Guinness
Josh Charles writes:
I visited the Guinness website this morning, and was pleased to see how they are using their country selection box. Some websites usually only move the U.S. or perhaps a few additional ones to the top. I wonder if there was some marketing data that went into this decision?
What the Font?
Mark Ott writes:
When matching fonts for an unknown font, “WhatTheFont?” has a nice liittle feature that makes your image stay put while you scroll so you can compare it easily with the results. Nicely done.
Facebook
Sebastian Hirsch writes:
I like part of the privacy settings on Facebook: Very effective on what it does and doesn’t do. There was bit of a row when the news feed was rolled out, but I think this screen is a great answer to users’ privacy concerns. Too bad that it just came as an afterthought.
True, Facebook had to do something to respond to its pissed off customers. But this kind of preference-mania is overkill. Too many indecipherable icons. Too many options. (From Getting Real: “For customers, preference screens with an endless amount of options are a headache, not a blessing.”) How about just an on/off switch and be done with it?
Got an interesting screenshot for Signal vs. Noise? Send the image and/or URL to svn [at] 37signals [dot] com.
Kester
on 19 Mar 07About time they updated the relationship status privacy setting, I hear it’s a real nightmare to break up on Facebook – there are endless inundation of questions and condolences. But then I suppose that’s what you get for living and breathing social networking…
engtech
on 19 Mar 07I did an article looking at Facebook privacy last week. The default settings are way too high, and you have to go through around 7-8 pages to reconfigured everything.
And now that I’m in the low privacy utopia I’m having a lot of trouble trying to explicitly share external links so they show up in my friends’ mini-feed. Ultimately I’d like to share my blog posts with my friends without having them show up on my profile.
Facebook privacy is so complicated.
Brooks
on 19 Mar 07Publishing a new post with the copy “The wait is over” is just cruel.
It’s amazing what the eye will focus on in a split second.
bofe
on 19 Mar 07“But this kind of preference-mania is overkill. Too many indecipherable icons. Too many options.”
Do you use facebook? If not… you’re taking the screen completely out of context. Privacy is a complicated subject – an on/off switch is oversimplification.
They listened to their users and made exactly what they need.
Jim
on 19 Mar 07Whats the Font? Isn’t very good at recognizing fonts. I cropped a crisp piece of text off of this page, and it failed to identify it. Let alone something that is part of an image.
MP
on 19 Mar 07I agree with Brooks!!
Golden tickets for the pain and suffering!!
ML
on 19 Mar 07Privacy is a complicated subject.
True. But that doesn’t mean taking all that complexity and just dumping it onto customers via tons of preferences and hoping they figure it out is the best solution.
Fargham
on 19 Mar 07I agree with ML.
LapinLove404
on 19 Mar 07I don’t know about the overkill…
Sure it’s way too complicated for most users… but what about experienced users or privacy and control freaks ?
Wouldn’t it be possible to have an “on/off” option with a discrete link to allow complex set-up ?
Just my two cents and I am compeltely out of contaxt (I never used facebook – Actually I don’t remember reading any facebook page)
Steve T
on 19 Mar 07I admit to not ever having used Facebook, but applying a blanket Getting Real concept on it – fewer privacy settings – is perhaps too hasty. Social networking sites are a different beast to lean mean commercial collaboration tools. Users like to stamp their individuality and spend hours per day tweeking profiles, making posts and meeting friends. Their millions of users have different tastes and requirements. They don’t like having their style cramped! And I’d suggest, as long as the process isn’t too too confusing, very granular privacy control can buy you quite good will from the end users.
Ryan Coleman
on 19 Mar 07“How about just an on/off switch and be done with it?”
I’d suggest if you just wanted to turn off everything that you could possibly share it’s probably a time to reconsider why you’ve even bothered to sign up for Facebook (or any other SOCIAL networking site).
Frank 'viperteq' Young
on 19 Mar 07I’m on Facebook as well and I don’t think that the privacy settings all that complicated. I think sometimes we can get simplification and laziness confused. The privacy settings allow you to show only what you want to show. For most folks, the default settings are fine, but for those of us that want or need greater control, it’s there.
You also have to pay attention to the options that are presented to you when completing a task in Facebook. If you’re posting a Note or republishing a blog post, there is an option at the top of the page that asks if you want the post to appear on your profile. Check it for yes, uncheck it for no. Now that’s pretty simple.
The thing that I think is the more interesting aspect of Facebook is that it truly is a walled garden set-up. Nothing and I mean nothing, that you post or share gets indexed by any of the search engines. I’ve posted all types of content on Facebook and I’ve yet to see any of it get picked by any of the search engines. Even the rss feeds that Facebook produces don’t show up in the open. That’s some beautiful engineering if you ask me…..
ML
on 19 Mar 07It’s probably a time to reconsider why you’ve even bothered to sign up for Facebook (or any other SOCIAL networking site).
A lot of Facebook customers were pretty annoyed when the Mini-Feed feature was introduced. Clearly the original implementation needed to be fixed. I’m just not sure that bombarding customers with this level of complexity/preferences is that much better. Yes, it gives customers control. But it also assumes that people have the desire and ability to go through and figure out what all these options mean and decide whether or not they want them. (And fwiw, I don’t use Facebook but I’m not sure that the idea of avoiding preferences goes out the window when you’re talking about a social networking site.) I think this is a complicated coverup for a feature that wasn’t well thought-out in the first place.
Adam T.
on 19 Mar 07I LOVE sites that make use of the ordering of statements! There’s nothing more painful than a U.S.-based company that puts the United States at the bottom of the list. Granted, I can just hit “U,” but why not make it the default option instead of fricking Afghanistan?
Matt Grommes
on 19 Mar 07Setting up privacy and who can see what on a site like Facebook is a very complicated dance for a lot of young people. I might want everybody I know to see everything, except this one person (an ex for example) and it’s incredibly important for this to happen exactly. You aren’t the audience for Facebook ML, and the usual 37Signals song about “less” doesn’t always work. The people on Facebook aren’t “customers”, they’re a community of sorts and expect to have a lot of control over their community involvement and social intricacies.
Instead of just poo-pooing this feature of a site you don’t use, I think the whole 37S gang would be well-served by spending some time with products that don’t fit your defined world view. Otherwise you start seeing everything as whether or not you can hit it with your favorite hammer.
ML
on 19 Mar 07Matt, I use plenty of products that don’t fit the 37s “defined world view.” I often wish they were less complicated. It’s not because I have a favorite hammer, I just want things to be simpler.
And I don’t think that just because a site involves a community, it means it’s ok to bombard that community with complex choices. What % of Facebook customers do you think actually understand what’s going on at this screen?
JF
on 19 Mar 07Instead of just poo-pooing this feature of a site you don’t use, I think the whole 37S gang would be well-served by spending some time with products that don’t fit your defined world view.
We do everyday which is why we believe in what we’re doing more and more everyday.
Anonymous Coward
on 19 Mar 07I also use Facebook and I agree with that level of complexity. I understand that the 37signals guys have a certain philosophy, but as non-users, please give some credit to those that use the product everyday.
Bertaka
on 19 Mar 07Facebook’s primary audience doesn’t mind complexity if it means they can show exactly what they want. However, the default privacy isn’t clear and could be better conveyed.
ML
on 19 Mar 07Curious about those who are sticking up for all these preferences at Facebook…do you also like the complexity of MySpace? That’s a site I do use and I think it’s horribly designed. Is the argument here that it’s ok for these sites to offer complicated UIs because they are social networking sites?
Also, I think the readers of this site are probably a bit more knowledgeable about preferences like these than normal Facebook customers. What % of normal Facebook customers do you think really understand what’s going on at this screen?
bofe
on 19 Mar 07ML,
Personally, I don’t like Myspace at all. The argument is not that it’s okay because it’s a social network… the argument is that Privacy is not an “on/off” thing to Facebook’s users.
The users of Facebook know what the 10 or so “actions” that show up in the News Feed are – they see them in the news feed every time they sign in.
They’re offering wild amounts privacy control and not simply taking the easy way out by making an on/off switch.
Facebook initially had a very simple privacy setup – then they released the “News Feed” and the their users needs changed. User feedback drove this ‘complexity’. They’re doing nothing but meeting those needs.
Also… News Feed ‘backlash’ was essentially over when they implemented these privacy features.
Anonymous Coward
on 19 Mar 07bofe is on the money.
ML
on 19 Mar 07Bofe, I agree that these privacy controls were effective in quieting the backlash. So yeah, a bad situation got better. But I think it’s all a sign that the feature was poorly thought-out from the beginning, not that this UI is a winner (or that Facebook customers want more complexity).
Andy Kant
on 19 Mar 07@ML
Pretty much everyone in college uses Facebook. I know plenty of people that hated the news feed when the feature first rolled out but once the privacy options were added everything was cool. I don’t know a single person that has any trouble understanding what the privacy controls mean.
Also, I would say that this degree of privacy controls is important on Facebook. Facebook is starting to become the new LinkedIn (man I hate that site), and I surely want potential employers to see a different profile for me than the college friend view.
Honestly, although Facebook might not think out their features all that well before they launch them…their UI designs are second only to 37signals’ imo. Everything is kept as simple as possible while providing the low level control that is needed. I might be the minority though, I prefer apps that don’t force you into moron mode (which is the main reason I hate my new MacBook Pro).
Greg
on 19 Mar 07I think the Facebook thing is fine. Anyone who uses Facebook is going to understand what “Publish a story when I comment on a Photo” means. Those aren’t arbitrary “tech speak” labels – all of that content is based on their life and their activities. I assure you, they’re familiar with what the labels mean.
If anything, I’d give mini-feeds “On/Off/Advanced” settings, where “advanced” pulls up what you posted in the screenshot. Some people just want it to go the hell away, some people want it on but don’t care what’s in it, and some people want granular control over what goes in to it, to suit varying degrees of exposing their private life to the world.
I can see someone not agreeing with that philosophy, but it seems like some people here aren’t understanding it.
KA
on 20 Mar 07I’m not a Facebook user, but going by the pic alone, it does look a little more complicated than it should be. If I were more familiar with Facebook, I suspect it wouldn’t be such a mystery.
That said, it would be nice to see you guys (37S team) post a better way to do it. You are unwavering in your belief that it is too complicated. How would you present it?
Vito
on 20 Mar 07Another thing that was mentioned in the post is all those icons. Believe it or not, most of us who use facebook on a regular basis know exactly what all those mean. Reviewing something that you don’t use just doesn’t provide accurate results. It’s like someone evaluating Basecamp purely by a few arbitrary screenshots!
kortina
on 20 Mar 07I think mini-feeds one of the most popular Facebook has ever added—I’ve seen a dramatic increase in the amount of time I see my friends use Facebook and hear the site mentioned since the mini-feeds came out, and I know people who now log in every day just to see the mini-feed.
And I agree with Greg that “Anyone who uses Facebook is going to understand what ‘Publish a story when I comment on a Photo’ means.”
ML, I have to make a counter-argument to your comparison of the Facebook to the Myspace UI. I think Facebook has one of the best (if not the best) UI’s of any website.
A few of the most well-designed features: The photo tagging on Facebook is simple and clean—you just click a face, start typing, and your friend’s name will autocomplete. The photo uploader shows thumbnail previews of your photos and allows you to upload multiple photographs at once. (I’ve never seen anything like that anywhere else.) When you write a note (like a blog post), before you publish it, the note is parsed for all of your friends’ names and the matching names are suggested as tags for the note. The restrictions on who I can easily find / try to befriend based on the networks I’m in make all of my contacts meaningful. I’ve never received a single spam on Facebook.
Honestly, I think you should take a closer look at some of their UI. It’s really well done.
Daniel Scrivner
on 20 Mar 07Like a lot of readers above it seems, this is one of the first times I’m going to have to disagree with you guys.
The Facebook Mini-Feed and preferences panel are not overkill at all. The Mini-Feed is one of my favorite parts of Facebook! And the icons are not hard to understand. Especially since if you have a Facebook account you see those icons everyday, and know exactly what they all mean.
And if you think the preferences panel is overkill, all you have to do is go to your profile and click on the “x” next to the item you want to delete from your feed. It’s so simple, and it’s such a great feature for keeping up with what your friends are doing!
A rule like, “For customers, preference screens with an endless amount of options are a headache, not a blessing.”, cannot just be applied to anything and everything.
In this case I think it’s definitely a blessing! And it’s in no way “an endless amount of options.” We’re taking about a freakin’ ten-item list here!
Jamie Quint
on 20 Mar 07“But this kind of preference-mania is overkill. Too many indecipherable icons. Too many options.”
I think facebook responded apropriately to the situation at hand, how would you have suggested they handle the privacy issue? Its not an all or nothing feature.
The icons are only indecipherable if you are unfamiliar with facebook, i bet a decent amount of facebook users would be able to tell you what each one stood for without help context just because they show up in the feed every day
Daniel Scrivner
on 20 Mar 07You fail to mention that the backlash from customers had nothing to do with the user interface, it was simply a matter of privacy. Users weren’t running around their dorms screaming, “Ohh my god! That new user interface is so confusing. Did they hire the people from MySpace? Nooo!”
Instead they were just wondering, “Do I want my friends seeing everything I do?” And apparently there were a lot of users annoyed and some pissed off by the new feature.
But while the feature is a complex feature, can’t argue against that one, I think they did a great job making the user interface and preferences as simple and easy to understand as they possibly could.
And as far as the preferences panel goes again, it consists of an icon, a checkbox, and a maximum of four or five words describing that preference. That’s pretty damn easy! There’s no ”?” mark links next to each option, no long descriptions. I think they did a great job making something which could have been hard and confusing, and stripping down to its barest of appearances and complexities.
Harris
on 20 Mar 07I didn’t really read through all the comments on this entry, so I don’t know if anyone mentioned this, but I’m pretty sure that the Facebook privacy settings page for the newsfeed is not overly complex.
In fact, I’m almost positive that unchecking all the boxes or checking all the boxes is probably of equal mental effort to using an on/off radio button, and this way people who want to share certain things have that power. Sure, it may be a few extra clicks, but not so many that people get a headache.
It’s very simply and lucidly designed, in fact. The primary Facebook user base (ie: college students) is very tech-savvy and wouldn’t be turned off by complex customizability even if this were complex. The icons are used all over Facebook, so users know how to recognize them. Those who don’t can simply read the words next to the boxes. Those who want a full disable should just uncheck everything and those who want a full enable should just check everything. It’s not at all difficult. I’d certainly not call it a bombardment.
And—having discussed this at great length among my friends—there are a lot of people who do use the power of customized privacy and if Facebook wants the newsfeed to be something that people actually use, the degrees of privacy are important to maintain—otherwise people will just disable the newsfeed, when really they just didn’t want people to see what they wrote on their friends’ walls, and then where would it be as a feature?
Sebhelyesfarku
on 20 Mar 07Another retarded 37s rant. “Too many options.” I guess you can drive only an automatic gearboxed car, a 5 or 6 speed manual has too many options.
ML
on 20 Mar 07The primary Facebook user base (ie: college students) is very tech-savvy and wouldn’t be turned off by complex customizability.
If that’s true, then I misjudged the situation. If Facebook users don’t give a hoot about complex customizability, then I guess offering all these preferences might actually be the right move.
My point here is just that every preference you offer comes at a cost. It’s one more decision that you force your customers to make. Even college students don’t have an endless supply of time: The more questions you ask them here, the less questions you can ask somewhere else. It all depends what the priorities are for Facebook and its customers.
Anonymous Coward
on 20 Mar 07For Facebook to give that much control in such a simple interface, is incredible.
William
on 20 Mar 07I also agree with the sentiment on this comment board that the Facebook controls are appropriate. Remember the age group it focuses on. “We” are used to those types of controls. I know from experience as well that people who are not are saavy enough to figure them out step out of their dorm room, find the nearest geek, and have them help them out. I think the next generation of web users-those of us who weren’t surprised by web 2.0 but expected the extentsion of platform-based programs to browser-based-knew how to adapt to those new settings. Everyone on facebook at my college breathed a collective sigh of relief when they were offered and figured it out (it was a social necessity).
What also has not been brought up that I might add to the discussion is that when they converted to the privacy controls they did an incredible job of doing a tutorial on how to use them and in such a small amount of time. If I remember correctly they created privacy controls from scratch plus instructions, UI, etc. in nine days. That’s pretty incredible.
Also, I wouldn’t necessarily knock Facebook’s icons either. Frequent users (i.e. nearly every college student) knows exactly what they mean now.
In general I would be careful to criticize Facebook and their design team. Let’s continue to focus rants on MySapce and hope they change…
Weixi Yen
on 21 Mar 07Just because it doesn’t follow “Getting Real” doesn’t mean Facebook’s way of handling preferences sucks. Facebook has always been heralded by its users for a great UI.
Facebook and Myspace are very different from something like Basecamp. People want to be on it, spend time on it, and waste time customizing it and learning it. Most of the 37signals products on the otherhand = software you want to use quickly and get out of quickly to accomplish a different task.
Therefore, yes, I would have to say the way Facebook is handling the News Feed preferences is correct, and no, I don’t think people get confused on what the icons mean, it’s very clear for most college students. Also, Facebook does provide an on/off switch for the news feed.
Jesse
on 21 Mar 07While reading this post and the comments, I racked my brain for a way facebook could improve upon those preferences and couldn’t come up with one. The customizability is great, as others have said – I, for one, would be very sorry to see it go.
And as Harris pointed out, checking or unchecking all the options is very simple. Maybe it takes a second more than a simple on/off switch, but it’s easy for everyone to understand. Better to have one preference pane than separate “standard” and “advanced” modes – now really would be complicating things!
One more thing – I think the icons are pretty, and they make the page more fun/friendly/inviting/what-have-you. There’s more to experience than usability. That’s a huge difference between Facebook and Myspace. Facebook has a very nice, clean, consistent look, which makes it a pleasure to use all around.
MCF
on 21 Mar 07I disagree that the Facebook icons are overkill. Sometimes a blunt instrument (as you suggest) is necessary. Sometimes (as Facebook decided) the ability to have granular control over privacy settings can be useful. As a regular and long-time Facebook user, I think the privacy settings meet my needs and are not confusing in the least. Facebook could probably do more to promote that these controls exist though (some of my friends still don’t know you can change your settings). Plus, the icons are cute and you get used to them and know what they mean soon enough. More on my blog about Facebook’s latest changes.
MCF
on 21 Mar 07The link directly above is incorrect, this is correct.
Ben
on 22 Mar 07Yikes. WhatTheFont’s first two guesses are about as far away from Optima (the uploaded snip) as you can get while still suggesting a sans serif face. I’d like to see the other three.
Alexandre
on 24 Mar 07I’d like to point out that many of my friends, who are quite technically literate, were not even aware that there were News Feed privacy settings at all. For a long time, people would just click the little “x”s beside each item and delete them manually.
August
on 25 Mar 07That whole “my privacy” option in the main menu had them pretty baffled, eh?
This discussion is closed.