Category: Web business

Users don’t want rich

Posted by Neil – September 30, 2009

For many years now, software developers around the world have been releasing quicker and more capable software on an almost constant basis. Each year, we tend so see new releases of existing products that make the products better in every apparent way, shape and form, and we, the computing public, lap it up.

For instance, Microsoft Word is currently at it’s 11th(-ish) version and still going strong as one of, if not the, most successful word processing packages of all time.  Each year or two Microsoft bring out a new and improved version that adds more features and more capabilities to the average person’s arsenal.

Now, for a moment, have a think about the last time you used Word.  Assuming you’re not one of the 10% of people who “power-use” Word, see if you can name five features of Word that you use on a regular basis.

Formatting?  Tables?  Printing?  er….. Word Count?

Let’s for a moment consider Word, with each and every standard toolbar open:

word

There’s a lot there, and there’s a whole load of stuff in there that you’ve never even seen before. Now, think back to the last time you upgraded your installation of Word.  What was the reasoning behind it?  What was the reason that you (may of) reached into your pocket and forked out for the funky new Office installer?

Well, let’s take Word 2008 – the headline features there were the Ribbon UI, and support for Office XML formats… and that’s about it.  Which of those features made you upgrade? Word probably has more functionality than you need… in fact, waaay more functionality than you’ll ever need.  So, why don’t you just use WordPad which comes free and is pre-installed on Windows?  Or TextEdit on the Mac?

Now cast your mind across to the web applications that we, as developers, are creating every day for our clients, be it on a bespoke purely custom basis, or as a product that we roll out to a customer base.  I dare say, that somewhere in your company is a man who works in what some would call ‘Marketing’.  This person wants to sell the product out to as many people as possible, and he also wants all of the current user base to upgrade on a regular basis.  Therefore, you most likely have an army of developers creating new features here and there, and making the existing features more capable in every way you can in order to persuade the customer that WhizzBang Enterprises Widget-o-matic 2009 is the best-est thing since last years version (which is now obviously outdated, insecure, and prone to crashing).

Why do we, as software shops, do this?  Why do we insist on making our software more complex, and more difficult to use for our customers?

bob

Put yourselves in the shoes of your user (let’s call him Bob).  First of all, be aware that Bob is nothing like you.  Bob doesn’t use computers for the fun of it, he uses computers to get something else done, so that he can go home on time and get back to work on his new garden terrace.  Bob doesn’t really get computers, he doesn’t really get the web that much.  Sure he uses Facebook, and emails his chums, and even has his own website (which incidentally is just his twitter stream), but Bob’s interested in other things – Bob just wants to get his shit done and go home.

So, whats the major difference between you and Bob?  Well for starters, for Bob, his computer, and the software on it is a tool – nothing more, nothing less.  He uses his tools to write his documents, send them out to his clients, and ensure that he gets paid at the end of the day.  To Bob his computer is identical to the bag he uses to carry his lunch to work, a tool to achieve a task.

So, thinking about tasks – what do most people want?  Well, it’s simple really.  Simplicity.  People just want to go in, get exactly what they want done with the minimum of fuss, and move on.  Even us developers do it.  We don’t sit down in the morning and think “I’m going to sit down for the next eight hours and write some Ruby…”, we think “I’m going to sit down for the next eight hours, and get this project finished and out the door”.  Our tools are an ends to a means.

So, coming back to our software, why do we make it so complex? Why are we so obsessed with feature richness and whiz bang interactions – the vast majority of people couldn’t care less, they just want to get their work done with the minimum of fuss.

Let’s take a look at richness in applications (the aforementioned whiz-bang element). Recently, there has been a huge movement by Adobe and Microsoft to get developers into using rich platform technologies such as Flash and Silverlight.  Whilst this is all very well, have a quick think about how many applications you use on a day-to-day basis you would consider to be rich (and buzzword bingo favourite “an immersive experience”).  Personally, there’s only one (Balsamiq Mockups if you want to know).  For most, it’s a twitter client.

So, what does this say?  Well for me it’s a sign that while we developers love to see the demo apps that are coming out and what some people are knocking out, but at the end of the day it’s ultimately simplicity and straightforward-ness that we prefer – we just want to get our work done.

In essence, I guess we might be guilty of three things – one, overestimating the users motivation and involvement in using the wonderful creation that you’ve just put out there. Secondly, of overcomplicating what we’re making the users use purely for the marketing aspect, rather than making a genuniely good product, and thirdly, for not really eating our own dog food and actually using this rich applications that we keep telling everyone they need.

Overally, we, as developers, need to keep it focused and keep it simple.  Distractions are aplenty, and we developers are incredilby suspectible to them all which makes us more prone to not keeping it simple…

Beware of the SEO scammers

Posted by Neil – September 23, 2009

Most days, I am somehow involved in the development of a website for a client, in amongst all of the application’s development that we do.  Normally, these jobs take the shape of a client wanting a site, occasionally a design firm providing some designs sized for A4, and more often than not, a “search engine optimisation” company.

Search Engine Optimisation is as old as search engines themselves, and it seems that there is something inherently broken about how companies approach getting themselves a good ranking on Google (very few SEO companies seem to recognise the other engines out there any more).

For instance, in my experience, SEO companies will recommend that you load your pages up with keywords and key phrases, that you populate all of your meta tags with keywords and descriptions, and that you build sitemaps until your eyes bleed.

blah, blah, blah

Now, I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again – Google (and Microsoft, Ask.com etc) spend an absolute bloody fortune on search engine developers.  These guys are the best at what they do, period.  Their sole reason to exist is to come up with an algorithm that finds the best web page on the internet, for any given search term.

So, what makes a page the best one?  Well, lots of factors that users care about.

For instance – think about Wikipedia.  There are pages on there that are generally considered the authority on a particular subject (at least as authoritative as the web can be).  This particular site is generally considered so because the information within is comprehensive, relevant, and usable.

There are no dirty tricks at play on wikipedia, there are no meta keywords, there is just good content.

So, how do you get to the top spot on an index like Google?  Simple – just build your site to be the best it can for it’s users.  Make sure your content is relevant.  Make sure your content is up-to-date, and make sure people see you as an authority.

Ah yes….the other people on the internet..

These days the most siginificant thing you can get to help you up those rankings is inbound links.  Engines like Google use inbound links and count them in a similar way to votes – however, not all links are equal  For instance, if you’re site is about BMW’s, and the BMW.com website links to you – that’s a really big vote which will give you immense promotion.  If a highly trafficked and relevant site on the subject links to you (for instance, Autocar), then again, big promotion.  If random_blog_from_someone.com links to you – not so much help, but some at least.

In essence, the search engines know what people want, and know this by looking at what we look at.  If your site is highly trafficked, has nice clean markup and relevant content as well as lots of people linking to you talking about a particular subject – then you’re onto a winner, you’ll get a good ranking.  However, if you just stick a page up, stuff it with keywords and phrases and expect the rankings to climb, you’ll be sorely mistaken.

Which leads me back to the supposed SEO companies out there.  Not all are bad, but there is a significant amount of bad eggs out there (and for some reason, most come across as failed web development shops).

Here’s a few good rules of thumb:

  1. If you come across a company that claims to be able to put you on the number one spot – walk away straight away – there are no guarantees (unless you only pay if they do achieve that).
  2. If you come across a company that does nothing but suggest meta tags, and a Google sitemap – walk away – there’s no significant benefit to either.
  3. If you come across a company that offers to buy inbound links for you on your behalf – walk away – they don’t work.  Google are wise to these.
  4. If you come across a company that makes a few small suggestions, then just pumps out monthly SEO reports for you for a monthly charge – be wary – there isn’t a huge amount that can be done with this alone.
  5. If you come across a company that offers to get down and dirty with your content, immersing themselves in your target audience, checking out the competition, and putting forward fresh relevant content, whilst fostering valuable link exchanges with other good high-ranking sites – then consider them – especially if they only want payment by results.

Overall, SEO companies are much like plumbers or builders – if you know how to spot a crappy one you’re safer, but there are no guarantees at all – after all, you’re competing with everyone else on the internet.  Best thing to do is get some companies to propose what they want to do, and then give you a trial period for free (or only charge if they actually improve your site traffic).  Also, remember, you can also hire more than one.

So, in a nutshell, check our any potential companies carefully, and the moment they mention meta tags – punch them in the back of the head.