Here are some interesting finds on UI/UX of the week!
Installing App Ads Experience. Very pertinent article from Baymard Institute, focused on the experience of installing native apps on e-commerce products and the ads used to support that same experience. It’s particularly relevant since e-commerce is highly focused on sales conversion, and the existence of ads brings an additional layer of friction that may deter users from continuing their product journey. Highlight of the article includes:
“If an “Install App” ad must be displayed, it should be removed once users have navigated to a new page on the site or have been on the same page for a certain amount of time. Once users have been on the site awhile, or have navigated to new pages, the benefit of showing the “Install App” ad decreases, while the potential to distract users is constant or increases. As mentioned above, “Install App” ads were observed during testing to suffer from banner blindness, where some users simply ignored them. For these users, the end result will be that they’ll have a much more limited view of the main site content for the duration of their time on the site, if the ad is permanently displayed. Furthermore, these users will potentially never see some critical site elements that are hidden by the “Install App” ad.”
Improving Design Processes. Thorough article from Smashing Magazine, focused on identifying issues and improving Design Processes. The article focuses on topics such as recognizing the complexity of problems that are being solved, lack of time for design iterations, among other relevant topics, worth reading through. It’s a summarization of well known items that have long been identified, but one well worth reading and keep as a constant reminder. Highlight of the article includes:
“Naturally, design iterations often affect certain parts of the code for a site, app, or software product. For this reason, during design spikes any code that will likely be affected by the design spike cannot move forward. But, as Dimmick clearly states, this “delay” will likely save time by avoiding re-work. It simply does not make sense to write code now and then re-write it a few weeks later after the team has agreed on a revised design. In short, postponing some coding actually saves time and budget.”
Alexa Auto Case Study. Very interesting case study from the Fast Company, focused on Amazon’s Alexa product integration in the next wave of automotive virtual assistants. It’s an insightful look at how Amazon has been attempting to use Natural Language Processing, particularly Automated Speech Recognition, in order to improve the general automotive ecosystem experience for its users (similarly to the way it has done so for Smart Houses). The article details integrations with partners as well as informative/insightful responses and contextualization from Ricardo DeMatos, the principal solutions architect for the project. Highlight of the article includes:
“Though Amazon’s concept car feels futuristic, its Alexa integration isn’t fanciful. All the functionality is available to automakers and their integrator partners in the Alexa Auto software development kit (SDK) released during in 2018. The electric car simulator was built by Elektrobit, one of a group of integrators Amazon is working with, and was meant to showcase all the cool voice-enabled services contained in the SDK. Elektrobit put in a bit of its own special sauce, too.”