Microwaves and user interfaces
At Skype, we do a lot of usability work. We want to make sure that Skype is easy to use for geeks as well as computer novices. The real art is trimming things down, eliminating the number of options and mouse clicks or key presses until you get to a minimum. The simpler it looks, the harder it is to get there. We’re nowhere near done yet.
We keep seeing real-life examples of why this work is important. We’ve one sitting right in our Tallinn office kitchen: the microwave. It doesn’t have anything to do with computers or Skype, but it has everything to do with making things easy to use.
]]>So the basic idea of a microwave oven is to warm/cook your food. There are two main variables that control its behavior: 1) how much power is applied, 2) duration of cooking.
[This is what microwaves used to be like in the old days.](http://www.flickr.com/photos/xput/9538171/) (I honestly don’t know what’s with the green thing. Don’t do this at home. I was just looking for a random oldschool microwave picture.) So on the righthand control panel you got two large dials — one for power, the other for time. At any given time, you can review the setting of both just by glancing at them. If you turn the time dial, the cooking starts and the time goes backwards until it reaches zero again, and then the oven goes KLINNNNG and you can take your dogfood out. Nice. Handy. Usable.
Now enter the second (third, fourth… whatever) generation of microwave ovens. This is what the control panel of our kitchen one looks like.
I’m sure the engineering and marketing folks behind this design had purely good intentions. They must have gone like “hmmm… let’s give the user the power to memorize the cooking settings! They must beg for programming presets into their systems. Hey, let’s even give them the power to program their system with one-second precision, because surely some gourmet freak will figure out that they want their chicken cooked exactly for 2 minutes and 38 seconds at 62% power. Heck, let’s even have factory presets for different types of food because the flyspeck print looks so nice on the control panel, nevermind that the oven functions pretty much the same anyway and it’s zero obvious how to switch between them.”
So they made a product, shipped it, sold it and it landed in our kitchen.
Act 2. A new Skype staff member approaches the microwave and goes “ok now… how do I cook my food?” Remember the oldskool control panel? You set the power dial and turn the time dial to start cooking. Here, you have to approach it with advanced fuzzy logic. You try to use the same logic as previously, try to set time by pressing the “minutes” button. Nothing happens. So you think “ok… maybe it just starts to work when I press Start, and I can add minutes during the time it works?” So you press Start. Nothing happens. So you think “I have to set the power first just like the old days?” And you press Power. Nothing happens.
This is just about as bad as it can get in the human-machine interaction flow. You’ve just made the user feel utterly stupid and overwhelmed by the machine. They cannot figure it out on their own. (Really… the only way you can operate this thing is you get someone more senior to walk you through it. How the first one did it, I have no idea. Maybe she read the manual?) Mind you, we have some of the smartest people on the planet with us. And when you end up smart people feeling stupid because they can’t operate the machine, something has gone seriously wrong.
The correct sequence to operate the high-tech microwave is:
1. press “Micro” to switch it into microwave mode (well… it’s a microwave, so what other modes can it have in the first place?)
1. press “Power” to cycle through the digits 100, 80, 60, 40, 20 on the display. Apparently, this is cooking power in percent. The unit is never shown, so you have no idea what the REAL power is (usually measured in units of Watts in case of microwaves).
1. press “Minutes” and “Seconds” to set the cooking time.
1. press “Start” to finally start the real cooking. (The display starts timer countdown. You have zero feedback about what’s the current power setting. There are some weird small icons on the display, some of them look like they matter, but they’re quite unobvious.)
There are many lessons here. A major one is that you don’t want your user to think unless it’s absolutely necessary. And you certainly don’t want him or her end up overwhelmed by the machine and feeling stupid.
So this is the mode of thinking we apply when designing and evaluating user interactions. It mostly seems to have paid off. Many users have said they like Skype because of things it has NOT done, rather than for the features it has. We often engage in heated discussions over whether a feature, button or option is really necessary. We welcome input about ideas and new ways to make user’s life easier, but reserve the right to dismiss them. [Here's an example.](http://forum.skype.com/viewtopic.php?t=28457) Switching the audio device from Skype main view sounds like a neat idea for those who need it, but the vast majority of Skype users have only one device connected. To them, the option would be confusing, since we’d force them to think what it is and whether they have to do something about it. There are obviously always extra considerations, like you could only have this selection when more than device is detected or what not, but the moral again is that it makes sense to think ahead twice before coding away, because doing things properly in the first place is much less costly than redoing three times. (Which we often do too if it’s worth it.)
The logic resonates. [Neville](http://www.nevon.net/nevon/2005/06/too_much_of_a_g.html) refers to Kathy Sierra’s [post on featuritis](http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2005/06/featuritis_vs_t.html) that effectively says the same thing as above — don’t overachieve with features. So we at Skype also try not to.
Reducing Cognitive Burden. A worthy constraint.
How many copies of “Don’t Make Me Think” are on your bookshelves?
Very good. I wish Microsoft had the same principle. Just take one look at how to create home network with just 2 computers and you’ll see what a shame it is. Plus their multiple, multiple menu structure that leads you to a back country road going “where am I?” Oh well, I could go on.
Great philosophy. KISS. Keep it simple stupid (or something like that). But keep it good.
Jaanus, you can actually skip step 2 so it gets slightly easier/faster but absolutley true about new Skypers and puzzlement on their first encounter with this shiny oven. We should add operating instructions to our New Employees Guide
Curiously there is another piece of machinery in our downstairs kitchen, which is a pet item for many of us, here at Skype. It represents everything that software should NOT make you do!
It is in a league of its own, but for very different reasons than the microwave. At some time it deserves an article of its own, to illustrate what we do and do not believe in at Skype.
I agree the microwaves story , I agree with all , if you remember I’m one of the one say no Video until the Audio system it’s perfect .
I fully agree I love skype cuz it’s simple . Personally I would like to see use some of the best GUI from mobile telephone like SE or Nokia .
I’m also afraid to see the option panel came time after time full of option , I will personally like to have much features with out have to cliking around .
Why not making just a simple right click on the Call windows during the call to select the audio devices ?
The best , and I know will come , it’s full support for bluetooth , some thing like the Mobile phones, with control via Voice commands and auto connect if a incoming call arrived .
Bye
I wish all that usability work had actually resulted in a MacOS-version capable of being controlled by Applescript…
Yesterday I had hours of fun finding lots of different ways that one could make Skype crasch by trying to make it do “complicated” things like setting the userstatus. =(
I’ve never tought about it, but Skype really has a very interesting and intuitive visual! The colors are also cool and quite funny!
I like the way it works and busts the phone companies!
Bye from Brazil.
It’s interesting to observe “feature creep” in the evolution of search engines: Google, famous for the simplicity of its home page, versus Amazon’s latest initiative A9.com, which has a bewildering array of options from which to choose before you begin.
Clearly, there are still people around who haven’t heard that “less is more” !
Kevin – there’s been some of that feature creep in Google as well. Just compare their today’s page with that from 1999 http://web.archive.org/web/19990427094925/http://www.google.com/
Gidday All fello skypies, this is just fantastic how skype keeps growing & being so much more of a simple tool to use. I must admit I am a [geek] with computers, & am learning so much with skype & if I dont understand something I just ring someone on skype & put a posting on the forums. Its just fantastic, The best part is its free. I just cant thank the staff here enough for all your effort that never ceases. So wishing you all a great day with loads of love & fun Jetta
I would like to market Skype by Non-E-commerce methods in Kenya.
Also SKYPE would do more better it it has the feed back of locally prevailing international telephony cost.
For e.g. I can see calling India from Kenya using SKYPE is cheaper but calling Dubai is expensive
K V Bhatt
My comment is not about the aarticle. It is about communication with you skype people. I have problem getting to pay you for Skypeout and cannot get anyone to help. I get all kind of electrinic advise, nothing that is of any use. Do you want new paying clients or not?
Appreciate reply to my email.
Thank you
varin555
So there is more to Estonia than delicious women and cheap vodka! (This is not a complaint, btw)
I want to design a “Phone over Skype Gateway”, which is an embeded device to replace PC skype. User can call any one in the world with a number they assigned to. I want to get the data format for skype API.
I highlighted a number of issues with the usability of Skype on the suggestion forum here: http://forum.skype.com/viewtopic.php?t=30132
i don’t speak english, I speak portuguese
not about this article but
i had great expectations of saving call costs for my business but as always you get nout for nout. yes the technology works well but most of my outgoing calls are to mobiles these days not landlines No money to be saved here then!!. Out of the millions of skype users I have only one skype contact. No money to be saved here either, Its just not worth the trouble at this rate I do not even have any relatives in Australia who I could sell the idea to. who is using all those phones to make free!!! calls
assalamo alaykom
COOL!!!
oh not so good Its mostly for marreying and relationship and kissing and BLAH BLAH BLAH!!!
pretty good