Nexxtep Blog

I’m in a very casual, “weekend warrior” type band, playing rock, surf, funk, and experimental tunes. There are 3 of us — me (Greg Jagiello) on bass, Rob McLay on guitar, and Tony Rathbone on drums — and we’ve been doing this for about a year now.

We went into the studio about a month ago to record a few of our songs, which was fun and productive, and we ended up with three good tracks. One of which, Frizzle, is now available on iTunes (link opens in iTunes) thanks to TuneCore, a service that allows musicians to get their music on iTunes, Amazon, Napster, and other online music stores. Great service, easy to use, and perfectly disruptive.

The potential exposure we have now for this one song is really amazing. We’re really just limited by the amount of effort we put into promoting it, which suits me just fine. I’m impressed that we could get our music on iTunes even as a casual band playing a few hours a week…that is the promise of the internet delivered.

You can hear a few more of our songs on the Nigiri Kings MySpace page.

I’ve been working with Glassdoor for a couple of months now, and it’s great to see some of my work (interaction design and UI design) appearing on the site. They are a seriously talented group (I work mostly with Tim A and Tim B, but everyone is really sharp) with a very cool product, already very popular and growing daily.

Here is one area where my contributions are found - mainly the content layout, filter design, conversion messaging and such (I might post a before/after, mainly to help explain how I work with a product that already exists, which is common and tricky):

http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Microsoft-Reviews-E1651.htm

You should post a review and a salary, even if you aren’t an active job seeker. (I’m guilty of filtering reviews by scores <2 of 5 and reading reviews from people who hate their job.)

Another super project I’m proud to be working on is getting some excellent exposure this week.

JobScore is one of the six Launch Pad finalists at the Web 2.0 Expo here in San Francisco. I’ve been working with Dan Arkind and Bob Mayes on the interaction and UI design of JobScore for quite a while now, and the app is really coming together great.

Here’s hoping JobScore takes some honors at the Launch Pad event — If you are in the audience on Thursday at 2pm, show some love. Hit this link for more info:

http://en.oreilly.com/webexsf2008/public/content/launchpad

Good luck!

As an active “next gen” console gamer (I’m Mint Octopus on Xbox Live and MintOctopus on the PS3 network), I am constantly exposed to micropayments in a way that non-gamers can’t really imagine. Sure, you may get “upsold” at In-N-Out Burger on fries — but it’s different, since you haven’t already purchased and eaten the burger already, days earlier even. That’s what it’s like for console gamers — we purchase the full version of the game at $60 (or for me, $30 since I rent then buy used from GameFly) then are offered new game content, often for a price.

Now, don’t get me wrong — I have no problem with paying for additional content, within reason. I recently purchased the new map packs for Call Of Duty 4 and Halo 3, and feel the 800 credit ($10) price tag is totally fair. It takes a team months and months to concept, design, build, test, package, and deploy these. I don’t even mind the re-skinned versions of earlier maps from those franchises…I enjoyed them once, and since I can’t simply import them into the most recent version of the game, I am happy to play them.

But I DO have a problem with game companies trying to squeeze my digital wallet dry. This is how I feel about the DLC (downloadable content) for Ace Combat 6. GREAT GAME! I played it through to the end, and it’s a top-notch title I recommend fully. But the DLC approach they use is absurd.

Take a look, if you dare, at the full-size version of this image — it’s a series of screenshots I hacked together showing all 53 pieces of DLC available just for Ace Combat 6 in the Microsoft Marketplace.

53 items available — 8 full pages of stuff, a whopping 9,620 credits!! That’s $120 US (given the strength of the dollar, maybe 112 Euros will surprise you!)

Now, I understand they are entirely within their rights to try and get me to spend twice as much on extra stuff as the original game. But one big difference is what it takes to build this stuff. Many of these items (the icons, for 80 credits) are just an image. A majority of the content consists of new variants on planes — I’m guessing this is basically a couple of code variables (change 52 missles to 72, reduce shields from 80 to 60) and some images that make up the skin. Hardly the enormous team effort that a pack of 3 maps takes.

(I won’t get into how the DLC for Rock Band, Guitar Hero III, or SingStar work…I have some thoughts on that, but somehow it feels slightly different.)

So I’m proposing a set of ground rules for DLC for console games (PC gamers, you guys can have whatever you want, I’m not trying to get into your world):

• Package many insignificant items into a larger package (30 planes? Let me buy and download them all at once.)
• Charge for the significant DLC packages for 90 days
• After 90 days, release them for free
• Also after 90 days, include them on the retail CD (ala COD4 Game of the Year edition)
• Don’t sell ANY DLC that gives me an advantage in online multiplayer

How do you feel about DLC?

Very cool - Betsy Weber awarded the TripIt screencasts as the “Screen Cast of the Week”. Here is the first of the three we did:

Steph and I worked on these — I worked with TripIt on the concept, scripting and assets, then I recorded the voiceovers, which Steph used while building the screencast in Camtasia.

I think people may be surprised at how much goes into these screencasts, even when using the right tools, so I may post more on the subject in the future. It’s the process and order of steps that I think is key.

Something cool I’m working on — TripIt — has been nominated for a Webby award.

We’re in the Travel category — how about giving us a vote if you think we’re worthy?

http://pv.webbyawards.com

The evolution of user interfaces of “real stuff” is fascinating to me. Some product categories have changed dramatically since I’ve been paying attention. Even common household items that work just fine get updated.

Consider the doorknob. Doorknobs have evolved from a basic utilitarian, mechanical tool to control access to rooms to something much more. Have a look at this example time line (dates are my guesstimate after a bit of googling):

(For this post, I’m only interested in the user interface functionality of the knobs — clearly the visual design and mechanical engineering involved evolves.)

In all four examples shown, the basic function is exactly the same: a turnable door knob with a lock. But I’d say that things have gotten more useful — both for people using the knobs and for people installing them. Biometric locks that require no physical key mean less hassle and risk for people, and since knob and lock are now integrated, installation is (I suspect) easier and faster.

We’ve gone from physically turning the lock with a key to a “fly-by-wire” approach, where some electronics are involved. You swipe your key card or fingerprint and an embedded computer tells a motor to do the bulk of the mechanical work. At least in San Francisco, I see plenty of real-world examples of card-entry, and some biometrics, so I know these are commercially available to builders.

So why is there so little fly-by-wire convenience in modern plumbing? There have been some advances — I used a nifty thermostatic shower at a hotel once, which kept the temperature constant automatically to within a few degrees.

Rather than dwell on that question, here is a quick and rough concept I mocked up for a fly-by-wire shower control:

Big push-buttons to turn on/off the water, a big analog knob to select a target temperature, a display showing the temperature (so you can know “your temperature” and use anywhere, such as a hotel), a “ready” indicator that lights/beeps when your target is reached, and 3 programmable user presets.

Too complicated? Is this the iDrive of shower controls?

User interfaces of all types grab my attention - especially when I feel they could be greatly improved. For example, I snapped a photo of this UI on a machine near my house (Post & Powell in SF Union Square, to be specific):

The machine I found this on looks something like this:

My first thought was that only an octopus could use these controls. The system just has no overall metaphor — the closest thing is the vague drawing behind the switches that somewhat correlate each switch to which piece of the machine it controls. If felt not only overly complex, but somewhat dangerous. Actual people would be up in the sky on this thing, and the controls clearly need some training to operate correctly. I didn’t even see an emergency “stop” button or any safety device at all.

Immediately I started mentally designing a simpler, more intuitive, and safer control panel in my head. Fewer controls, each with multi function….joysticks with rotating knobs…safety indicators with audible warnings…etc.

This post was originally going to be about my proposed redesign of this control panel. But I started thinking about constraint. Working with startup companies, I am well aware of how constraints — financial and time constraints, in particular — often impact my own interaction and UI designs. The best designs I envision for my clients have actually never been implemented! Throughout my decade or so of professional interaction and UI design, constraints have always changed the end product.

With this in mind, I reconsidered the cherry picker control panel. I imagine the constraints were typical: budget, timing, people. I guesstimate that there are actually very few off-the-shelf components that would deliver the type of control I wanted to create, so using stock switches is a reasonable compromise. Assembling a panel from stock switches is also much less time intensive than creating custom parts. And I saw people using the machine, and no one fell to their death while using it, so perhaps it’s not as complex as I assumed.

A bit of a ramble, I know…but my take away point is this:

I’m sure that right now, someone out there is looking at UI design work I’ve done, and redesigning it to be better in their head. Whatever design they envision is likely to be cleaner, simpler, and more useful — in theory. But the design I delivered was chosen because I managed project constraints well. Clients keep wanting me to work on their projects, and they are recommending me, so I shouldn’t overlook the importance of understanding how to work within constraints.

Any thoughts on constraints?