Don’t Ask E.T.

Screw Tufte as he’s obviously an arrogant academic. How his books can be any good is anyone’s guess.

I agree with the decision to remove the small caps, they did not seem ‘right’ to me.

Dylan: Like I said: I am happy about every comment. The more critical the better. As long as I can spot the argument. Sometimes it’s hard time to find something to learn, when people just insult you. Being familiar with user testing I can take a lot of criticism and often spot the real problem behind the criticism.

The first comment on the 95% article was “* you, ********, your font is too small!!!” so at first I thought: “**** yourself, 12px is standard, bigger than many others. I’ll stick to it”

Another guy complained that I override his favorite font size (actually that only happens in Explorer 6, but that’s 75%), so I decided to go for the usability-size (100%) instead of defining it.

It’s difficult to create a nice layout with 100%, but I think I managed to get there. And now I really enjoy it. I also made my layout resizable due to user comments. I was aware of the issues before as I am in this business for many years, but getting hundreds of professionals’ input really made clear what I needed to do. I was aware of the caps, but not quite sure what to do. Others have commented on them before.

Comments also helped me improving my argument, my writing style and tracking down typos. Typos, that my German eyes just wouldn’t see. It’s not that I don’t know the difference between its and it’s, but often I just can’t spot the mistake.

David Davies from GIM was so kind to correct some of my texts for free. But I haven’t had the time to follow up on all the mistakes (client work is more important than spelling mistakes on my blog). I am planning to work with David in the future. So far I just didn’t have enough readers to invest any money in checking my blog texts.

Of course reading Tufte’s comment raised my blood pressure, but me and teachers go way back when it comes to fights. Getting this teacher attitude at 35, doing webdesign for almost 10 years now, I though: Let me tell now you what I think about this attitude, now that I know how it feels to be a teacher myself (I earned my bread as a rhetoric and informatics teacher during University).

I was sure he’d agree with my main argument, as he keeps on repeating that it is the content that makes a website - while I say you have to shape the content so it’s easy to read. And that’s information design, as I understand it. What is there to disagree? That information design is typography is a bold statement, but reading my text it and considering my sources it becomes very clear why. I still tried to get the best out of his harsh smack down.

Reflecting on what he said, and actually looking more critically at his website, I slowly got into a mode of slight amusement. If he reads this (which I doubt), I hope he has enough humor to understand that. If he heard my Swiss German accent between the lines he’d have to be made of ice to not smile.

If he really believes that good designs don’t need to be user tested, I am afraid he’s not very open to what I just said. I am sure that I will have enough humor to deal with that as well. Of course I get enough positive reactions to help me in such difficult times. ; )

I’m a big fan of your site, and your writing. The main thing I’d say as a bit of user-testing feedback is that it is not obvious where the article ends and the “meta” stuff begins. The “More about this note” header doesn’t really trigger my brain into thinking “okay, that the end of the article”. Probably because it is the same size and color as the font you use for major sub-headings within the article.

But that’s a minor niggle. I only found your site a couple of weeks ago (via a reference to your now-infamous typography article) and was instantly impressed by it. BTW, I’m a programmer, not a designer, by trade, in case that makes any difference to the validity of my opinion.

Also, it never occured to me that you are not a native English speaker. I am, and your grammar seems at least as good as, if not better, than a lot of blogs I see from native English speakers.

Obviously your Typography article was meant to be contraversial. That’s the beauty of blogs - people can post opinion pieces and spark debate. The fact that Professor Tufte has contributed to that debate with his own opinion just shows the power and reach of the internet.

I know that Tufte is held amongst designers as a bit of a god when it comes to presentation. I even have a copy of the “Visual Display…” book but after several forays into it I never really got much from it. Perhaps that’s down to my not being a designer again. It seemed to me that he had one point to make and just kept coming up with examples he didn’t like to re-inforce it. But my opinion of the book is not the point. I really cannot agree when he says that user-testing is unnecessary. Not because I think that user-testing specifically is a good thing (though I do) but because after 40 years of life I have come to the opinion that anyone who claims to be constantly and consistently right on a subject and refuses to put their thinking in front of others for feedback is someone who is suffering from a very detrimental degree of arrogance.

Experts in a field, as Tufte is in the realm of the printed word, always eventually come up against new ideas which they cannot necessarily absorb and relate to. You mention Einstein, but despite his great contribution in his field he was unable to deal with the implications of quantum theory. Perhaps the web is Tufte’s quantum theory and it’s time for a new generation of designers to become the geniuses in a new field.

Your decision to pick a fight, so to speak, with Tufte is exactly what I believe you should do if you disagree with him strongly enough. Even if niether of you learn something from the experience, your readers still probably will. When somebody disagrees with a person that is well-repsected in the field, it can mean one of three things: he is foolish, he is misinformed, or he is on to something new. I don’t get the impression that you are foolish or downright misinformed, so this is probably a debate worth keeping an eye on.

I have to second the comment about not knowing you were not a native speaker of English. Don’t change a thing.

An “expert” will point-out things about a something that is bad, but will only trash things which threaten him. Mr. Tufte’s work is highly regarded, but he is a nerd. He understands the display of data, but not the execution of a user experience. The biggest thing I’ll ever give him credit for is figuring out how to get people to fork over $500 for a print of his dog jumping in a lake. Now THAT’S true genius.

Just noticed some “subtle” changes on Mr. Tuftes commend, concerning your article:

‘… The claim that the web is “all about typography” is false and over-reaches. There is insufficient attention given to the relationship between type and image. …’

And he also skipped the “brazen quality” thing.

頑張ってくださいよ！

Jan, I noticed and added an update at the end of the article. Actually I am already getting a little tired of this. He has a strong point with my current use of pitures and text. It has given me a headache for quite some time. I have a solution I am testing right now. 頑張りましょう

Ask E.T.?

“This goes hand-in-hand with his genius claim that “good web design doesn’t need to be user tested”. I was ready to strike back, but one of my readers suggested to let Tufte’s comment “speak for itself” (thanks Jerome).”

In response to the above statement – a different perspective.. is it just semantics or a mismatch of ontologies? Maybe being more precise on the problem and context?

1) the visceral design of the web page may or may not be user tested – many sites have fantastic style in both type and graphics (expert graphic designer) and are useable or not 2) usability design should be tested with the user in an interactive and iterative design-development process – user centered design and software development 3) usability is about efficiency of use. If the user’s profile, goal and action sequence is well understood, then you can use a substitute for the user – a software agent – see Anderson’s ACT-R work and Bonnie John’s at CMU 4) there are experts in the field of usability, and when they know what the user knows – then they can act as a super-substitute for the user in the evaluation of the design – better than the agent – I would consider Tufte to be one such expert.

I liked Tufte before he wrote a book about powerpoint, which sucked, because powerpoint isn’t cognitive, it is anti-intuitive. I have several of his other books, as he and I share alot of interests, but no more for me.

xxx Thank you. Very interesting points. Basically I agree with all of your points. I would like to add something to 3 and 4 and add a 5th point:

3) ACT-R and John’s CPM-GOMS are interesting approaches, but they’re a notch too academic. In practice it is still much faster, cheaper and more efficient to write a couple of tasks on a piece of paper, get 5 people for 20 minutes and observe them using the site or applications. From my experience with user testing I highly doubt that it can be emulated by machine or a single human.

4) Tufte is a master organizer of statistic information, but his expertise in interactive usability seems questionable. He is kind of proud about his photography as well, but I leave that critique to the experts in that field. Usability experts normally base the necessity of user testing on the fact that they a) have a deformation professionelle (know too much to see the obvious) and b) that noone sees everything.

I consider myself a usability expert enough to assess the main defects of a site (as they’re usually the same), but again and again I am surprised when I see what users do or don’t do when testing. He must be a usability genius without any blind spots. And he must be able to forget everything he knows at the same time, because that is putting yourself in the non-experienced user’s perspective. I can do that to a certain degree, but only a genius can do that perfectly. I am not saying he’s not a genius, I am just saying that for us normal professionals user testing is inevitable.

For us normal beings web design is a never ending process based on feedback. I look at my stats daily. I use Google analytics to see where people click. My website is ONE never ending user test. I use the information I get through my website to create better products for my clients. I continuously develop my site based on user feedback (even on the visceral level, as I get great input from graphically more talented people than myself), and - no matter what the professor says - based on my user feedback I still belive that I have made great progress like that. I cannot imagine an end to that process of improving, I cannot imagine that I’d ever say: “I don’t need to hear what people that use my products say about it.” Frankly, I don’t think that’s genius, I think that’s obnoxious. But I might be wrong. The idea that one day I don’t need user feedback anymore is kind of scary. In interaction design, personally, I enjoy the interaction as much as the design part.

Of course I am not the ultimate expert here. It would be interesting to see what Nielsen, Norman, Tognazzini think about that.

5) Maybe it’s more of a generation conflict: He grew up with role models like Einstein, Corbusier, Picasso, Schoenberg, Gould, Pele. My paradigms are Larry Page, Thom Yorke, Thomas Bernhard, Steve Jobs, Jeff Raskin, Larry David alias George Costanza, Jakob Nielsen, The Designer’s Republic, Herzog&DeMeuron, Zidane(!) and AphexTwin.

Mike,

To be fair, Tufte and you (and me) and the fantastic Khoi all have reservations when it comes to PowerPoint. Tufte boldly claims that “PowerPoint is evil”. And I liked him for that, as I like approaches that “over-reach”, in order to make a point. I am all for good rhethorics. I especially liked the way he concludes his article on PowerPoint:

PowerPoint is a competent slide manager and projector. But rather than supplementing a presentation, it has become a substitute for it. Such misuse ignores the most important rule of speaking: Respect your audience.

He always smiles on pictures and looks quite relaxed. Until recently I though the guy must have a lot of humor. I was eager to hear his destruction of MS Word (very very evil too). In the mean time I think he was dead serious with his “PowerPoint is evil” claim. Dealing with him so far sure was not a lot of fun.

We all know that good slide shows can help our thinking. And of course we all know that programs cannot be evil as such. They can only be hard to use or structured in a way that leads to inadequate, bad or dangerously wrong results. But then it’s up to us, to refuse them or make the best out of it. People that make programs, can be evil and make them tools of evil. Sounds kind of paranoid though.

We know that PowerPoint presentations are just plain crap and from my experience some people who use PowerPoint are evil. I once worked with this business consultant who used PowerPoint to… anyway. There are some good people who use PowerPoint or Keynote and manage to create pretty good slideshows, which leads to my conclusion: PowerPoint is 95% evil, Keynote 10%.

You can’t be bothered by Tufte’s comments.

1. When it comes to web design, I would ignore Tufte. He has no idea what he is talking about. Knows statistics, not the web. (Look at his web site for proof.)

2. At one of his talks he went on about how great Jakob Nielsen is. But then Tufte bashes usability testing. ‘Whatever.’

3. I semi-enjoyed his books. But he is one of the worst presenters I’ve ever come across. I went to one of his ‘courses’ and he spent the morning giving a tour of his books and showing us some rare books he owns. What a complete waste. I could have just bought his books and read them for less than the ‘course’. I left at lunch break and didn’t come back.

4. In the middle of his morning session he looked at one of the attendees and complained they weren’t following along in his book. He clearly doesn’t know his audience.

5. He gave a sneak peek of his ’spark lines’ idea. Give me a break. The example he used was a win/loss record of a baseball team. On the top line was the wins and the bottom line the losses. When asked, no one in the audience of a few hundred knew what it was supposed to be. If you wanted to know how many wins there were, you had to count the tiny (and I mean tiny) lines that were difficult to see. If no one know what it is, isn’t that bad communication? Isn’t the standard of 76:34 easier to see that a team has 76 wins and 34 losses? Or you could just count 76 little lines to learn that.

I was surprised by Tufte’s reaction to your article. I was more surprised by his condescending tone and lack of open mindedness about what you said. I started writing a response but got so depressed I gave up. Maybe later, but after reading some of the other comments on his website I don’t think it’s worth the trouble. More people should go back and read McLuhan’s book “Gutenberg Galaxy” before spouting off about what’s happening on the internet.