The MossyBlog Times Archives 2007 - 2009 : Next Generation RIA

What if you could combine RIA with tomorrows multi touch innovation

scbarnes — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 06:42:26 GMT

I was mucking about in YouTube today (smacks for me and not doing work) and I came across a project being built at MIT. This project allows folks to draw a physics based diagram which then comes to life on what appears to be a homemade (MIT style) "Smart Board".

Watch the YouTube video below to see how it happens.

I then also came across another video (next in the play list) where a teacher was instructing his students on various laws around what appears to be electronic circuits (I could barely keep up with it - I'm dumb though). I thought to myself what a great contrast the two illustrate.

I say this as when you watch the teacher instruct the students on the lesson, he is using chalk to outline various points in his lecture. In that he'd use arrows to illustrate the flow of a current in a electric circuit. He'd also then add variables to the equation which would in return produce different results.

What if he used a similar technology as the one produced by MIT? What if he was able to draw his electronic circuit in a way that visually came to life, allowing the slow ones (like me) to suddenly see how it's all coming together.

How does RIA play a role you maybe asking (well you are now)?

It gets better, as the picture below indicates; the teacher has just run out of room on his blackboard. Thankfully he has cascading boards which he then makes use of, but what if he continues to grow and grow and needs more room as he decomposes the situation further.

How does the students keep track or have the ability to refer to previous "boards"?

What if that person was to have a device, one that uses some of the RIA technology of today? What if they were able to communicate with the friend next to them - silently - with a Live messenger style query "..I have no idea wtf this means, show me.." their study friend could then overlay some drawing(s) etc on top and since he/she may know their friends learning habits find a better way to illustrate the lesson in terms that the friend understands.

RIA is a concept; it's not really a Flash, Silverlight, WPF or any one thing. It's merely a place in time where technology is able to aggregate data and present in different ways that reduces a footprint on any one person’s nominated platform. A friend once said, "Aggregated View of Disparate Systems".

We at Microsoft are building a UX Platform that is looking to keep these concepts all in perspective and that's essentially what a Platform is all about. Providing a foundation for tomorrows innovation.

In this case, take all of the above technology and look at how it could fit into tomorrow’s learning institutes. Who knows our ramp up to learning a topic maybe shorter?

I once had a great debate with Frank Arrigo's replacement, man at the helm Roger Lawrence about technology makes us smarter. I thought it did, but Roger put it to me that we aren't smarter but technology does help ramp up faster than normal. Our intelligence doesn't grow, simply our understanding.

I love this industry.

Putting the Rich in RIA : User Account Profiles.

scbarnes — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 12:58:25 GMT

A User Account Today.

Typically when you set out to build a RIA, you look at what data you're about to keep about a persons account. In that obviously "Username, Password and Email" are three key pieces of information you need to begin. The rest is the other metadata associated to an account, and in CRM's you'd go deeper in terms of phone numbers etc.

The data is up to you and I'd never dictate what you should and shouldn't capture. What I am focused on is how you present that data, in that how "Rich" do you want the experience to be in terms of presenting what is probably the most boring data in a RIA.

I'd wager majority use Tabs + Forms and basically categories this into neat portions that are close to being semantically correct (in terms of which heading they fall under - look into information architecture).

Context is what though?

What's the context of having a person(s) username & password in a form along side their other information? Isn't this more of a security thing vs a personal bio? What if you're profiling your accounts based on experience they've had with you as well? where do you put that data?

Point is, suddenly your tabbed approach starts to get bogged down and the next thing you know it, you're facing a comprehensive set of tabs (stacked ontop of one another most likely) and the form probably grows in metrics - width/height to accommodate).

Let's put the Rich back into RIA.

Well, I'd now argue that if you're using some of the new RIA technologies, why the heck are you using Tabs? In that, you've got the ability to go beyond a form now, in that the technology is a blank canvas and the experience is up to your imagination (alongside some basic Usability Principals).

That's the key, why present a form which after traversing through a grid presents you with more then you bargained for. Why drop the experience there, why not approach it differently - radically if you will.

Step away from the Tabs as you know it..

In the blow example I did something trivial, I took all these pieces of a users profile and applied them in a format that is well similar to a Mobile Phone.

The reason I did this is what's the best device on the planet at the moment that has almost figured out how to cram a lot of data into a small portion (screen). In that assign "icons" to represent what the tabs would typically do, but also do so that it's broken into piece meal format(s). Let the user then decide which part of a users detail they want to drill into.

That's all well in good, but where is the Form?

So once the "Profile PDA" (if you will) has been conjured up, how does the end user get into the form?

Well, this is where your imagination needs to do it's job. In that take the above example, it states that I've selected the "User Profile" card, which in this case means "this is the users contact profile" so the form could then spring out (overlay the top of grid style layout) and present the persons details in a similar looking "Contact Card". (Sorry still working on the artwork for that).

Point is, you've just isolated the overall account metadata into one small piece, once clicked it expands into a richer experience (I assume your next step will be rich!). The experience is the motivator here, in that let's make this form almost feel like some GUI found within games, like you've hacked into some year 2055 future looking CRM - have fun with the data but be serious with it, as it's business still.

What are your users thinking?

I hinted in an article before that when you build your RIA's you should think about monitoring the users interaction with it. In that in the above GUI you will note a "smiley speech bubble icon". This is basically an idea whereby when a user logs into the system, they not only get asked their Username & Password but also "how you feeling right now?".

Based on their answer, the Profile PDA adjusts it's UI to suite. This will then empower the owner of the RIA system to get an understanding of the emotional state of their users (why isn't important, it serves this example so stop asking questions).

let's assume when I logged in today, I nominated my emotion as angry. This then updates a row in a database (simple flag) and the UI reacts to my emotional state (in that what if the outer GUI would reflect on colours that would help cheer me up or does something that makes me laugh? - maybe a joke in a newsticker or a funny youtube overlay).

Emotions are for weaklings, I love Vista how does this matter?

Well, as you'll note in the Profile PDA next to the "Scott Barnes" part, there is also a "Vista Zealot" icon (I got these from an icon set called "Forum Faces"). In my RIA I'm curious to know what type of breed my profiles are? in that what do their peers think of them and again, can the User Interface react to suite this (advertising could suite more towards Vista compatible software instead of BeOS hehe). If the account in question was a Mac fanboi etc you could also insert an icon that represents this.. etc etc..

Conclusion.

The objective of this post was to trigger thought, in that you are armed with some of the greatest, most agile and excited technology to build with and the first thing we typically see in most RIA's is a typical "form" mentality and I often ponder on this. I can see it's easier to ship, and well I don't fault that at all. It just irritates me the most though, as I think user experience isn't just about pre-defined design patterns, it has more potential and the objective I'd like to see tomorrow's RIA have is that they react to context.

I want software to react to me for a change, I want to be able to punish and reward my software and lastly I want it to be something that can adjust my mood and that of the work force.

Software isn't just about balancing general ledgers, it can also be about fun and just because you're building a complex financial system doesn't mean it also can't be fun at the same time.

Think about it, why does the Friday emails get sent around in email about some funny random act that happened around the world. It helps break the day up a little and that's my hope for RIA.

Q.What's that RIA you're building Scott?

I've got this idea for a RIA Platform, it's something I've been very slowly chipping away at for the past 2 years. It's being built in Microsoft technology (was built in Adobe Flex), and I'll expand more another day, as I'm not ready to talk about it just yet (it's my personal project that I hope to release before I grow old and retire heh).

(I'm also thinking of ways to one day pitch it internally to become a Microsoft Product.. i have but a dream..)

Usage Metrics in your RIA

scbarnes — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:00:01 GMT

Inspiration comes from Games.

I was at MIX ON CAMPUS (Brisbane) today and I was listening to one of our guest speakers (Ross Brown) talk about about some of the projects / research his students are doing with regards to games. One part of this session that really caught my interest was the metrics associated around the usage of games and how one is able to pinpoint events / ripple effects associated to game design.

An example was around how in a game like WoW, where a druid suddenly picks a fight with other characters, what would be the ripple effect of this event occurring. Using a tracking graph, one is able to pinpoint when the druid attacked and one furthermore is able to determine if the druid is now to powerful or not powerful enough, thus restoring balance back to the game.

Games are RIA's but have different content.

When you factor in a game like World of Warcraft vs Hotmail, what are the differences (other then the obvious context). In that in its primitive state, HumanA logs into ServiceA, HumanA interacts with ServiceA using various features within ServiceA. HumanB does the same as HumanA, only they use it differently (maybe left handed mouse etc).

If you're not tracking this, then how do you know what's really going on behind the scenes? Where are the usage bottle necks and how do you ensure that User Experience Architect that you forked out a small fortune for isn't just some crack pot fortune teller after all?

The only real way is to validate your usage. In that look at ways in which you not only monitor the structure of your user interface but log various events within it. This in turn provides valuable data in which you can later aggregate and analyze to determine what the next features will look like or more to the point which features constantly get overlooked or never used.

This isn't new, don't get me wrong and the idea has been around for quite some time. A lot of folks do do this in fact one local guy within my area and resident WPF Guru has done this many moons ago (Joseph Cooney). He was measuring various data points to determine what his consumers of his application (Thoughtex) were up to.

We also see hints of this in mainstream auto-mated bug reporting found within all Operating Systems ("Do you want to send a report back to Microsoft") etc.

Yet, we need to do more .. much more, especially in the RIA space as this will help underpin/elevate RIA perception further.

Reward them.

Once you figure out what you want to measure and why, and it can be anything just so long as it doesn't impact on performance. Yet, be careful at the same time.

For instance, I floated the idea of XBOX Achievement style concepts past our Hotmail folks internally (ie wouldn't it be great to have more areas of Hotmail open up with the more you use it? reward the power users if you will). They loved the idea and took it onboard, but they have reservations.

I thought "Why.. why on earth would you not act!"... simply put, privacy.

Can you imagine the fall out if we secretly monitored not only your behavior with Hotmail but all our software? In that whilst we have positive intentions in mind, at the end of the day this is still a privacy thing and it would be a delicate balance to strike.

The intent though is there, figure out a way to reward your power users and not so much your lesser users. As you in theory stand a better chance of driving User Satisfaction that much higher.

RIA is primed for this.

This is something RIA can do today, as majority of the time RIA solutions have to constantly talk back and forth between servers. Usually the outbound call is simply a case of "getXXX()" which is small in size and usually the returned response is where the hurt kicks in. So why waste that call and why not send some extra metadata down the pipe to record this information for later use.

RIA is primed for this kind of thinking as the technology itself is agile enough to cope with this, and more to the point has enough technological prowess in the room to do some smart overlays with that said data (in that you could heatmap areas of interest within your GUI).

This to me is where analytics in the future should head, it's providing a service that RIA Producers can tap into and relate such information back to their chosen solution. Not only that, it also helps determine performance spikes, as after all you're exposing a desktop like experience to the entire web, much like most mainstream games do today.

What impact does this have and how can you correlate your UX against your server logs in the event of a crash?

If anyone needs me, I'll be talking to the Live.com guys about this and seeing where I can take some of my ideas around this further.

Understand, RIA isn't about just putting a presentation tier ontop of disparate systems, it's also about ensuring it fits snugly within an entire platform and what impacts it can and can't have.

RIA, just who really builds them.

scbarnes — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:31:00 GMT

In Microsoft we have a few bets on whom are the likely candidates who build RIA (Rich Interactive Applications) and what stimulates this behavior. It's a fluid demographic to pin down to be honest as typically speaking it's so new and foreign in many ways that it's likely to change radically tomorrow.

I say this as I honestly think the software industry is about to radically evolve, in that think if you will a Zebra changing it's stripes to circles - that's how radical we are going to get. It's now important that we grow and nurture these types of RIA producers, the one's whom are likely to be the thought leaders in this space.

Here's my take on whom they are likely to be and what really stimulates them into being the...

Next Generation RIA Producers.

User Experience Developers

Typically this person is someone whom is still investigating, has a fairly solid development background and understands the basics of User Experience. One could argue they are likely candidates for becoming more mature Software Architects, but overall they are more interested in producing an interactive application rather then a detailed end to end business grade solution. In that, it's not just about solving the business related issues, it's also about ensuring sensory engagement is fulfilled.

These folks are rare, in fact next to impossible to find. They have spent years practicing their art, sometimes under the guise of graphic designer - other times - as web developers. They'd typically code in simplified server-side languages, such as Php, Coldfusion, ASP.NET, RoR, CGI, Perl and so on whilst have the capability to go quite deep with these languages should they choose.

They also understand the concept of Design Patterns and probably even own the Gang of Four's book at some point (they may even know Martin Fowler's name on sight).

They are rare and usually cannot deliver on projects as they aren't detailed developers or designers, but rather more of a Program Manager.

Prototyper

These folks are almost at the stage of upgrading into a RIA Developer, but still prefer a hands-on creative control. They are usually chaotic in thought, yet usually have a unique personality (fashion choice, car selection, behavior - usually regarded as immature). They are really great at thinking through an interactive problem and usually draw inspiration from others, rarely innovate on their own - yet - when they do it's actually quite unique. These folks typically can eyeball a concept, decompose it in their minds and reproduce it from end to end. They are easily a hands on developer and designer, in that they can do both but prefer to lean towards the design portion of the brain.

They produce a lot of isolated pieces, in that before they commit something to the composite project, they are likely to produce a "ball bouncing around the screen" and it's usually to road test a theory before they commit to producing it as part of an application.

Puzzler

I separated these types of folks from the Prototyper, as there is a level of difference between the two. They share a commonality that is similar, yet they are more focused on producing the graphical interface itself then actually seeing the behaviors attached to the GUI. They think in terms of shapes, in that they can look at a rectangle, shave the corners off so they are rounded, apply a gradient fill, take out a pencil brush and begin to carve depth into the GUI.

They can foresee the expected GUI's behavior in that "when you click this button, I expect this draw to fly out" yet, are more interested in designing the concept then working on executing the concept. They are also unique in personality, and have a similar "quirkiness" to their thinking, some would say "passionate" others would say "arty". Overall something about them usually always sticks out.

They have a strong artistic background, and are likely to branch out in their artwork in other areas, in that they typically crave a different style each time. Today it could be a Pixel-Art Interface, tomorrow it could be a vector art based approach whilst the next following year don't be surprised if they are mixed in with 3D.

They see a (UI) User Interface as being one big puzzle to present to the user, in that they want the user to typically discover elements of the GUI but are acutely aware not to make the UI complex.

Colorist

Much like the Puzzler, same breed if you will but typically they aren't really focused to heavily on conjuring up a puzzle. They prefer to simply make the UI look both visually appealing and are happy that a basic emotion is derived from looking at it vs. interacting with it. These folks for example have typically come from a CSS Design background, in they are used to the browser / page paradigm and find RIA overall a lot of unnecessary work at times.

They are typically exceptional in their artwork, and are quite capable of going beyond Puzzler in most cases but are more likely to be focused on design specifics rather then interaction. They are conscious of interaction but again, it's not a constant focus in their mind and usually aren't aware of this at the time. They have limited development background and aren't likely to investigate down that path.

They can however animate and find it enjoyable to do so, and will usually compensate a lot of their interactive work with animation.

These folks are at times strong believers in standardization and usually have their house in order in terms of how things should look, assembled and produced. Theme's usually are something they produce and typically sit with a style for quite some time.

Conclusion

Overall these are I guess four elements of a RIA Producer that I've kind of settled on through observation over the years. I can think of so many people in my past, simply by re-reading this post and can easily separate them from one another into these style of role(s).

I need to be clear, these roles are easily mutated together at times as that's the scary part of what RIA can do. It can take a "developer" of old, someone whom has never looked at RIA and suddenly within a year spit out a RIA Producer. This is what I mean by an evolution as the tools are becoming very smart and when you teach someone how to do a specific style, animation, a way of reproducing interaction through mathematics and so on.. they in turn push themselves and the project they are working on further.

This for me is kind of what I mean by being in the middle of both "designer and developer", it's hard to allocate a spot for them as they are still trying to evolve and as each new RIA platform arises, different behaviors begin to form and choices are made.

There is a demon amongst them all though, I'd typically call them the "Zealot" or "Fanboi", watch out for these as they pick on technology and will refuse point blank to change. They aren't open to change and are usually forced into it via Project or Career prospects. We all hate change, but with these folks it's an absolute battle every step of the way.

RIA is an evolutionary response to pushing the software market today to an alternative approach to solving business related solutions. It can also begin a new path of entertainment but usually it's purpose built to produce a point of difference in solving or innovating a business process of some kind.

I love RIA.