Please note: This site's design is only visible in a graphical browser that supports Web standards, but its content is accessible to any browser or Internet device. To see this site as it was designed please upgrade to a Web standards compliant browser.
 
Signal vs. Noise

Our book:
Defensive Design for the Web: How To Improve Error Messages, Help, Forms, and Other Crisis Points
Available Now ($16.99)

Most Popular (last 15 days)
Looking for old posts?
37signals Mailing List

Subscribe to our free newsletter and receive updates on 37signals' latest projects, research, announcements, and more (about one email per month).

37signals Services
Syndicate
XML version (full posts)
Get Firefox!

Great Contingency Design

10 Jun 2003 by

A super example of great contingency design from OmniWeb 4.5 beta 1:

omni bookmark redirect

In case you can’t read it, it’s asking you if you want to update an existing bookmark because the URL you’ve bookmarked as been permanently redirected. Very human and damn smart. [Thanks Scott]

27 comments so far (Post a Comment)

10 Jun 2003 | hurley#1 said...

Great indeed. It would be even greater if the text said "...should the bookmark be updated..." instead of "should the bookmark be changed.." as that would correspond more directly to the "update" and "don't update" buttons. And the icing on the cake would be if they explained what would happen if you clicked on the "set preference" button. Presumably you can set a preference to automatically update your bookmarks whenever a permanent redirect is detected, which would be a really cool feature. I'm intuiting that possibility from the existence of the "set preference" button, but the average user might not. Then again, the average user will probably stick with Safari ;-)

10 Jun 2003 | Joshua Kaufman said...

Poll: everyone ask their mom or dad what "permanent redirect" means and give them five seconds to answer. My instincts tell me that more than 50% wouldn't know what it means, but I could be wrong.

10 Jun 2003 | Kristen I. said...

Ahh, too bad this example wasn't ready in time for your panel discussion at HOW 2003, right Jason?

Once again, nice job at the conference. I think you, Ilse, and the T.I. guys really opened people's eyes to the importance of a thoughtful interface design at the start of a project, when it matters most.

Cheers!
(See, I told you I post here every now and then...)

10 Jun 2003 | JF said...

veryone ask their mom or dad what "permanent redirect" means and give them five seconds to answer. My instincts tell me that more than 50% wouldn't know what it means, but I could be wrong.

True and valid, but I was more impressed by the idea than the actual wording (which needs some help).

10 Jun 2003 | Paul said...

A nice bonus would be: if I don't update the bookmark and leave it in my bookmarks menu (or wherever it lives), an icon appears next to it indicating that it's been moved/ permanently redirected. Although I'd worry about said menus getting nuttily icon-ified....

10 Jun 2003 | steve said...

My instincts tell me that more than 50% wouldn't know what it means, but I could be wrong.

Yes, but the real question is: How many moms and dads out there are using OmniWeb 4.5 beta 1?

10 Jun 2003 | hurley#1 said...

Yes, but the real question is: How many moms and dads out there are using OmniWeb 4.5 beta 1?

True, though now that they're finally doing better in the standards department, OmniWeb could end up being a popular alternative to Safari. I used OmniWeb as my default browser for several months and loved the interface and features. I stopped using it for the same reason everyone else did: it made hash of sites that use table-less CSS layouts. Once the new version is out of Beta I intend to try it again.

But anyway, the text in the dialog box could just say: "The page [address] that you bookmarked is out of date or no longer in service. The forwarding address for this page is [address]. Do you want to update the address in your bookmark?

10 Jun 2003 | Bill Brown said...

This isn't exclusive to OW 4.5 beta 1. If I remember correctly, it's been in there since the early 4s.

OmniWeb has always struck me as the most well-thought out browser of any platform. They don't have all of the coolest features, but the whole experience just flows together.

Hmm, sounds like another company I'm familiar with.

11 Jun 2003 | Tim said...

A couple of questions...

1.) What does the "Set Preference..." button do? I assume it sets some sort of preference in relation to this bookmark alert...?

2.) Why aren't the "Update" and "Don't Update" buttons located next to each other...I feel like the functionality of those two buttons are related, while the "Preference" button is sort of, um, different and therefore should be segregated?

That is a cool bit of functionality, though...beat going through your bookmarks one by one and seening if they're still valid (and sometimes, hitting an invalid site that redirects you to one of those horrid "holding page" sites that ask if you want to set "crapsearch.com" as your homepage...)

11 Jun 2003 | Steve said...

The prominent browsers at least used to have a function to update bookmarks en masse years ago. I'm not even sure if it exists anymore, which shows how well-hidden and unused it is. This on-the-fly approach is much, much better. I like the idea of a background update running, scheduled at regular yet infrequent intervals, like maybe once a month.

Did this update just appear randomly, or only when you attempted to use the bookmark?

13 Jun 2003 | pb said...

I suppose that's a neat design but it is of literally zero value so what's the point other than introducing a few extra lines of possibly buggy code and user confusion?

Why can't browser creators focus on features with at least some value if not a lot of value?

20 Jun 2003 | SteveM said...

When exactly would you NOT want it to update the bookmark? Why is it bothering to ask a question it already knows the answer to?

20 Jun 2003 | hurley #1 said...

When exactly would you NOT want it to update the bookmark? Why is it bothering to ask a question it already knows the answer to?

Two reasons that I can think of:

First, , it alerts me to the fact that this bookmark has changed, in case I've shared that bookmark with others, referred to it in documents, or linked to it from my Web site.

Second, and more subtly, it gives me more of a sense of control as a user. If the software updates the bookmark "behind my back," it might lead me to wonder what other things the program is doing without asking me first.

20 Jun 2003 | Ken said...

it might lead me to wonder what other things the program is doing without asking me first.

Um, just about everything- that's why it's a program.

23 Jun 2003 | Jeremy said...

Yes, but the real question is: How many moms and dads out there are using OmniWeb 4.5 beta 1?

Riiiiight. No need to make software intelligible if it's only used by a few people. Instead, keep it hard to understand, that way you're sure to grow your market.

Right.

23 Jun 2003 | hurley #1 said...

Riiiiight. No need to make software intelligible if it's only used by a few people. Instead, keep it hard to understand, that way you're sure to grow your market.

I don't see how the dialog box in question makes this product "hard to understand."

But it is worth keeping in mind that OmniWeb is a niche product aimed primarily at geeks and tech enthusiasts, not the average user.

99% of computer users don't care which browser they use, they just want one that works. That means most Mac OSX users will use Safari or IE, both of which are free and installed on new Macs. OmniWeb costs $30, so someone would have to really be dissatisfied with the other products or looking for additional features if they're going to shell out cash for a Web browser.

OmniWeb thus may have valid reasons for wanting to flaunt some features rather than performing the actions behind the scenes, if its chief selling point is that it offers more features and a better interface than its competitors.

24 Jun 2003 | Brent Rockwood said...

Automatic updating bookmarks should work every time, except for dynamic redirects. In certain situations you may wish to point to a script which terminates in a dynamic redirect. This is especially handy during development. This would not be possible with completely automatic updating bookmarks. Hence the preference.

Nonetheless, I think this should just be a checkbox on the "New Bookmark" form. Maybe it could say "Update Automatically?". Feature on by default. Most people will never need it.

25 Jun 2003 | Andrew said...

First, , it alerts me to the fact that this bookmark has changed, in case I've shared that bookmark with others, referred to it in documents, or linked to it from my Web site.

But my browser isn't the place I can correct any of those references, and certainly not from within a modal dialog. This might be good to know, but probably only useful if I remember it later on, and in another application.

I wonder if anyone really cares about URLs changing other than web developers. Probably only developers will really understand the feature anyway--this is the program bragging to *us* about how cool and smart it is. Everyone else sees this *at best* as just another dialog box to click through or be scared of.

Who even cares that www.mozillazine.com/weblogs is changing to weblogs.mozillazine.org/hyatt anyway? URLs are meant for computers to understand, so let the computer keep track of the right one for "Dave Hyatt's Safari weblog."

26 Jun 2003 | Brent Rockwood said...

After thinking about it, I think automatic updating bookmarks are absolutely in the spirit of the HTTP protocol. Assuming the redirect really is permanent (ie. proper use of the 301 response code), these bookmarks can save you at least one HTTP request every time you use them.

I can only surmise that this preference is to deal with incorrect use of redirects. It is possible that an application might use at 301 redirect when it really should have used a 302 (temporary redirect). In those cases, the preference might be useful. Either way, I don't think a modal dialog is the time or the place...

But what do I know. I don't even have a Mac.

26 Jun 2003 | ic said...

"Don't make me think".

Remember?

18 Jul 2003 | Brian said...

I still looking for the button labeled "No" or "Cancel" because thats what most people click when they see these sort of cryptic dialog boxes...

07 Aug 2003 | garbanzito said...

what many people probably don't realize is that OmniWeb gives the user the choice to have fine control over cookies.. if you don't want the control, you don't have to have it and i suspect you won't see this dialog.. if you do want the control, you'ld probably like to know who's tracking you how, so this dialog is a helpful way to monitor the ebb and flow of cookies

the exact wording aside, this kind of thoughtful, privacy-oriented control is one of several ways OmniWeb excels for the technically astute user

16 Jan 2004 | Archibald said...

If an application is designed well, the reward for users is that they will learn it faster, accomplish their daily tasks more easily, and have fewer questions for the help desk. As a developer of a well-designed application, your returns on that investment are more upgrade revenue, reduced tech support, better reviews, less documentation, and higher customer satisfaction. The rewards of building a good-looking Aqua application are worth taking the extra time.

16 Jan 2004 | Paschall said...

For example, if you see an AIM window peeking out from behind your browser and you click on it, that window will come to the front, but the main application window will not. The Mail.app/Activity Viewer is another example. The Aqua system of layers works well in many instances, but not in all. Thank goodness that the Dock is always there to come to the rescue. I know that clicking on an application icon in the Dock will always result in not only the application coming to the front, but also any non-minimized windows associated with it. And if the application is active but no windows are open, clicking on the Dock icon should create a new window in that application.

28 Nov 2004 | click said...

871 Very well said chappy.

18 Feb 2005 | consolidation online said...

8991 Nice site here

Comments on this post are closed

 
Back to Top ^