17|04|12:I don’t care how you are

People often ask me how I am. “How are you?” “How was your day?” And then I do what everybody else in the world does; spit out the automatic “fine.”

But after that, in that awkward little silence that follows, people expect me to ask them “how are you?” back. And I never do.

This throws some people off. People have asked me why I don’t do it. Sometimes I get the snotty “well I’m fine too, thanks for asking”. I even remember someone taking it very personally once, and we didn’t speak for a week afterwards.

I don’t ask “how are you?” back, because I’ve found it to be fundamentally unnecessary. I used to ask it. I actually used to be the first one to ask it when beginning a new conversation. And due to this long previous experience in asking those three words, I now know that it’s a waste of time.

I actually already mentioned the reason why asking this question is futile. 95% of the time the answer is “fine”. Some flourish it with an “I’m” in the beginning, others like to mix it up by saying “good” instead of “fine”.

But in the end, fine is what the overwhelming majority of people are.

Of course I have no problem with people being fine, and it’s good to hear that people’s lives are going good. But the problem with this response is that there is no natural flow for where that conversation should continue next.

“How are you?”
“Fine.”
“Okay.”

When people tell you they’re not feeling so fine, you can always say “Aw, how come?” and take it from there. But somehow I find myself sounding incredibly odd if I ask people to list the reasons why they’re feeling fine. The only way to continue the conversation from there is to change the subject entirely. So what was the point of asking it in the first place?

Especially since the thing is so automatic. How are you, fine and you, also fine. It’s as if it’s the national greeting, mandated by a socialist government in commemoration of The Great Leader of the People, Fine, Sr. You just have to go through it before you can get to the meat and potatoes of a conversation, whether you like it or not.

Can you think of some other conversation starter that’s equally automatic? I can. It’s the hellos you say right before it. So effectively, “how are you” is a second, more verbal, layer of hello. A waste of time with no semantic purpose because nobody thinks about it when they answer. It’s a reflex. It’s a society of people who begin conversations by hammering each others’ knees.

As for the remaining 5% of the time when people are not feeling so chipper, the most common response I get is “Not so good, but I don’t want to talk about it”. I don’t know if people find me somehow especially hard to confide in. Or if I seem like the kind of person who enjoys dealing in schadenfreude more than sympathy. Perhaps they’re correct.

But I still find myself in a conversational cul-de-sac. They have just instructed me not to talk about this grievous misfortune that’s occupying their mind and clouding their day. And yet, if they have such a dark secret inside, I don’t suppose they’ll enjoy it much if I try to change the topic and tell a joke about a duck. There’s no way to disregard the heart-ache the other is experiencing without coming across like an insensitive dick. The conversation is dead. And I walked right into that minefield all on my own by asking “how are you?” back.

Now wait a minute. What about that small portion of people who are not fine and do want to talk about it (with you)?

Well if they’re feeling down and they want to talk to me about it, they will invariably bring it up on their own. It sounds harsh, but it’s true. Every single time I’ve had to console or advice my friends in sorrow, I never asked to be anybody’s therapist beforehand. I never asked to hear their problems or queried how their day is going.

They just start talking about it. Which is great. Then I didn’t need to probe them for any hot button issues, or ask them if it was okay to talk about it. They have the problem, they should set their own pace for unraveling it. Any shrink will tell you this.

You might think I’m over-analyzing this. That I should just conform to this non-optional social custom, grit my teeth and say it. But no.

According to a highly unscientific source, people have 50-60 conversations per day. Going through the “how are you?”s takes about four seconds without flourishes. 4 seconds × 60 conversations × 365 days makes for 87,600 seconds, or 24.333 hours. So basically each year, you spend a whole day going around asking people how they are. I don’t know about you, but I’d prefer a hobby. Or even a COPS marathon.

What really sucks up time though are people complaining about me not saying it.

Well that’s it right there. Four seconds is still less than the four minutes it takes you to go through this rant.

Sure. And after someone gets angry about me “not caring about them”, we have an argument. And after the dust settles, I ask them how they are, and they tell me they’re “fine.”

I can’t be held accountable for the self-importance of other people.

20|01|12:Designing help

I’ve recently been designing a help center for work, and I thought to share my observations during development. As always, I begun with research. Testing help and support systems of popular websites to see what works and what doesn’t.

Even without research though, I already knew that help system is the one feature if anything that should be absolutely 100% unambiguously crystal clear. Confused users won’t want to be confused again trying to figure out how to get help figuring out the product.

So I went to the help sections of a selection of popular websites, but, always in a foreign language I couldn’t read. That should prove to be a no-BS method of finding out whether something is intuitive to use or not; seeing if you could use it even if you can’t read the text.

The fact is, most users don’t read the text. Explanation paragraphs are often skipped entirely, and forms for similar purposes are usually exactly the same website to website, so there’s no need for a seasoned surfer to read any of that. And should any of them read something, ask them twenty minutes later if they remember what they read.

As we all know, every web user is in an infernal hurry all the time and even 10 seconds wasted on a video that didn’t meet expectations is enough of an atrocity to fire an angry comment about “never getting that time back”.

Here’s a few samples of what I found.

Twitter Help

LinkedIn Help

Gmail Help

Dropbox Help

Apple Help

Most of the sites seem to have a big or visible search bar on the front page of the help section. The only exception is Apple, but considering that the support page is supposed to cover dozens of products in multiple generations, software and an operating system, with manuals and downloads for consumers and developers, a blind search that’s going to pull up content from all these multisubject categories is probably not effective whatsoever.

Every design is also very airy and visually clear, but I suspect that’s a given, and for most cases, not a design principle solely restricted to the help center.

Facebook and LinkedIn address me by name. I guess this might be an attempt to make the help section look more personal – even though the content isn’t personalized whatsoever.

All of them seem to have extensive lists of links. Either they are presented immediately (like Gmail and Dropbox) or hidden one click away behind categories (Apple, Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn). Some users prefer to browse for answers rather than search for them, and they oblige. This tells me that neither the user nor the developer believes that the search function is actually effective. And it usually isn’t.

All of them have a language selection (Gmail’s didn’t fit in the screenshot, LinkedIn’s and Dropbox’s are a flyout menu link in the footer). Most of these are not the same language selection as for the rest of the app, but rather, a different language selection specific to the help center. So either they are all catering for the apparently voluminous group of users that prefer to learn about the app in a different language than they actually use it in, or in a very unhelpful gesture, the help contents aren’t even close to always available in the same languages as the product.

Facebook infamously does not have any contact information listed. From the LinkedIn screenshot I couldn’t tell if they have a contact us section at all or not. However, from experience I know that it’s that grayed out link at the top navigation… and it’s grayed out because LinkedIn forces you to use the search before contacting them.

Y’know, for all those times users are gonna find “Deleting a contact produces Parse error: syntax error, unexpected T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM. Is this a bug you’re unaware of?” in the FAQ.

Dropbox and Apple have graciously provided the contact sections with icons; a letter and a phone, respectively. Looking at the screenshot, I have no idea how to contact Gmail support. Perhaps that’s on purpose. As for Twitter, I suspect they have a “Contact us” link in the footer, and you can of course always tweet @support, as mentioned in the lower right corner.

This research made me come to some intriguing conclusions;

  1. Search — The search should be big, clear and played up, but only if it actually works. Sadly, users have gotten used to help center searches that ask you to type in keywords or even entire questions, only to give you back 1,609 results, probably organized by date and maybe in multiple languages. The search function is often an afterthought, and therefore users opt to spend way more time than necessary trying to figure out which category or tag their question relates to. Is “What happens to my offline data when my subscription ends?” under “Premium”, “Billing”, “Offline Use”, or what?
  2. Personalization — Most SaaS companies already keep tight logs about their users and what they do. Not to mention the actual content users create. Why couldn’t this data be put into good use in personalizing the help center beyond the point of greeting the user with his first name? If the user keeps editing a piece over and over again, suggest an article for improving their submission. If the user has recently logged in from Hungary, suggest a checklist for strong passwords. It’s not really all that hard to guess what the user might be after, and it costs nothing to try.
  3. Language — 99.9% of the time users are going to use the help center in the same language that they use the app in. The only exception is when you don’t actually offer the help center in that language. Which is shoddy, because in that case, you’re likely not offering email/phone support in that language either. Or even worse, in crowdsourced translations, the question is in English, the answer in the user’s language, except for all the links which are unaccountably also in English. It doesn’t matter whether you use professional translators or crowdsourced ones. Mandate that the help section is also translated before publishing anything. Require them to translate new features and their associated help articles before you release them.
  4. Contact — I don’t get LinkedIn’s policy of requiring a search before contacting them. Sometimes there are just things a FAQ doesn’t solve. Facebook’s hermit routine isn’t very attractive either. If your call center is being swamped with users calling in with the same questions… so what? As the owner, maker, marketer and seller of this service, it’s your duty to sack up and provide support for what you made. And that’s only a sign to either hire more reps, or make your help center better and easier to begin with. However, users should always always always have a direct way of contacting you if they need to. No bullshit, just an email address and/or phone number, right then and there.

But most importantly, I found out how tragically hidden these things are.

Location of the help on Facebook

Location of the help on Twitter

Location of the help on LinkedIn

Location of the help in Gmail

Location of the help on Dropbox

Location of the help at Apple

Almost all of the links to the help section are tiny, gray, and tucked away. Notice the position of the scrollbars. Facebook is again the most notorious with this, as when you try to click the help link in the footer of, say, your News Feed, it actually runs away from you, as more content gets lazyloaded via AJAX. Gmail hides the help section behind a dropline menu identified with a gear symbol – usually meant to denote settings, not help.

Apple has the clearest Support section link, but that again is an unfair comparison, since they sell hardware.

Hiding the help sections into 8pt gray links says to me that all of these products think they are so easy to use that no users basically need help. But that’s just silly. It looks like help section was an afterthought. Like nobody would ever need it. And then thisthis, this, or this happens.

I don’t think there even should be a help center. Centralizing all of your documentation to one separate minisite usually means that the user needs to stop doing what they were doing when they needed help, open a new tab and specifically go out to seek help. One moment you were in the middle of chatting, the next up you’re on the fifth page of Google results about why Gtalk Labs Edition lost connection and won’t connect again. If it didn’t keep logs, there would be no hope for you to remember what you were talking about after you resume.

Of course one solution is to make your app easier to begin with. But if you always designed something that was 100% intuitive to 100% of users, there wouldn’t be all that much room left for doing things nobody has ever done before.

Your product should instead live and breathe help. Help articles shouldn’t be something that you need to scour for. They should be right there, when and where you need them. I proposed having a personalized help center that looks at your behavior and gives you customized suggestions. Now what if that was actually on the page where the user were? What if instead of an article or a video, you’d have an interactive tutorial, that actually showed you how to do exactly what you wanted to do?

This might all sound like Clippy. However, the fundamental problem with Clippy wasn’t that it existed. It was that it

  1. Didn’t know anything
  2. Still insisted on helping

Help should not be something to do three days before launch, not matter how excitingly intuitive you think your product is. It should be a fundamental part of your design and development process. It should be entirely built-in to your design, to every user interface. Don’t push or force to give help (the error of Clippy and LinkedIn, respectively), but make it clear where to get it instantly, when you need it. And maybe you can finally turn off the fans at your call center.

15|01|12:█████ in Finland is ██████ ███ ███████

Wikipedia has an entire article about censorship in Finland, with half of it dedicated to Internet censorship. The Finnish Wikipedia has a lengthy article solely about Internet censorship in Finland. That’s how fundamental a building block it has become in our society.

Here I was thinking that censoring the Internet was only something that countries like China or North Korea would do. But apparently the pioneer of telecommunication, technology and design, and the most envied information society slash social benefit paradise in the world also sees this as beneficial for everyone.

The beginning of censorship was such a cunning parlor trick that I would be laughing if I wasn’t crying. The cornerstones of restriction of information are easy to smuggle in under the veil of something generally despised, such as child pornography. If someone stands up to protest, it’s not a particularly difficult feat to make the protector of the freedom of speech look like some pedophile lurking around kindergartens. Ingenious.

And once the mechanisms are in place and the dust has settled, then it’s that much easier to start expanding the existing censorship machine to other equally or at least almost equally despicable things. “We censored that thing before, so why couldn’t we censor this thing as well?”

Now the target has been The Pirate Bay. Politicians have also spoken about hiding online racism and online poker. And why not also ban all the rest of the pornography, all the blogs critical of the government, and everything else? The first and foremost function of the government is indeed controlling opinions and upholding Christian family values.

Never mind that such

The Pirate Bay hasn’t actually gone anywhere. Their content, demand or userbase hasn’t gone anywhere. Despite the ban, copyright laws are being broken there dozens of times per second. Sonera and DNA customers can still access TPB normally. It takes 20 seconds of googling for Elisa customers to get around the ban. The Pirate Bay isn’t even close to being the only channel for procuring illegal material. The pirates affected by the censorship do not magically convert into paying customers. And to top it all off, the ban is illegal in both Finland and the EU, and against human rights.

Instead of this childish rampage, perhaps the copyright organizations should try to make the legal channels easier and more accessible. Piracy cannot be stopped, harmed, restricted or even disturbed in any substantial way without destroying the freedom of speech or causing excessive harm to the legal use of the Internet. Censoring child porn is against the freedom of speech and doesn’t do one single sorry thing about the production of child pornography. And I won’t even comment on policing opinions and legal porn to please some conservative tight-ass.

23|11|11:For sale by disillusioned owner

Inspired by the excellent 100 Days of Less by Caleb “I Make Web Things” Troughton, I decided to take a long hard look at my own room. For each object within my purview, I asked myself if my life would change in any way should that item disappear. For many of them, the answer was “It wouldn’t. At all.”

I spend most of my time at my computer. When I’m feeling thoroughly adventurous and I go out, I’ll have with me my phone, my wallet and the clothes on my back. Things that were very important to get/own before don’t seem so important anymore, and as a result, I’m drowning in all this unimportant crap.

“This is what we do to ourselves on a daily basis. We weigh ourselves down until we can’t even move. And make no mistake… moving is living.”

— Ryan Bingham in Up In The Air

So I decided to get rid of most of my things. Unnecessary books of mine are going to the excellent “Omakauppa” section of Booky.fi. The rest of my crap ends up in an Huuto.net online auction, or city refuse services.

I first looked at the shelf on the opposite wall. It houses the DVD collection I paid in sweat, blood and tears to gather. However, most of them I’ve already ripped onto my computer, and it’s far more convenient to watch them that way, rather than fiddling with the physical DVD discs and boxes thereof. Away ye go.

All sorts of books I haven’t read in years also caught my eye. Harry Potters, Sinuhe the Egyptian, the Bert series, Harri István Mäki’s neverheard books… I haven’t read any of these in a long while, and I stubbornly will not read them in the future either. Off with you.

My field of vision also contained lighting, decorations that have no sentimental value, computer speakers, old (but functional) Nokia phone, a few cameras and um… computers that I don’t use anymore, a jailbreaked iPod touch and a set of Dominos.

Then I opened my closets for the first time this year, and a true jackpot revealed itself before my eyes; piles of old but well-kept clothes, board games, CDs, Legos, a mountain of Donald Duck magazines and paperbacks, more books, and all other sorts of gadgets and thingymajigs I haven’t even realized I was the proud owner of, let alone actually ever needed them.

So for the next few days I’ll log my item overflow for sale online at my own pace. And hopefully all articles will find a better home.

Click here to see my books for sale on Booky.fi

Click here to see my other possessions for sale on Huuto.net

For international readers: If you really really really want some of my old crap, I can ship to anywhere if you pick up the postage tab.

02|11|11:Helsinki, the World Dreamsign Capital 2012

I heard that Helsinki is supposed to be the 2012 World Design Capital. But after seeing the November 2, 2011 episode of 45 minuuttia, I cannot but wonder…

How in the hell?

We have all kinds of dreamers in this country – in fact, just about as many as there are these shit stiff jefes with budget statements under their arms, saying no to creative. I guess the whole city will become just one big dream.

According to 45 minuuttia, the Kamppi center was originally supposed to look like this;

This is excellent design. Eero Saarinen turns in his grave when someone brings something like this to the party. This is something tourists will flood Flickr with their artsy perspective shots of. It’s nigh enough iconic.

What stands there today is every single building in Otaniemi.

There is nothing amazing or unique about the Kamppi they ultimately built. It’s just a mall. An incredibly mediocre A-to-B mall where you can buy a Coke before taking the bus far, far away.

Kamppi is just one example; e.g. the current Hartwall Arena, Cirrus skyscraper and the parliament annex that are the result of the same mysterious design axing phenomenon.

Any why did Kamppi turn into such a paragon of mediocrity? Because the original design was too expensive, and the current design fits more stores.

Then they tried to explain that some ideas from the original design did make it to the current one. For example, the bus terminal is underground.

Hold the press.

Gutting top notch design for expense reasons is kind of like starting to scrape off some of the background from Mona Lisa because green paint is so damn expensive.

As a sidenote to illustrate the virtues of aesthetics; Not one single reader of this text had to google Mona Lisa to know what it is. And I guess there are reasons for the long queues and high entrance fees to go see it.

Finally, the show had Lasse Männistö, chairman of the city planning board, as a guest. He seemed like a particularly toothless snot. His only response to the vanishing of all this amazing design was simply; “well, would it have been better that we built nothing at all instead?”

Well… yeah.

They interviewed an old woman on the street. She moaned about how ugly Cirrus is and was missing the little forest that used to be where Cirrus is now. I’m with granny; if we let bookkeepers tamper with the work of our most cutting edge professional designers, then I think we might just as well leave the forests be.

This is exactly the kind of “good enough” thinking that’s the reason why Helsinki and Finland overall is such a forgotten albania; why the fact that Finland was mentioned in some South Park episode made headlines once with the original airing, and a second time with the rerun; why Conan O’Brien was greeted by half the country.

But the situation being what it is and unlikely to change, with all the equally responsible instances knowing nothing else to do but pointing fingers at each other, I guess Helsinki shall forever be this internationally trivial collector of empty titles. And cutting edge design in Helsinki will also most likely stay a dream – so called dreamsign.

02|05|11:Useless useful digital mail

I’ve spent the last month in India. Two more months are still ahead.

A quarter of a year is a very long time to spend abroad, especially since life at home doesn’t stop in the meanwhile. For this reason, I subscribed to the NetPosti service. It’s an online service, run by the Finnish Post Office, where letters from a pool of selected senders will go to an online postbox in digital form, instead of the plastic one sitting on a street corner in Helsinki. As such, I could read my letters wherever in the world I may be, and as an added bonus, paper is conserved.

Except that the entire service doesn’t even work.

During this past month, I haven’t received one single lousy letter in NetPosti. And it’s not because I’m unpopular; the postbox in Finland gathers paper letters every so often, from internal revenue, from my mobile operator, from all sorts of senders. I called the NetPosti customer service, and an otherwise very helpful person told me that the companies sending the letters can still decide for themselves, which letters are sent in paper form, and which in digital form.

The companies will of course choose the hard copy for their most important billing, collection letters and other três pressant shipments.

That means that precisely the letters that require immediate action from me lay in their box for months, when nobody seems to understand that I’m not there.

In the meanwhile, all types of trivial bullshit newsletters arrive at NetPosti just fine.

When it comes to taxes, it’s particularly inconvenient. My choices are to either queue up to the phone service — when using a Finnish phone to call to Finland from India, I’m looking at 3.50 € per minute; or I can sit here for two months and take care of it in June, when the defaults have been logged and a second sheet is required to print the list of late fees.

Personally I happen to be in luck, when I have someone back in Finland to check my postbox daily. Otherwise I’d be jolly and ignorant of this entire fiasco. But I still don’t see how a trip to India is a reason to give permission for third parties to read details of my tax affairs.

By mistake, I had left a bill from my mobile operator to hang about. Yesterday, Intrum Justitia, the collection agency for my operator, sent me a letter. I didn’t let my contact person in Finland open it, but instead, I called (with the swinely prices) their customer service, where I was told that they can’t tell me what the letter contained if I can’t tell them what the letter contained. I then sent them an email, to which they replied with payment details.

This has made me think that the centric reason why postal services the world over are dying slowly are not the high prices or the slow delivery times. As the global Internet spreads even to the mud hut villages in Africa, and as it develops towards a revolution of cloud computing services, a postal service which is locked to a physical location is becoming more and more of an anachronism every passing day. Thanks to Gmail, Facebook and Dropbox, I can access my emails, photos and files, and keep in touch with my friends, instantly, wherever in the world I am.

NetPosti (and other services like it) is a step to the right direction in regards to separating mail from location. But at least the NetPosti implementation simply isn’t good enough yet; they only accept mail from a limited pool of pre-approved companies. And even then, the companies from ye olde worlde will choose whether or not they’ll use the service on a letter-by-letter basis.

The whim of the sender takes presidency over the convenience of the recipient.

And then the red-edged collection letters sit about, unread and wet by the rain of a month of Sundays. The sender wonders why the message doesn’t seem to sink it at all, while the intended recipient is blissfully ignorant. Not to mention the wasted paper.

29|11|10:Fixed width über alles

I recently developed a skin for a certain wiki. Like all projects always are, this too was a learning experience. I had never before made any serious attempts at a wiki skin, but the ordeal was interesting and versatile, and for a first attempt the results weren’t half bad.

In the process of designing websites, you always have to make certain decisions for each element; the location, size, color, shape, font, etc. But the width of the page is one decision for which my answer is so invariably identical every time, I don’t even really recognize it as a decision so much as a default fact of life. I always use the 960.gs template for designing, which sets the width of the page to 960 pixels. It’s a good width, because nigh enough all screens today can show it in its entirety, and it’s easy to divide into equal columns. This is why every website I design is 960 pixels wide.

When I asked for design advice from #mediawiki, one of the tips came as a slight surprise to me; the width of a proper skin should be the width of the screen. That is, the width of the content area apparently should fluctuate randomly according to the user’s resolution. I did not understand why, and I even tried for a change.

I’d understand the frustration of side-scrolling if the user’s resolution width was 800 pixels and I’m trying to push in a 960 pixel layout. That’s the downside to fixed width. But the 800 resolutions are starting to get très très rare. In the past three years, I’ve seen exactly one single screen where the width of the resolution was less than 1024. And that was in my pocket sized touchscreen Galaxy S smartphone.

Before that, I saw a screen with a 800×600 resolution when I was working in one of the OMXH25 companies. It was used by one of my sixteen bosses, and even though the hardware itself could’ve achieved all kinds of magical definitions, she was neurotically happy with her 800×600. She had internalized side-scrolling as a part of normal operation of a computer, and has since retired.

800×600 resolutions are simply put ancient history, and these days resolutions less than 960 pixels wide are as rare and irrelevant as Internet Explorer 6 — since both 800×600 and IE6 are from the times of infancy for the internet, the times without any wikis or facebooks or google docses and other such modern day wonders, it is odd at best that such relics are let dominate the development of these world-changing web apps. As for me, I couldn’t give one single miserable damn if my wiki skin from the year 2010 is not displayed perfectly on a decade old browser and an even older screen resolution.

That is why the small resolutions of the past are not a problem for fixed width. But the massive resolutions of today are a problem for dynamic width.

I myself am using a resolution 1920 pixels wide. Some common iMac computers can run resolutions up to 2560 pixels wide. The wider a single row of text becomes, the harder it is to read. Even on my resolution some edge-to-edge texts are difficult to read; I daren’t imagine reading the same things on the iMac. And you know they’re only gonna get bigger from here. When a website’s layout is redesigned, it’s supposed to server the website as far into the future as possible, and that is why the past and the present are irrelevant. What happens when 3840×2400 becomes as common as the 1280 px wide resolutions are today?

Random page width doesn’t only bring problems to the reader, however. It also presents predicaments for the content producers. Even if large resolutions make texts look shorter, perhaps presenting a nice carrot to write ever more, is displaying content in tables harder. You can’t know what resolution the viewer is using, and you can’t profile since the screen resolution is absolutely independent of your target audience. As a result, your table could be noticeably narrow, and your endless ramblings in five columns or more become very irritable one-word-per-line type of porridge. Your table could also be ridiculously wide, and then your reader’s heads gyrate as if in a tennis match when they read it. And if you give your tables a fixed width, it’ll either cause side-scrolling or a huge stupid white space. The prevention of which dynamic width is supposed to do.

Well, as a last argument, the #mediawiki people said that using the edit box is somehow better than sex in the summer night when it employs dynamic width. I’m writing this blog post with a very very wide text box and using it is tiring at best. In wiki editing, it’s also good to see how your content is going to be distributed on the final page as you’re editing without always clicking that preview button.

Therefore on both wikis as well as normal websites, a fixed width of 960 pixels wins. Dynamic width ruled the internet in the beginning of the 2000, when the average resolution was still manageable, but since resolutions grow, inch sizes grow and font sizes shrink from year to year, the dynamic width is now just one more item to be placed in the museum of web design.

11|10|10:Phone number validation must die

These days almost every form validates the information you enter to it in some way. AJAX and jQuery and other JavaScript methodologies have made it incredibly quick and interactive; no longer do you need to even submit the form – the validation is done as quickly as you can type. And if you are a flaming non-conformist, the system will burn you with a little red icon or text, saying that you failed in the worst possible way just now.

Form validation is important so as to stop users from inputting garbage or spam into fields, making sure passwords are secure and memorable, and confirming that the inputted data will work with the system that asks for it. An email address needs one and only one @ sign and at least one period, because sending email to adgshfadsafasd might prove difficult – at least for the automated emailing system.

However, not every field needs to validated. The field asking for a phone number is one such field that does not need validation, and yet every so often it is validated.

Validation means that you expect the user to input data in a specific format. For a web address you might expect a protocol (such as http://), perhaps followed by www and a period, then an unforeseeable number of a-z characters, dashes and numerals, followed by another period, a TLD code and whatever folder structures might come after it. This is a universal format. Web addresses are the same in America, Finland and Beijing. Some users might omit the http://, but most systems are smart enough to add them if they are missing.

However, phone numbers have absolutely no universal standard, other than they are numbers. However, convention on the amount of numbers, and any spaces, dashes, periods or parenthesis applied in between changes from country to country. In addition, the country code is a plus sign and one to three extra numbers. Which absorb the first digit of the number, but only if it’s a zero. Before the country code might come the carrier-dependent long distance call code. Which removes the plus sign.

A phone number in America might look like (212) 123-4567. A phone number in Finland might look like 09 123 4567. Or maybe +358 9 123 4567. Or perhaps even 011 358 45 3 486 684. I’m not even kidding, that is an actual number; mine, to be exact.

Does your system accept all of this?

I do not even quite understand why developers see the need to validate the phone number in the first place. An email address needs to be validated, because in all likelihood the system is going to send automated emails that need to be received. But very rarely do websites automatically call you.

In some cases you might send automated text messages, but usually you also need to know the user’s carrier and country, in which case you already know a somewhat specific format. But mostly the phone number is probably used so that your representative (a human with brains) is going to call it, or simply for display in a profile.

The user knows how their phone number is supposed to be written, and it’s odd to pretend you know better. After all, the internet is global, and your web app needs to realize this. Users also might like to format their numbers in a non-standard way, i.e. group them differently. My phone number is conventionally grouped as 045 348 6864, but because the last three digits are symmetrical to the three digits before them, I group for that; 045 3 486 684. Much easier to read and remember. But your validation could kill that.

If you absolutely need to validate your phone number field, knowing and testing for every single possible format there is might require some serious-as-easter-island work. So just make sure your phone number field conforms to this set of rules;

  • Varchar field less than 32 characters long
  • No minimum length
  • Contains only digits 0-9, spaces, or characters:  . ( ) + -

It’s that simple. Anything more specific and you’ll have your users run into trouble. Entirely unnecessary trouble, at that.

11|10|10:Better Better Facebook

I use quite a lot of Facebook during an average day. It’s an efficient way of keeping in touch with friends whose faces I tend to not peer at personally all that often, and it doubles up as a handy business tool as well. And yet it misses a few dandy features, which can easily be acquired by installing a plug-in called Better Facebook.

Too bad it’s pretty ugly. As a graphic artist, this especially bothers me.

So I used the spare weekend to write up a CSS-file for this plug-in, improving the layout so that it doesn’t look all that bad.

You can use this file too, if you want. The URL for the file is http://www.groenroos.fi/better.css

To use this, click the “Options” button in the top bar, choose the “CSS” tab, and paste the URL of the CSS file into the box labeled, “Insert a reference to an external stylesheet”. This way, as I update and improve my stylesheet file, you will instantly see the improvements on your Facebook.

Thanks go to Stanislav for fixing a few kinks with the tabs, check out his blog at http://khromov.wordpress.com.

In closing, a comparison screenshot.

Better Facebook comparison

23|07|10:Just as it was going way too easy…

Why do websites where the basic function is to download files, always make actually downloading the file so difficult?

Why would I have to download a 5 megabyte download manager program to download a 2 megabyte file? Why would I have to register and log in, why would I have to give my name and email address, why would I have to also download some random toolbar and virus scan? Why can’t I just download the file I want?

For instance, Adobe Flash Player. With 98% of all computers having it, it’s the single most popular browser plug-in to date by a huge margin. It’s been estimated that even up to 40% of websites would contain Flash content. So almost every other website has a Flash object on it.

My Firefox is telling me to install an update for Flash Player because the current version has been proven to have some security leaks. Well, if half of all websites contain a Flash object or two, there must be a rude amount of websites who might, wittingly or not, abuse these leaks. Best to update.

To me, one of the worst parts of Flash is that it cannot update itself. Not even if you’d tell it to. You have to download the file separately every time. So I go to the Flash Player download site, and it already contains a pre-ticked box for a McAfee Virus Scan. No, I can’t say I want that. Tick it off and OK.

“Firefox prevented this site from asking you to install software on your computer.” Allow. Do you want to install Adobe DLM? I don’t know. I wanted Flash Player. At this point, I realized I was downloading a program which would in turn, download the program I originally wanted.

Download managers are nifty because they allow you continue your download from where you left off; you can even turn your computer off in the meanwhile. They also guide the user through the installation process.

Except that Flash Player is nighly a 2 megabyte file. I bet has no user been so ninja that they could’ve closed the download manager before Flash finished downloading, let alone the computer. Has anyone ever contacted Adobe support and said “hey, I can’t work out how to download this file. I just wish there was a downloadable file that would download this file for me!” I realize this same program is also used on Adobe’s website to download other files gigabytes in size, but it still doesn’t mean it should be forced on all the files. Or any files, for that matter.

And what comes to helpfulness in the installation process;

I tried to come up with even one reason why this getPlus was so necessary when installing a security update, especially since it doesn’t actually work and security holes are left wide open. Around the fifth hour I went to watch television.

As the web develops, the importance of Flash deminishes. It doesn’t work on mobile devices very well. It’s not open. Websites made with it aren’t indexing friendly whatsoever. Accessibility is next to zero. It’s missing all the features that are crucial in today’s web. New technologies such as HTML5 and jQuery are starting to sail by. They are a part of the browser, not a separate plug-in. Web content, functionality and possibly even ads are starting to move away from Flash in favor of these new technologies.

Therefore, I don’t understand why Adobe feels that they can afford to make their users jump through hoops to get their product. Why anybody would feel that.