

  The friendly baristas at the Putterham Circle Starbucks, often the only people I see during the day other than my wife. (It’s not their fault that when corporate redesign
ed the place recently they decided that good lighting wasn’t something people really needed.)

  My son, Harry, now finishing his degree at RPI, whose company I treasure more than he knows. I exhaust his patience regularly by asking him to explain to me just one more time the difference between a meme and a trope.

  If anyone has a job opening for a Cognitive Science major with a minor in Game Design, I’ll be happy to pass it on.

  And finally, Melanie, who has only one known failing: an inherited lack of superstition that leads her to say things like “Well, I haven’t had a cold all Winter.” Apart from that, I am, as I say so often, among the most fortunate of husbands.

  If you’d like your life to be good, marry well.

  Index

  $25,000 Pyramid, 36

  A

  accessibility, 173–81

  affordances, 151–53

  Agile development, 4, 118

  Animal, Vegetable, or Mineral?, 42–47

  Apple, 143

  apps, mobile, 155-59

  average user, 9

  myth of the, 18, 108

  B

  Beat the Clock, 85

  Big Bang Theory of Web Design, 89

  big honking report, 4, 117

  Breadcrumbs, 79–80

  Brin, Sergey, 26

  browse-dominant users, 59

  browser

  what users say it is, 26

  browsing, 60–62

  Brundlefly, 162

  Burma-Shave, 29

  C

  Calvin and Hobbes, 153, 191

  Camtasia, 122, 163

  Cascading Style Sheets (CSS)

  and accessibility, 181

  earliest use of, 37

  and usability, 171

  clickability, 15, 37

  Collyer, Bud, 85

  conventions, 29–33, 64

  culture clash, 107

  cursor, 37, 152

  D–E

  delight, 155–56

  designing

  conventions and, 29–33

  Home page, 84

  navigation, 54

  and satisficing, 24–25

  Web sites, intention vs. reality, 21, 23

  do-it-yourself usability testing, 115

  Elements of Style, The, 49

  expert usability review, 3

  F

  FAQ list, 165, 171

  “Farmer and the Cowman Should Be Friends, The,” 102

  Flat design, 152–53

  focus groups, 112–13

  font size, in browser, 173

  forms, 46–47, 67

  G

  golden goose, temptation to kill, 99–100

  goodwill reservoir, 166–71

  H

  Hansel and Gretel, 79

  happy talk, eliminating, 50

  Hatch, Sen. Orrin, Web site, viii

  Holmes, Sherlock, 7

  Home page

  cluttered, 39

  designing, 84

  happy talk on, 50

  link to, 70

  hover, 152

  I–K

  instructions, eliminating, 51–52

  Ive, Jonathan, x, 184

  Jarrett, Caroline, 40, 46, 194

  Jobs, Steve, x, 184

  “kayak” problems, 139

  Klein, Gary, 24–25

  Kleiner, Art, 107

  Krug’s laws of usability, 10–11, 43, 49

  L

  Larson, Gary, 23

  Lean startup, 4, 114

  Lincoln, Abraham, 145

  link-dominant users, 59

  links, visited vs. unvisited, 190

  logo. See Site ID

  M

  memorability, 159

  mensch, 164

  mindless choices, 42–47

  mirroring, 161

  mission statement, 95

  mobile

  apps, 155

  usability testing, 160

  Mobile First, 147–49

  muddling through, 25–27

  N

  names, importance of, 14

  navigation

  conventions, 64

  designing, 58

  lower-level, 72

  persistent, 66

  revealing content, 63

  needless words, omitting, 48–52

  new feature requests, 139

  Nielsen, Jakob, xi, 54, 58–59, 96, 115, 121

  noise. See visual noise

  Norman, Don, 151

  P

  page name

  importance of, 74–76

  matching what user clicked, 76

  position on page, 75

  persistent navigation, 66

  primary navigation. See Sections

  Prince and the Pauper, The, 26

  printer-friendly pages, 171

  promos

  content promos, 86

  feature promos, 86

  pull-down menus, limitations of, 108–09

  R

  recruiting test participants, 120–21

  Redish, Janice (Ginny), 40, 41, 46, 179, 194

  registration, 87, 99

  reinventing the wheel, 31

  religious debates, 103, 104, 109

  reservoir of goodwill, 166–71

  responsive design, 149, 150

  “right” way to design Web sites, 7

  Rosenfeld, Louis, 194

  S

  satisficing, 24–25

  scanning pages, 22–23

  scent of information, 43,

  script for usability test, 125, 127–36

  search box, 16–17, 30, 58, 71–72, 86, 99

  on Home page, 86

  options, 71

  wording, 71

  search-dominant users, 58

  secondary navigation. See subsections

  section fronts, 50

  Sections, 69–70

  signifiers, 151

  Site ID, 67–68

  sizzle, 169

  slow-loading pages, 59

  stop signs, 29

  street signs, 64, 74

  subsections, 68–69

  T

  tabs, 80–81

  color coding, 81

  importance of drawing correctly, 81

  tagline, 93, 95–98

  Talking Heads, 55

  teleportation, 62, 67, 92

  Theofanos, Mary, 179

  tradeoffs, 145–47

  tragedy of the commons, 100

  trunk test, 82–83

  U

  usability

  attributes of, 155

  defined, 9

  usability lab, 115

  usability testing, 3, 110

  do-it-yourself, 115

  vs. focus groups, 112–13

  of mobile devices, 160–63

  number of users to test, 119

  observers, 124

  recruiting participants, 120–21

  remote, 140

  reviewing results, 137–39

  sample session, 127

  unmoderated, 140

  value of starting early, 115

  what to test, 124

  User Experience Design (UXD, UX), x, 183

  UserTesting.com, 140

  Utilities, 65, 69–70

  V–Z

  validator, accessibility, 177

  visual hierarchy, 33–36

  visual noise, 38

  Welcome blurb, 93

  White, E. B., 49

  xkcd, 194

  Zuckerberg, Mark, 26

  Also Available

  It’s been known for years that usability testing can dramatically improve products. But with a typical price tag of $5,000 to $10,000 for a usability consultant to conduct each round of tests, it rarely happens.

  In this how-to companion to Don’t Make Me Think: A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability, Steve Krug spells out a streamlined approach to usability testing that anyone can easily apply to their own Web site, application, or other product. (As he said in Don’t Make Me Think, “It’s not rocket surgery”.
)

  Using practical advice, plenty of illustrations, and his trademark humor, Steve explains how to:

  • Test any design, from a sketch on a napkin to a fully functioning Web site or application

  • Keep your focus on finding the most important problems (because no one has the time or resources to fix them all)

  • Fix the problems that you find, using his “The least you can do” approach

  By paring the process of testing and fixing products down to its essentials (“A morning a month, that’s all we ask”), Rocket Surgery makes it realistic for teams to test early and often, catching problems while it’s still easy to fix them. Rocket Surgery Made Easy uses the same proven mix of clear writing, before-and-after examples, witty illustrations, and practical advice that made Don’t Make Me Think an instant classic.

  Steve Krug (pronounced “kroog”) is best known as the author of Don’t Make Me Think: A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability, now in its third edition with over 350,000 copies in print. Ten years later, he finally gathered enough energy to write another one: the usability testing handbook Rocket Surgery Made Easy. The books were based on the 20+ years he’s spent as a usability consultant for a wide variety of clients like Apple, Bloomberg.com, Lexus.com, NPR, the International Monetary Fund, and many others.

  His consulting firm, Advanced Common Sense is based in Chestnut Hill, MA. Steve currently spends most of his time teaching usability workshops, consulting, and watching black-and-white movies from the ’30s and ’40s.

  Rocket Surgery Made Easy: The Do-It-Yourself Guide to Finding and Fixing Usability Problems

  Steve Krug, ISBN: 9780321657299

  www.newriders.com