We’ve
all been there, the infinite scroll. Scrolling around with no idea what
to watch. Good news for the indecisive folks in the room, with the new
On Now row and Channel Guide on Fire TV, it’s easier than ever to watch
Live TV with Amazon Channels.
Amazon
Channels is the Prime benefit that lets Prime members subscribe to over
100 channels, with no cable required, no apps to download, and can
cancel anytime. Most movies and TV shows included in your subscriptions
are available to watch on demand. Some channels also feature Watch Live,
which gives you the option to live stream programming on supported
devices the same time that it’s broadcast on TV. That means you’ll be
able to watch and live tweet Westworld when everyone else is watching.
On Now ✨
Here at Fire TV, we want to make it really easy to discover the live programming available to you. If you’re signed up for HBO, SHOWTIME, STARZ, or Cinemax
through Amazon Channels, you will see a new row on your homepage called
On Now. That row will show you all of the programming that is live now.
On Later ⏰
In
addition to this handy dandy row, you will also have the ability to
look into the future 🔮. If you’re curious what’s on later today or
coming up in the next two weeks, you can use the new Channel Guide to
browse the entire schedule. To launch the Guide, simply press the
Options button (looks like a hamburger) on the Alexa Voice Remote while
watching Live TV and see your channels and all the future programming
information. Don’t forget to ️favorite ⭐️ your top channels so that they
show up first in your Guide. Coming up this weekend, SHOWTIME Showcase
will be airing Death Becomes Her and St. Elmo’s Fire; who needs weekend plans when two of the best movies are on?!
Just say — ”Alexa, watch HBO.” 🗣️
If you already know what channel you want to watch — simply press the microphone button on your Alexa Voice Remote, or speak to your connected Echo device, and say “Alexa, watch ___”. The Live channel will instantly tune on command.
Here a few voice commands to try:
“Alexa, watch HBO.”
“Alexa, tune to HBO Family.”
“Alexa, go to Cinemax.”
“Alexa, go to SHOWTIME.”
“Alexa, watch STARZ.”
“Alexa, go to the Channel Guide.”
As
always, you can ask Alexa to search for shows, movies, actors, genres
and more. If you search for a show or movie that happens to be airing
live, the channel will appear in the search results.
The
new Live TV experience is currently available with subscriptions
offered through Amazon Channels (HBO, SHOWTIME, STARZ, Cinemax) and we
will be adding more channels in the near future. Start your free trial
with these channels today to get started with Live TV on your Fire TV.
This functionality is only available if you have an HBO, SHOWTIME,
STARZ, or Cinemax subscription though Amazon Channels. If you access
content from these providers through another method, you will not see an
On Now row or the Channel Guide on your Fire TV. Pleaseclick hereto learn more. Happy streaming!
Social
media and digital executives in newsrooms already have a tough job
connecting their content to consumers via social media, but Facebook’s proposed changes in the algorithms of its ‘newsfeed’
are going to make it a lot harder. Social networks offer immense
opportunities for reaching vast new audiences and increasing the
engagement of users with journalism. The most important platform in the
world is about to make that more difficult.
Clearly,
this is a blow for news publishers who have spent the last decade or so
fighting a battle for survival in a world where people’s attention and
advertising have shifted to other forms of content and away from news
media brand’s own sites. They are clearly very concerned. Yet, could this be a wake-up call that will mean the better, most adaptive news brands benefit?
I’m
not going to argue that this is good news for news publishers, but
blind panic or cynical abuse of Facebook is not a sufficient response.
The honest answer is that we don’t know exactly what the effect will be
because Facebook, as usual, have not given out the detail and different
newsrooms will be impacted differently.
It’s exactly the kind of issue we are looking at in our LSE Truth, Trust and Technology Commission.
Our first consultation workshop with journalists, and related
practitioners from sectors such as the platforms, is coming up in a few
weeks. This issue matters not just for the news business. It is also
central to the quality and accessibility of vital topical information
for the public.
Here’s my first attempt to unpack some of the issues.
Mark Zuckerberg: making time on Facebook ‘well spent’
Firstly,
this is not about us (journalists). Get real. Facebook is an
advertising revenue generation machine. It is a public company that has a
duty to maximise profits for its shareholders. It seeks people’s
attention so that it can sell it to advertisers. It has a sideline in
charging people to put their content on its platform, too. It is a
social network, not a news-stand. It was set up to connect ‘friends’ not
to inform people about current affairs. Journalism, even where shared
on Facebook, is a relatively small part of its traffic.
Clearly,
as Facebook has grown it has become a vital part of the global (and
local) information infrastructure. Other digital intermediaries such as
Google are vastly important, and other networks such as Twitter are
significant. And never forget that there are some big places such as
China where other similar networks dominate, not Facebook or other
western companies. But in many countries and for many demographics,
Facebook is the Internet, and the web is increasingly where people get their journalism. It’s a mixed and shifting picture but as the Reuters Digital News Report shows, Facebook is a critical source for news.
From Reuters Digital News Report 2017
If you read Zuckerberg’s statement he makes it clear that he is trying to make Facebook a more comfortable place to be:
“recently
we’ve gotten feedback from our community that public content — posts
from businesses, brands and media — is crowding out the personal moments
that lead us to connect more with each other.”
His users are ‘telling him’ (i.e. fewer of them are spending less time on FB) what a plethora of recent studies and books
have shown which is that using Facebook can make you miserable. News
content — which is usually ‘bad’ news — doesn’t cheer people up. The
angry, aggressive and divisive comment that often accompanies news
content doesn’t help with the good vibes. And while the viral spread of
so-called ‘fake news’ proves it is popular, it also contributes to the
sense that Facebook is a place where you can’t trust the news content.
Even when it is credible, it’s often designed to alarm and disturb. Not
nice. And Facebook wants nice.
“We
can’t make money unless you keep telling us things about yourself that
we can sell to advertisers. Please stop talking about news.”
Another
accusation is that Facebook is making these changes because of the
increasing costs it is expending at the behest of governments who are
now demanding it does more to fight misinformation and offensive
content. That might be a side-benefit for Facebook but I don’t think
it’s a key factor. It might even be a good thing for credible news if
the algorithmic changes include ways of promoting reliable content. But
overall the big picture is that journalism is being de-prioritised in
favour of fluffier stuff.
Even Jeff Jarvis, the US pioneer of digital journalism who has always sought to work with the grain of the platforms, admits that this is disturbing:
“I’m
worried that news and media companies — convinced by Facebook (and in
some cases by me) to put their content on Facebook or to pivot to
video — will now see their fears about having the rug pulled out from
under them realized and they will shrink back from taking journalism to
the people where they are having their conversations because there is no
money to be made there.”*
The
Facebook changes are going to be particularly tough on news
organisations that invested heavily in the ‘pivot to video’. These are
often the ‘digital native’ news brands who don’t have the spread of
outlets for their content that ‘legacy’ news organisations enjoy. The
BBC has broadcast. The Financial Times has a newspaper. These
organisations have gone ‘digital first’ but like the Economist they have
a range of social media strategies. And many of them, like the New York
Times, have built a subscription base. Email newsletters provide an
increasingly effective by-pass for journalism to avoid the social media
honey-trap. It all makes them less dependent on ‘organic’ reach through
Facebook.
But
Facebook will remain a major destination for news organisations to
reach people. News media still needs to be part of that. As the
ever-optimistic Jarvis also points out,
if these changes mean that Facebook becomes a more civil place where
people are more engaged, then journalism designed to fit in with that
culture might thrive more:
“journalism
and news clearly do have a place on Facebook. Many people learn what’s
going on in the world in their conversations there and on the other
social platforms. So we need to look how to create conversational news.
The platforms need to help us make money that way. It’s good for
everybody, especially for citizens.”
News
organisations need to do more — not just because of Facebook but also
on other platforms. People are increasingly turning to closed networks
or channels such as Whatsapp. Again, it’s tough, but journalism needs to
find new ways to be on those. I’ve written huge amounts
over the last ten years urging news organisations to be more networked
and to take advantage of the extraordinary connective, communicative
power of platforms such as Facebook. There has been brilliant
innovations by newsrooms over that period to go online, to be social and
to design content to be discovered and shared through the new networks.
But this latest change shows how the media environment continues to
change in radical ways and so the journalism must also be reinvented.
Social media journalist Esra Dogramaci has written an excellent article
on some of the detailed tactics that newsrooms can use to connect their
content to users in the face of technological developments like
Facebook’s algorithmic change:
“if
you focus on building a relationship with your audience and developing
loyalty, it doesn’t matter what the algorithm does. Your audience will
seek you out, and return to you over and over again. That’s how you
‘beat’ Facebook.”
Journalism Must Change
The
journalism must itself change. For example, it is clear that emotion is
going to be an even bigger driver of attention on Facebook after these
changes. The best journalism will continue to be factual and objective
at its core — even when it is campaigning or personal. But as I have written before,
a new kind of subjectivity can not only reach the hearts and minds of
people on places like Facebook, but it can also build trust and
understanding.
This
latest change by Facebook is dramatic, but it is a response to what
people ‘like’. There is a massive appetite for news — and not just
because of Trump or Brexit. Demand for debate and information has never
been greater or more important in people’s everyday lives. But we have
to change the nature of journalism not just the distribution and
discovery methods.
The media landscape is shifting to match people’s real media lives in our digital age. Another less noticed announcement from Facebook
last week suggested they want to create an ecosystem for local
personalised ‘news’. Facebook will use machine learning to surface news
publisher content at a local level. It’s not clear how they will vet
those publishers but clearly this is another opportunity for newsrooms
to engage. Again, dependency on Facebook is problematic, to put it
mildly, but ignoring this development is to ignore reality. The old
model of a local newspaper for a local area doesn’t effectively match
how citizens want their local news anymore.
What Facebook Must Do
Facebook
has to pay attention to the needs of journalism and as it changes its
algorithm to reduce the amount of ‘public content’ it has to work harder
at prioritising quality news content. As the Guardian’s outstanding
digital executive Chris Moran points out, there’s no indication from
Facebook that they have factored this into the latest change:
Fighting
‘fake news’ is not just about blocking the bad stuff, it is ultimately
best achieved by supporting the good content. How you do that is not a
judgement Facebook can be expected or relied upon to do by itself. It
needs to be much more transparent and collaborative with the news
industry as it rolls out these changes in its products.
When
something like Facebook gets this important to society, like any other
public utility, it becomes in the public interest to make policy to
maximise social benefits. This is why governments around the world are
considering and even enacting legislation or regulation regarding the
platforms, like Facebook. Much of this is focused on specific issues
such as the spread of extremist or false and disruptive information.
MVP
is a great way for your app to find its early adopters, investors and
even customers. But, experience has shown that raw MVP without, at
least, tolerable UI and UX fails miserably. OK, but how much will MVP
app design cost me? Spoiler: not much. And you will be surprised with the result.
What
is the point of an MVP? To show off the core features of your app to a
target audience and investors before even starting the development. In
other words, to test the waters.
However, it doesn’t mean at all that you have to produce an ugly monster with absent UI. As one more crucial goal of MVP is to find your customers. Great UI in pair with convenient UX is your key to success.
But what is the cost of MVP app design? How much resources you have to spare on design purposes? Let’s find it out.
Preparations
To
get more or less decent design of your MVP you can’t just draw some
lines and boxes on a napkin and give it to a design company or
freelancers. Actually, you can do that, but it will cost you, and a lot.
We’ll talk about that further on. Now let’s get back to the point.
If you want to save time and, consequently, money it is a good idea to get prepared, prior meeting with a design agency. Wireframe and some mockups are pretty much everything you might need.
Moreover,
by presenting comprehensive app wireframe and mockups, you can be sure
that there won’t be any unpleasant surprises. As a hired freelancers or
guys from a contracted agency will know for sure what end-result they
are ought to provide.
Wireframe of the app
A
skeleton of your app. That is a rough, or even drawn on a napkin
(yes-yes), layout of the navigation, screens and elements in your app.
It also outlines the core features of it. And the best thing is that you
finally have a, more or less, complete idea of your app.
Sure thing, making a wireframe is more than DIY-appropriate. Tools like Bootstrap may come in handy here. The coolest part is, that almost none programming skills are required. Only basic knowledge of HTML and CSS. And, probably, some video guides. :)
With
available templates, you’ll be capable of building a rough layout
within hours. Plus it is completely free. Unless you’ll require some
advanced templates. But you can always look out for those on the other
platforms.
Needless
to say, it will help a lot for the initial pitching session. Even if
you decide to entrust all this job to an agency — some minimum wireframe
would be very helpful prior approaching them.
On the average, wireframe might take 10–30 hours in development. It might cost you nothing if you’ll do it by yourself. But if you’re going to ask an agency — $500 — $3.000 would be a fair price, depending on the complexity of the app.
Mockup of the app
Mockup
is what your customers and investors will see. It can make them fall in
love with your app or drive them away. In a nutshell, that is an
approximate final look of your app.
There is a good rule for mockup estimation. Landing page will cost you around $500. And every additional screen will, usually, cost about $50–70.
Count the number of screens you are going to have. Simply add
everything to get the total price. That is the most common practice how
companies and freelancers usually charge for their services.
But what about DIY? Of course,if you are familiar with such great tools like Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Experience Design it
won’t be a problem for you to make a simple (or brilliant, depending on
your skills) mockup. Those are the most common and handy tools. And
while Photoshop will cost you $10-$20 (depending on the plan), Experience Design is completely free.
Interactive mockup
Speaking of simple mockups, there is a great way to improve those — interactivity.
Interactive mockup
— is a good chance for you to improve client engagement. Customers or
investors would better prefer interactive solution over a static image.
One more big plus — those are easy to spread over various devices.
Tools like Framer and inVision
are your best helpers here. They work pretty much like usual app
building platforms. Take your mockups, drag-and-drop different elements,
adjust navigation and features, et voila! Now you have it.
Interactive mockups cost just a slightly more than the usual
ones. You’ll just need your usual mockups and subscription for one of
those tools. Or you can give this job to the designers you’ve hired.
Anyway, additional expenses won’t exceed $100-$500. But potential profit may be a lot bigger.
Total price
Those blessed ones, who chose DIY way, might pay from complete nothing to a few hundred bucks (subscriptions, paid content, etc.).
And those who decide to hire somebody, might receive a bill on $1000-$10.000. Price varies drastically because of:
complexity of your app
desired features
region where you hire
One more good advice. Design agencies, usually, take fixed (and pretty high) price. Freelancers or outsource companies, on the other hand, often, charge onper hour basis.
So hiring few freelancers in India for $10/hour might be a good idea
for your wallet. But is it so when it comes to the quality?
With
the introduction of OLED screens to the iPhone X, more and more people
are requesting night themes in their favourite apps to take advatage of
the true blacks on OLED screens, to save battery, and to make it easier
on the eyes in some cases. But should you add this option to your app?
Don’t confuse choice with convenience.
If
you ask any user if they’d want the option of night mode in your app,
they would say yes. As consumers we think we need more choices. It
sounds very logical. The more choices I have, the more likely I am to
choose something that suits me and makes me happy. But does more choice actually make users happier? In the TED Talk, The Art of Choosing, Sheena Iyengar explains how that might not actually be true.
Just
because users are asking for options, doesn’t mean they’re going to
start using them or that it’s the right choice for them. Depending on
the type of content that you provide to your users, a night mode might
actually hurt their engagement.
You have to ask yourself why you’re thinking about a night mode. If
you’re doing it solely to give your users options, then please, do
yourself and your users a favour and stop. There are many downsides to
having a night mode that you have to consider and be OK with before
adding it to your app.
A
night mode creates inconsistency within your app. It’s already hard
enough to keep your apps consistent with iOS and Android, and if you
have a website having that be consistent with everything too. Why would
you go out of your way to make it even more difficult for yourself?
A
night mode might reduce your users’ engagement with your app. Your
users are the reason that you have created your app. They have been
using your app and are used to it. If you have good information
architecture and user experience, they might be even using your app with
muscle memory. These users are your friends. They have already
memorized your app’s hierarchy and are using affordances and clues in
your app to navigate it fluently. Introducing a dark mode would change
all of that. Now they have to re-learn your app. Even though everything
is in the same place, they have to re-learn the affordances and clues
and repeat the process of getting used to it all over again, and this
risks alienating your users. They might see the dark mode and think
that’s a good choice for them and turn it on, but the next time they
open your app they won’t know how to navigate it and it will feel
strange. Remember when Instagram switched their UI design to the new
flat one with the new logo and everyone was running around setting
things on fire and protesting on the streets? Ok no one protested on the
streets but some users were pissed. Do you want your users to be
pissed? Looking back the re-design of Instagram was a success because it
simplified the interface to make room for new features like stories and
bookmarking photos and such. But a night mode is not a re-design.
Instead of moving your design forward, you would give it a split
personality.
Designing
a night mode for an app is no easy task either. You might think that
it’s just as easy as flipping the background and text colours, but
there’s actually a lot to consider. If there are photos in your app, are
they going to look their best in dark mode? On each given page, is the
right content being highlighted when the colours are switched? Do users’
attention still flow the same way they did in the regular mode? How
does the setting page look? Should the setting page also be switched to
dark mode? It would look very weird, wouldn’t it? what about all the
sub-pages of the settings page? how about the keyboard? Do we change it
to the dark keyboard in iOS when in night mode? If you have a black
tab-bar, should it now suddenly be white? because if it stays black then
there would be no contrast, but if you turn it white, there’s a big
bright object at the bottom getting all the attention from the rest of
the screen, and that’s not really what you want.
What
if my users have sensitive eyes and can’t handle bright lights? Or it’s
very hard for them to read balck on white due to dyslexia? Both iOS and
Android have very thorough accessibility features to accomodate the
whole experience for them. Having those settings on an app-by-app basis
would be confusing and inconsistent. There are options to reduce white
points, invert colours without inverting the photos, greyscale, adding a
tint, and options for different kinds of colour blindness built into
the system. So these don’t become an excuse for you to add a night mode
to your app.
OK. So there are many reasons why someone shouldn’t add a night mode to their app. But is there a good time to add a night mode? Yes.
It
all depends on the context — the type of content or service you are
providing your users and the context in which the users use your app.
The main complaint around the lack of night mode is prolonged reading at
night in a dark environment, mostly in bed or while in a car.
If your app is a game, then don’t bother.
If
it’s a productivity app, it’s still a very hard no as changing the
colour of the tools and the layout in an app that users depend heavily
on might confuse them. Unless you know for a fact that your users are
for some reason only using your app in bed with the lights off, then for
their sake do not add a night mode.
If
your app is related to messaging, then it’s be best to optimize for the
Smart Invert feature and let the user control the dark mode from the
accessibility section in settings if they wish.
If
your app focuses on reading, *cough* Medium *cough*, then it’s a good
idea to provide options for your users to adjust the reading environment
to their comfort. A great example of this is the Reader mode in Safari.
Reader mode in Safari allows you to change a few settings to find the most comfortable one for you.
If
your app is related to driving, like Google Maps or Podcasts, and might
stay open while a user is behind the wheel, it’s a good idea to add
automatic night mode so that it won’t distract the users while they’re
behind the wheel (can’t wait for self-driving cars).
I’ve
seen a lot of confusion and frustration from users and designers
surrounding night mode and if it should be a system-wide feature or not.
I hope this article made it a bit clearer if you should or shouldn’t
add a night mode to your app. Happy designing! ❤️
A three minute introduction into shorthand variable assignment
This article will take a (very) quick look at shorthand variable assignment in JavaScript.
Assigning Variables to Other Variables
As you’re probably aware, you can assign values to variables separately, like this:
var a = 1;
var b = 1;
var c = 1;
However, if all variables are being assigned equal values, you can shorthand and assign the variables like this:
var a = b = c = 1;
The assignment operator = in JavaScript has right-to-left associativity. This means that it works from the right of the line, to the left of the line. In this example, here is the order of operation:
1 — First, c is set to 1.
2 — Next, b is set equal to c which is already equal to 1. Therefor, b is set to 1.
3 — Finally, a is set equal to b which is already equal to 1. Therefor, a is set to 1.
As you can now see, the shorthand above results in a, b, and c all being set to 1.
However, this is not a recommended way to assign variables. That’s because in the shorthand variable assignment shown above, we actually never end up declaring variables b or c. Because of this, b and c wont be locally scoped to the current block of code. Both variables b and c will instead be globally scoped and end up polluting the global namespace.
Using Commas When Assigning Variables
Lets look at a new example. Consider the following variable declarations and assignments:
var d = 2;
var e = 3;
var f = 4;
We can shorthand this code using commas:
var d = 2, e = 3, f = 4;
As you see, we are separating each variable assignment with a comma which allows us to assign different values to each variable.
For ease of reading, most coders who prefer using the comma method will structure their variable assignments like this:
var d = 2,
e = 3,
f = 4;
Best of all, in the shorthand variable assignment shown above, we are declaring all three variables: d, e, and f. Because of this, all variables will be locally scoped and we’re able to avoid any scoping problems.
Want to Learn More Shorthands?
Check out my other articles on shorthand coding techniques in JavaScript:
This
week, the Federal Communications Commission will vote on the future of
net neutrality. Whether you’ve been following the political back and forth,
skimming the headlines, or struggling to decode acronyms, the decision
will have an impact on what we can do online (and who can afford to do
it). Because the internet has effectively been free and open since the
day it was born, it’s easy to lose sight of the impact this vote will
have.
The reality is, the internet is a fragile thing. Open, crazy, weird spaces where people swap stories and secrets, create rad digital art projects,
type furiously and freely with people seven time zones away — these
spaces are rare. People build them, people sustain them, and now, people
are trying to restrict them. If this week’s vote passes — which is
looking increasingly likely — the internet’s gatekeepers will have more
control over their gates than ever before.
Because
we live and breathe the internet, laugh and cry on the internet,
connect with people who’ve tangibly changed our lives on the internet,
we decided to gather some perspectives on this moment in time. Why it
matters, how we got here, and what the future may hold. Here are some of
the most insightful essays we’ve found on Medium to help us make sense
of the fight to keep the net wild and free.
In 1989, Tim Berners-Lee
invented the World Wide Web. Now, he’s defending it. “I want an
internet where consumers decide what succeeds online, and where ISPs
focus on providing the best connectivity,” Berners-Lee emphasizes.
Content and connectivity are two distinct markets, and they must remain
separate. Conflating them risks blocking innovation, free expression, and the kind of creativity that can only thrive online.
What’s happening now is not just about net neutrality, law professor Lawrence Lessig
argues, but about the foundations of our democracy. Tracing the history
of the concept from its origins in the aughts (one of his students, Tim Wu,
coined the term “net neutrality”), Lessig sees the rollback of
Obama-era regulations as a symptom of a larger issue: a democracy that
doesn’t serve its people.
Through statistical analysis and natural language processing, data scientist Jeff Kao
shows that millions of pro-repeal comments submitted to the FCC were
faked. Organic public comments, according to Kao’s analysis,
overwhelmingly supported preserving existing regulations. The report
calls into question the legitimacy of the FCC’s comment process, and the
basis of chairman Pai’s intention to roll back regulations.
In part one of a five-part series on net neutrality, computer scientist Tyler Elliot Bettilyon
takes us back to FDR’s New Deal. Piecing together the history of
“common carrier” laws — those that govern everything from shipping to
telephone lines — Bettilyon contextualizes today’s fight for a free and
open internet.
Social psychologist E Price
interrogates the idea that the internet we’ve grown to love is really
as “free and open” as we’d like to think. “Internet activity is already
deeply centralized,” Erika writes, and major social media sites are
today’s answer to the Big Three TV networks of a few decades ago. The
internet is closer to cable than we think, and it’s (probably) about to
get even closer.
Why should the internet be a public utility? Economist umair haque
debunks the “competition will lower prices” argument against internet
regulation, and makes a compelling case for why going online, “just like
water, energy, and sanitation,” should be a basic right: “It
dramatically elevates our quality of life, best and truest when we all
have free and equal access to it.”
Visit battleforthenet to write or call your congressperson in advance of the vote. You can also text a few words of your choice to Resistbot.
The
UI/UX case study documents the processes involved in a redesign of a
fashion retail and e-commerce app. The app includes a product scan
feature for customers to perform a self-checkout at a physical store.
This design sprint took 11-days to complete and is submitted to the UXDI
course at General Assembly, Singapore.
Project Brief
Work
in a team to identify problems and/or opportunities with an existing
mobile application and utilise your knowledge to design a solution.
For this project, my team selected the Uniqlo, Singapore app
to redesign. For this documentation, the brand name will not be
mentioned again below. The ideas below apply to most fashion retailers
with an e-commerce presence.
Overview
The 11-days group project (3 members) includes the following processes and methodologies:
#1 Discover
Background research
Contextual inquiry
User Interviews
Online surveys
Competitive analysis
Heuristic evaluation
#2 Define
Affinity mapping
User personas
Customer journey mapping
Feature prioritisation
Design studio
#3 Design
Wireframe
InVision prototype
Visual mock-up
#4 Testing
Usability testing
System Usability Scale study
#5 Deliver
Interactive prototype
Visual mock-up
Research report
Presentation
The Context — Competitive Retail Scene & Mobile Payment in Singapore
News clippings from The Straits Times and Channel NewsAsia
It is increasingly difficult for retail businesses to remain competitive in Singapore. This is due to the high rental fees to maintain a physical store and the difficulty in hiring lower-skilled sales assistants.
In addition, consumers are increasingly shopping online on platforms such as Taobao, ASOS, ZALORA for their fashion fix.
In the recent Singapore National Day Rally Speech (Aug 17), the prime minister pushes for consumers and retailers to adopt mobile payments. This will be done through initiatives such as ‘PayNow’ and a common national QR code.
Based on this setting, my team picked a retail outlet with a physical and online (mobile app) presence as our project.
Heuristic Evaluation
Screen grab from heuristic evaluation report–Consistency and Standards
First, we started by analysing the existing app to identify key problems and issues. This was compared to online reviews on Google Play and the App Store.
App reviews on Google Play and Apple App Store
The main issues discovered was the app is a hybrid app, i.e. it is pulling information from a web page. This creates potential issues:
Slow loading as most of the information is downloaded only when needed.
The experience is not catered to mobile. Fonts, buttons, and images appear too small on the mobile phone.
Navigation is inconsistent throughout the app.
Competitive Analysis
Competitive Analysis–Comparing features on the Home screen
Next, we compared the app to the competitors’ apps. The competitors are determined by these 4 points:
Fashion retailers with a physical store in Singapore;
Has an e-commerce mobile app;
Similar price range and demographics;
Fast-fashion retailer.
Key findings identified were:
Most shoppers do not know of or use the apps;
No in-store signages were found to encourage its usage;
Competitors
have a barcode scanner to provide additional product information. This
feature integrates the in-store and mobile experience;
Competitors have a significantly better app presentation as it feels less cluttered;
App approaches may be different — one is more editorial, while the other is focused on e-commerce.
The Big Questions — How Might We…
At the start of the project, we had three main questions in mind.
How might we…
adapt the physical store experience into a mobile experience?
use a mobile app to further enhance the physical store experience?
adopt mobile payment or a mobile self-checkout at a physical store?
Defining the In-store Experience
First, we define the unique experience at the physical store to adapt it to the mobile app.
Greeted with ‘Welcome to (the store)’ every time you enter the shop;
Same familiar shop layout at every outlet;
Wide open aisle, bright lights, neatly stacked shelves;
Sales and promotions throughout the year for different products each week;
Easy to find the right sizes without help from a sales assistant;
Strong visual branding from clothes tag to signages.
Contextual Inquiry/Field Study
Contextual inquiry at the physical store
We conducted a field study at an outlet by speaking to customers and shop assistants. Also, we showed the product scan feature found on our competitor’s mobile app.
What we noticed and found out:
Shoppers do not know of the app even though they frequently shop at the store.
The current app is for e-commerce only.
Shoppers will consider shopping online after knowing of the app.
Shoppers are wowed by the product scan feature
as the technology is fascinating. The same technology is already
available at a kiosk at the flagship store (in the city). Other smaller
outlets (in the neighbourhoods) did not have this kiosk, probably due to
space constraints.
The same product might be cheaper in the app as there are mobile exclusive discounts. This, although they may incur additional delivery fees ($6 for spendings < $30).
Various products are available only at the flagship store or on the mobile app.
Long queues were observed at the store during peak hours.
User Interviews
Sample interview questions grouped by topics
We
interviewed 7 users to find out what they think of the current app. The
questions we asked were centred on various touch points common to
fashion e-commerce apps. For example, we asked questions related to:
browsing for clothes,
making a purchase,
waiting for the delivery,
receiving the items,
and making returns.
Key findings from the interviews:
The
app is easy to browse, hence there are no major issues with the
navigation. The only issue is with ‘dresses’ being classified under
‘tops’.
Frustration comes from the lack of filtering and a complicated check-out process.
The app lacks clarity in the delivery options and fees.
The app presentation is messy.
Affinity Mapping
Existing App User
Shopper–Potential App User
After conducting user interviews and contextual inquiry, the next step we did was to organise the insights into groups
in an Affinity Map. With this map, we could identify common habits,
problems, and pain points. The map also helped us to identify 2 key
personas (elaborated below) where the same coloured post-its are usually grouped together. Eg. Red and pale blue posts-its are existing users.
User Personas and Customer Journey Map
Based
on the patterns identified in the affinity map, we came out with 2
personas — an existing user of the app, and a current shopper who is a
potential user of the app. These personas describe a typical
user/potential user, their habits, problems, pain points, and other
details about him/her.
Persona 1 — Existing user of the app
User Persona–Existing user of the app
Customer Journey Map–Shopping on the App
Katie
prefers to shop online and is an existing user of the app. She wants
quick access to all the discounts and finds it difficult to find the
size and availability of the items she wants. While she is familiar and
comfortable using the app, she hopes the user experience can be
improved.
Persona 2 — Existing shopper and potential user of the app
User Persona–Shopper at physical store/Potential user of app
Customer Journey Map–Shopping at a physical store
Natalie
shops at the physical store and is not aware of the existing app. While
she enjoys shopping at the store, there are often long queues at the
payment counter. She may be a potential user of the app since she uses
other e-commerce apps to shop for clothes.
Potential project approaches:
The redesign should not affect current users of the app. Navigation should be kept similar to the existing app and website.
New features can be added to the app for current shoppers to use it in-store.
Users should be able to access ‘Promotions’ quickly since it is a major feature of the brand.
Increase awareness of the app through in-store posters and other marketing efforts.
Feature Prioritisation Matrix
Feature Prioritisation Matrix–User Needs vs Business Needs
57% of users surveyed rated a 4 or more, that is important to have a self-checkout counter in-store
Through a design studio process, we came up with various new features we intend to include in the new app. To come out with a Minimal Viable Product (MVP, or Minimal Lovable Product, MLP)
we conducted an online survey to find out what users want on the app.
We looked at the features from the business perspective and organised
them according to our user and business needs. Features at the top right corner (the box in red) are the ones that should be included in the new version of the app.
Storyboards
The new features are illustrated in storyboards, detailing the environment, scenario, and context where the app may be used.
Storyboard by Parul–Receiving a push-notification when user is near the store
Storyboard by Parul–Using the barcode scan and self-checkout function
Mid-Fi Prototype & First Usability Test
Mid-Fidelity Prototype by Parul
Since
my team comprises two visual designers (myself included), we skipped to
a mid-fidelity prototype after doing quick sketches. Visuals of the
clothing may be important in helping users visualise the actual app.
The
version was used for testing with actual customers on our second trip
to the store. The purpose of the test is to determine if customers are
receptive to the new scanning and self-checkout feature.
Key findings from the usability test:
Customers are able to identify the scan feature and its uses.
Most customers are able to expect what will appear after scanning the product.
However, they questioned the need to know more product information when they have the physical item on hand.
Customers will use the self-checkout ‘only when there is a queue’. This is to be expected since most Singaporeans are more comfortable making payment by cash at a counter.
However,
most highlighted there they are slowly accepting mobile payments and
self-checkout systems as part of the future retail experience.
The wishlist feature was removed subsequently as users do not require the function.
Hi-Fi Prototype
From
the usability test, we iterated a high fidelity prototype. The branding
was also enhanced in the design by using the right fonts and colours.
The interactive prototype can be viewed on InVision.
We created a video to show the new scan feature on the app since it was impossible to prototype the actual feature.
App Scan Feature Prototype Demo
Delivery Target Bar
Another
feature on the app is an animated target bar for free delivery. This
will encourage users to spend more to meet the target while providing
greater clarity to the users.
Animated delivery target bar
Geo-Fencing Push Notification
Users
will receive a mobile coupon through push notification when their GPS
indicates that they are near a store outlet. This will encourage them to
use the app for self-checkout.
Receiving a mobile voucher through push notification when user is near an outlet
Usability Testing
Tasks assigned for usability tests
Participants
were given 4 tasks to complete. Task 1 was conducted on both the
existing app and the new app. The clicks for 3 of the tasks were
illustrated below.
Where did the users click?
Time taken by user to find a dress on the current and new app
To collect quantitative data, we timed users on how fast they took to complete the task on the existing app and new app. The new design allows the user to complete the task more efficiently.
Quantitative Data from System Usability Scale(SUS)
In
addition, we conducted a post-test survey to collect feedback from the
participants on their views of the new app. This was done with the System Usability Scale(SUS) test. The results were tabulated and calculated based on the method specified by the standardised test.
Results from system usability scale test:
Users rated 69/100 (marginal) on their opinion of the new app.
Although this is below the acceptable score (>70), it was not a bad score.
The marginal score was due to the difficulty in performing task 4 (i.e. performing a self-checkout).
Designing a self-checkout is a challenging task due to the lack of existing models to follow. Users need time to learn and accept self-checkout methods.
Design Iteration — Improving the User Flow
After the usability test, we discovered that users were confused by the product detail page after scanning the barcode. They assumed that the item was already added to the cart after the scan.
Scanning Products
Revising the user flow to provide more feedback
Providing feedback to guide users in completing their task
We made the process more informative for users by providing feedback on what is happening.
First, we prompt users if they want to add the item to the bag after
scanning the barcode. Next, we gave them the option to continue scanning
or proceed to the shopping bag. This provides more clarity to the user as they are provided with options to proceed to the next step.
Self-Checkout
Revising the self-checkout user flow to provide more instructions
This
is a case where a simpler user flow, may actually cause greater
confusion to the user. With more steps inserted, users are more
confident in performing tasks.
Providing instructions on what to do after self-checkout payment
The revised self-checkout user flow may seem a lot more complicated, but provides greater clarity to users. This is because instructions are given to them to proceed to the Express Packing Counter to get their items packed, and the security tags removed. Without these instructions, users were unsure what to do after making a payment.
Promoting the App Usage
Through
our app redesign, we created opportunities where users can use the app
within the physical store. Hence, to encourage the usage, this should be
accompanied by various promotional materials around the stores.
Clothes Tag and InStore Posters
For
example, the clothes tag can include a line to inform users that they
can scan and perform a self-checkout with the app. This can also be
included in the signages found throughout the store.
Express Packing Counter for self-checkout users
As
users have to get their items packed and security sensors removed, we
propose setting up an Express Packing Counter lanes that will be quicker
in serving these customers. This will help to bring about a greater
awareness of the app.
Future Steps
In the short term:
We propose to include features that will help users to find what they need. For example, we can include an image search feature so that users can find a similar style.
Personalised feed for signed in users based on gender and body size to suggest the right style and promotions.
In the long term:
Align the current website with the new app after collecting user feedback for the new app.
Rearrange products in the navigation based on knowledge of future product inventory.
Points to Note
The design of the app in the InVision prototype does not follow the guidelines listed in the iOS Human Interface Guidelines. This was due to my unfamiliarity with iPhone app design. After studying the guide, I redesigned the app to match the style specified for iPhone 7.
The main difference is in the system font choice (SF Pro Display) and in the navigation labels. This is to ensure consistency throughout the iPhone.
Revising the navigation to match Apple iOS Human Interface Guidelines
Special thanks to:
Team mates, Parul Shukla & Cheryl Lee, Instructor, Nie Zhen Zhi, and Teaching Assistant, Wilson Chew
Hardik Gandhi is Master of Computer science,blogger,developer,SEO provider,Motivator and writes a Gujarati and Programming books and Advicer of career and all type of guidance.
