For example, the study found that users aren’t crazy about using their iPad devices to deal with complicated forms that require lots of user input, especially if those forms are found in non-optimized websites, rather than housed in an app. Users would skip registrations processes rather than deal with inputting information in many cases. The solution to such a problem would be to make forms simpler, requiring less information, and reduce the need for repeat entry of information (so apps that offer to remember login details are better, for example).

iPad users also aren’t as able to decipher non-obvious control systems as some developers might think. In cases where it wasn’t made clear what tapping an item that wasn’t obviously a button (i.e., a logo) would do, users often missed the functionality. Examples cited in the report include the logo in the top left of The Daily app, which returns users to the app’s home screen. USA Today  originally used a similar mechanism, but changed their logo to include a “Sections” label to tell users that it was in fact designed to be tapped and tied to a function.

Likewise, gestures in apps can sometimes cause trouble when there are no visual cues to provide information about how they work. Don’t think that placing an instructional video or graphic at the beginning of the app will solve the problem, either. Many users don’t read instructions, though visual instructions that are incredibly obvious, like those used by Bing for iPad, tested well with those participating in the study, since users couldn’t avoid grasping their meaning even when they quickly dismissed them. Nielsen Norman Group advises developers that they’re much better off including visual markers throughout, indicating that swipes and other gestures can be used. For example, magazine apps like Wired include arrows that show the direction a user should swipe to unveil more content.

Another alternative is to provide explicit tips in the form of dialog boxes, like Adobe Photoshop Express does. The iPad Photoshop app uses gestures to control effects like “soft focus,” and pops up notifications to alert users of what to do. Tips can be hidden at any time, so they won’t become annoying.

What users find very annoying according to the report are splash or loading screens. No matter how clever, or how easy on the eye, splash screens and animations become annoying very quickly. Startup sounds, in particular, are singled out as especially bad, because of the potential they have for unpleasantly surprising people who open apps in surroundings where noise might not be appreciated.

Also, almost universally, apps will benefit from having back buttons on nearly every page, and should aim for a simple homepage-like table of contents over more complicated navigation schemes. Users prefer a home base from which to operate without having to hunt through carousels or wade through long columns of thumbnails, and they always want the option to go one step back from their current position, because of accidental taps or to refer back to something they just saw.

As mentioned above, iPads tend to be communal devices, at least within the household. But the report also highlighted some other interesting points regarding how we use the Apple tablet. Generally, we use it for gaming, checking email and communicating via social networking, watching videos/movies and reading news. We also tend to shop, but the participants in the study generally preferred shopping on their desktops, and some even perceived iPad shopping to be more risky from a security perspective. iPads also tend to be carried around by many users, or at least taken along for the ride when long waits or trips are expected.

Now that the iPad is more than a year old, it’s interesting to see how people are using it, and what is and isn’t working when it comes to app usability design. No doubt there’s still plenty of innovation left in iPad app interface design, but this report illustrates that some things never go out of style when it comes to user experience.

How does your experience with the iPad either agree or disagree with the findings described above?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Mobile Q1: All Eyes on Tablets, T-Mobile and AT&T
• Connected Consumer Q1: The Over-the-Top vs. Pay TV Battle Heats Up
• A Media Tablet Forecast, 2011 – 2015

The real world experiences of children using the iPad has not stopped the Nielsen Norman Group from releasing a preliminary 93-page report detailing the usability problems of the iPad. (Thanks to Mark Pilgrim for the Link). Citing problems in learning gestures, hidden controls, small buttons, and many other usability errors in 34 popular apps and sites. The researchers admit that the report is not up to their usual standards, since the iPad has not been available long enough to know how people are going to use it.

This report is less thorough than our normal research reports and does not contain as many detailed and actionable design guidelines as we usually provide. We decided to publish the report anyway (as a donation to the community), because all experience from the last 30 years of usability shows that early usability findings have disproportionately large impact on design projects.

Also interesting to note is that the research was carried out using seven people, one-on-one, for 90 minutes each.

One of the most interesting aspects of the report is the inclusion of websites into the study. Nielsen Norman Group summarizes its findings:

For a truly optimal experience that takes into account both the constraints and strengths of the device, an iPad-specific website may be the solution.

After reading through the report, I find it “must read” material for anyone developing iPad applications or marketing their website to iPad users. The usability testing is not a study of the usability of the iPad itself, but the usability of the apps that were tested, which can vary from one app to the next, and change as each app is updated. Very little attention was paid to system wide software like the keyboard, or how the device is handled physically other than saying that it was “heavy.”

Apple’s Human Interface Guidelines define certain aspects of how an app should look and feel on the iPad, but given the disparity of user interfaces between apps, it’s obvious that developers need studies like the Nielsen Norman Group’s. Time will tell what the best interfaces are for the platform, and what UI mistakes developers are making now. What we should not do is hold this report as a study of the usability of the iPad itself, which my young son will happily tell you is just fine.

Because the technology press and hardcore technology users have an unprecedented platform from which to speak and be heard. Period. End of story.

Last week’s iPad announcement made this abundantly clear. The technosphere has labeled the iPad an unqualified failure, in large part due to lack of multitasking. News flash: multitasking is overrated. Its not nearly as important to average, everyday users as it is to the people who cover technology for a living. Despite the fact that Palm’s WebOS and Google’s Android both support multitasking, neither has come anywhere close to the success of the iPhone.

With the iPhone and now the iPad, Apple is clearly targeting a mass consumer audience. Many of these users aren’t comfortable with computers. They use them almost because they have, for email and a few other core tasks. Obviously this is changing, as the number of computer and Internet users continues to grow. Its not because computers and the Internet are incredibly easy to use, because they aren’t. In fact, the difficulty in using computers has probably slowed adoption of computing and Internet services into consumers’ daily lives, and part of that complexity comes from multitasking.

Here are three observations that also lead me to believe that multitasking just isn’t that important to most people.

1. I have facilitated or observed literally thousands of web usability test sessions over the last several years. In watching people use computers and the web, I’ve noticed three very specific behaviors: 1) most people instantly maximize windows to fill their screens and minimize distractions; 2) only the most tech savvy users use alt-tab (Windows) or command-tab (Mac) to switch between apps; and 3) people are far more likely to be confused when multiple windows and apps are open.
2. There has been a surge in interest in the last few years for desktop applications that take over the screen. This is true of Firefox, for example, which has a full-screen “kiosk” mode, and several word processors designed to let users write without distraction.
3. Despite pretty regular usage, my wife still struggles with some basic Mac operations related to multitasking, such as closing windows as an attempt to quit an app, switching between apps, not realizing which window is active, etc. While she still uses the Mac, she has moved more and more of her computing activity to her iPhone because she doesn’t have these same issues.

Sure, many of us heavy users like multitasking on our computers and might not feel nearly as productive without it (I say feel because there is evidence to suggest that we aren’t really multitasking but fast switching, and performance suffers when we do). But the majority of people in the world aren’t like us. They want something that is really easy to use and understand, and that provides some level of enjoyment or helps make their lives easier. Apple’s iP products (iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad) are designed for these people.

What Apple is really doing is making technology disappear, surfacing content in a very human way. Even if processing power and battery life are currently capable of delivering multitasking, I’m not sure Apple will implement it in the way we think of multitasking today. Perhaps it will allow background processing and easier switching among apps, which get at core user needs, but I expect it will maintain a solotasking approach well into the future of its product designs.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce
• Content Farms: The Players, The Benefits, The Risks

The one thing many people did not expect with a new version of iTunes was that Apple would use the opportunity to cause dissent among its fanbase by introducing another new user interface. Some classify the new styling as “needed” and “elegant and refined” while others have resorted to a variety of hacks to return to the UI of yesteryear.

We’ve gone through every corner of iTunes we could find and dug up all of the major changes in the interface. Here’s what we found.

Welcome to iTunes 9

The first thing many noticed is that iTunes 9 now launches with a Welcome to iTunes screen, offering quick links to videos showcasing some of iTunes features. Similar to apps like iPhoto and iWeb, users can disable this by ticking a checkbox.

iTunes Preferences

iTunes Preferences also featured a few notable changes, specifically adding support for grouping iTunes U content.

iTunes 9 General Preferences

iTunes 8 General Preferences

Parental Control also received a new icon (matching the icon in Snow Leopard) as well as some slight rewording.

iTunes 9 Parental Controls

iTunes 8 Parental Controls

Removed from iTunes 9 are references in the Store section to “adding to shopping cart” versus buying with Amazon’s licensed 1-Click technology. Added is an option to use the full window when browsing the iTunes Store.

iTunes 9 Store Preferences

iTunes 8 Store Preferences

Browsing Content

Browsing content within iTunes has also received a refresh. While browsing music in List Mode, the artists have been grouped along the left, making it easier to narrow down your selection rather quickly.

iTunes 9 Music List Mode

When browsing in Grid View, the first thing you will notice is that the dark black background is gone and now albums are scattered amongst an off white background. Badged content, such as Podcasts, TV Shows, iTunes U and Movies feature blue badges instead of the original red. Gone from this view are the tabs to sort content within an area (such as Music) by Albums, Artists, Genres and Composers. This can be re-enabled via the View menu.

ITunes 9 Podcasts

Cover Flow view is pretty much the same, with the refining of the “full screen” icon.

iTunes 9 CoverFlow

The iTunes 9 Equalizer also received a refresh, styling the control knobs with blue accents.

iTunes 9 Equalizer

iTunes 8 Equalizer

Icons & Buttons

Buttons and displays in iTunes 9 have been overhauled to give them a more glossy, shiny three dimensional look. The toolbar has also been realigned, removing the ‘View’ label and moving the ‘Search’ label instead the Search field. The information area has also been updated, providing more useful information during syncing and downloading of content from the iTunes Store (such as time remaining).

iTunes 9 also brings about many refreshed icons, including many of the icons in the sidebar. Specifically, playlist icons have gotten the most attention, while TVs, Movies, Audiobooks, and Applications have seen slight refreshes as well.

Syncing

Syncing is by far the area that received the most attention in this revision. Specifically, users now have the ability to sync content more selectively. When choosing a TV show, for instance, they can sync specific seasons or specific episodes. When syncing a podcast, they can choose to sync specific episodes. When syncing photos, users can take advantage of the iPhoto ’09 Faces and Places aspect to sync photos of particular people or a particular place. Many of these areas also provide a search field, making it easier to quickly narrow down and select the specific content you’re looking for.

Syncing TV Shows

Syncing Ringtones

Syncing iTunes U

Syncing Music

Syncing Photos

The biggest feature in the redesigned sync options is the ability to organize your iPhone and iPod touch apps directly within iTunes. Check the ones you wish to add, highlight to select them and drag them to whichever home screen you desire. Selecting multiple apps is a cinch and moving them between home screens is equally easy.

Syncing Apps

Everything Else

Upon a user’s first visit to a section, such as creating a new Playlist, or visiting the Podcast area, they are greeted with a new UI that discusses how that particular concept works.

iTunes 9 New Playlist

While this overview is fairly exhaustive, there are likely many other features that users will continue to discover. If there’s one we’ve missed, please use the comments to let us know!

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Cloud in the Forecast For Apple
• Report: Monetizing Digital Content
• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era

The reason? Usability testing requires you setup a lab of computers (or at least one) with specialized software that records the users actions and clicks on the computer, and potentially their expressions and eye movement through the use of a camera. Usability software can be very expensive and complex.

Until now.

Clearleft just released Silverback, a simple usability testing software that’s only $49.95. And it comes with a full-featured 30-day trial.

Silverback sits in the background, capturing the user’s screen activity in the form of a Quicktime video, and also records audio and video from your Mac’s iSight camera (or any webcam). The finished test can be customized and output as full-resolution Quicktime movie or saved down to a smaller file size suitable for email or web use.

How it works

So how does Silverback work? The software is so simple, you don’t even need instructions. Just open the program and you’ll be prompted to create a project (such as “The Apple Blog Usability Test”).

Then add users to the project. You have the option to add notes, or you can wait until after the session. You can maneuver them to the perfect position with a video preview and then click “Start Session.” Everything in the window (except the Silverback app windows) will be recorded. Users can resize windows, change applications, and interact with the operating system. Everything is captured.

Users clicks are recorded and accentuated in the final video with little “dots” that show you visually where they clicked (even if it wasn’t on an actual link), which is very useful information. When recording the test, there are no visual queues. Silverback sits in the background completely silent.

You can pause the session or add chapter markers using your Apple Remote. To add a chapter marker, press the “+” on the remote. To pause/un-pause, press the “Play/Pause” button.

When finished you can stop by clicking the menubar icon, or by selecting the application and clicking “stop.” You can add notes, start another session or export your data to Quicktime. To export, you’re given just a few options and can save your video out at 100%, 75%, 50% or 25% of it’s original size, and at Best, High, Medium and Low quality settings.

Silverback is a really elegant application and was very easy to use. It really reminds me what great Mac software should be like. If you’re a web designer or develop desktop software for Macs, check out Silverback and start usability testing!

Screenshot Gallery

Here’s a short video from the Silverback website:

Silverback screencast from Jeremy Keith on Vimeo.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce
• Content Farms: The Players, The Benefits, The Risks

I’m definitely more a keyboard-jockey than a mouse user – I just feel more efficient with my hands on the keys is all. So it can be annoying when I have to move my hand to the mouse and click the “Don’t Save” button in those warning dialog boxes. True enough, that hitting the ‘Tab’ key cycles through those button options, but in my experience, hitting ‘Enter’ when over the button you desire is flaky at best.

So in the event you want to choose the ‘Don’t Save’ button (from your keyboard), hit CMD-D (assuming the ‘D’ stands for ‘Don’t'). You should actually be able to use this tip for most warning dialogs, swapping out the ‘D’ for the first letter of whatever button you want to choose. It’s worth mentioning too, that hitting CMD-D executes that selection immediately, not requiring an extra keystroke to hit ‘Enter’.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce
• Content Farms: The Players, The Benefits, The Risks

And that brings me to the first rant regarding UI design on the Mac OS: consistency. Apple has made good strides – with Leopard, at least – to pull the UI back to one consistent style and way of doing things. The trouble is, we still have some Carbon hold-outs and some apps that look and act completely differently. John Gruber had a write-up about this topic back in 2003, but I take the opposite stance on the idea of “click-through”…

Safari supports click-through for most interface elements. This means that even when a Safari window isn’t in the front (including when Safari isn’t the current application), you can click on its toolbar buttons. iTunes does not support click-through, so you can click anywhere in a background iTunes window and the click will simply bring the window to the front. (Except of course for the window titlebar buttons – close, minimize, zoom – which now support click-through system-wide in Mac OS X, which is an entirely other story.)

Safari’s support for click-through is a terrible idea. You might think otherwise, especially if you come from a non-Mac background, but trust me on this. The argument for click-through is that it’s somehow a time-saving shortcut – I see the button in the background window, why not just let me click the mouse once to invoke it? But how much time does an extra mouse-click to activate a window before clicking a button cost you? A fraction of a second, almost nothing.

He goes on to state his case for why he thinks click-through is a bad idea. I disagree with his opinions about it, but that’s not the point I’m trying to make here. In fact, I would still use the Mac platform even if they had kept the non-click-through nature of OS 9 (Gruber came from OS 9, which would explain some of his feelings).

The problem is in iTunes. See, in iTunes, if you click the green Zoom button in the upper-left corner, the app goes into a handy “remote/mini-player” mode. And iTunes, in its normal full-windowed mode will not support click-through, but as Gruber points out a few paragraphs down, the mini-player does support click-through. This is still true 4 years and 3 revisions later. If the rest of the operating system supports click-through, from the caption buttons to standard controls, where is iTunes at in terms of ignoring it? The window control buttons that are on iTunes even support click through all the time. This isn’t consistent – both within the app itself and in relation to the OS and other apps. (Gruber also believes very strongly in consistency. He also published a piece ranting about the lack of consistency between Dashboard widgets and regular apps and their “themes”, back when Jobs previewed Dashboard.)

But there’s a worse issue with usability in Leopard: contrast and the ability to see the status of an app in your dock. If you look at the keynote video from WWDC, the new dock is striking and just really beautiful, and the reflections look great, but I noticed something missing: the familiar black triangles.  Sure, they weren’t that easy to see, but they were noticable enough to tell you what applications were running. They’ve been replaced with something not nearly as good: little spots of light. Their white-blueish color isn’t exactly helpful, because it tends to blend in with the glossy reflections of windows and the desktop. Many windows tend to be gray or white, so the white dot doesn’t stand out. I would have thought that they could do a contrasting visual as we see in the menu bar of Leopard. Allegedly, we’re going to see some minor UI changes before Leopard is released, so I hope this is one of those changes.

Don’t get me wrong; I don’t hate Leopard or iTunes, or any of Apple’s UI work. It’s definitely awesome, and continues to make steps in a positive direction. But like anything in life, it can always get that much better.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce