http://www.mondaynote.com/2010/12/19/rebooting-web-publishing-design/
http://knowledgebank.posterous.com/the-web-is-reborn-technology-review
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Monday, February 14, 2011
UX response
Web magazines mainly fall short because of the intimate factor. The structure, images, layout, size, articles, ect. can all be imitated by the web; but the web never has been successful at creating the intimate feeling of reading a magazine. The web also utilizes many ads on the page, and distracts the read from their experience. To create a digital magazine successfully, the magazine must have the must be a balance between the expectations of the medium (interactivity, video, movement, ect.) and aspects of a magazine (print, layout, image, structure, ect.).
The current digital structure fall into many problems, but most have to do with the innovation of the design and utilizing the medium that they are in. When a user picks up an iPad they immediately touch the screen and navigate through each section. Yesterday, I was at the AT&T store upgrading my phone. I saw many people walking straight up to the iPad and interacting with it. From 7 year old to 40 year old people, the iPad has draw to all people of all ages to use it. If the medium is the message, then the iPad has has to be use in the way that is best implies its message. The interactive nature of the iPad is one of the draws to the technology. A digital magazine should take this into account. People want to have interactivity that make sense, that adds to the narrative structure to the magazine. It has to incorporate more to the magazine.
That is the hook that people will pay for. If it is well balanced and incorporates good narrative interactions then people will buy into it. The hard part is finding the balance. It has to 'feel' like a magazine, but should innovate and expand how people use the medium. People will pay for the experience of a digital magazine.
interactivity [video, movement, social, linked, custom, simple] + balance [ print, layout, image, structure] = Digital Magazine
The current digital structure fall into many problems, but most have to do with the innovation of the design and utilizing the medium that they are in. When a user picks up an iPad they immediately touch the screen and navigate through each section. Yesterday, I was at the AT&T store upgrading my phone. I saw many people walking straight up to the iPad and interacting with it. From 7 year old to 40 year old people, the iPad has draw to all people of all ages to use it. If the medium is the message, then the iPad has has to be use in the way that is best implies its message. The interactive nature of the iPad is one of the draws to the technology. A digital magazine should take this into account. People want to have interactivity that make sense, that adds to the narrative structure to the magazine. It has to incorporate more to the magazine.
That is the hook that people will pay for. If it is well balanced and incorporates good narrative interactions then people will buy into it. The hard part is finding the balance. It has to 'feel' like a magazine, but should innovate and expand how people use the medium. People will pay for the experience of a digital magazine.
interactivity [video, movement, social, linked, custom, simple]
Sunday, February 13, 2011
RE
I agree with much of what you are saying, it sounds like your research is leading you to think of how digital magazines should be designed differently, and that right now it's not necessarily happening yet. I also agree, the intimate nature of reading on an iPad is qualitatively different than reading on a computer or laptop.
When Dan Allan and Jeff Lynch first started reading about UX, much of what was being said seemed obvious to them. As they are finding, and as you point out, the User Experience is a subtle thing. Gates had 3 tries at a tablet PC, all were failures because Microsoft just isn't as interested in the User as much as Apple is. Things like weight, how the object feels in the hands, and the touch screen turned out to be the difference between success and failure.
So, as you research, I want to know more about why do Web magazines fall short? I went to the Wired web magazine, and had no interest in reading the stories and was irritated that a pop-up was trying to sell me something. My feeling was that this is an irritating experience. How can digital publishing improve my experience and capitalize on the new medium?
My hope is that digital publishing will 'feel' like quality publishing. On the web, everyone is giving it all away, how has that affected the experience of the end user? Once you clearly define the short-comings of a current medium, then it becomes easier to identify what the new medium should take advantage of. Wired will have to give me a reason to switch to the iPad magazine, are they doing that?
When Dan Allan and Jeff Lynch first started reading about UX, much of what was being said seemed obvious to them. As they are finding, and as you point out, the User Experience is a subtle thing. Gates had 3 tries at a tablet PC, all were failures because Microsoft just isn't as interested in the User as much as Apple is. Things like weight, how the object feels in the hands, and the touch screen turned out to be the difference between success and failure.
So, as you research, I want to know more about why do Web magazines fall short? I went to the Wired web magazine, and had no interest in reading the stories and was irritated that a pop-up was trying to sell me something. My feeling was that this is an irritating experience. How can digital publishing improve my experience and capitalize on the new medium?
My hope is that digital publishing will 'feel' like quality publishing. On the web, everyone is giving it all away, how has that affected the experience of the end user? Once you clearly define the short-comings of a current medium, then it becomes easier to identify what the new medium should take advantage of. Wired will have to give me a reason to switch to the iPad magazine, are they doing that?
Saturday, February 12, 2011
anwsers
My question is a Digital magazine really any different than a web site? If so, why is it different and what implications does that have in where future designs will go?
It you go to the wired website, you will feel like this is a website. they has tab for magazines on their home page. the page takes you to, not just a page talking about that magazine, the article themselves. this scuws the line between magazine and web. Smashing Magazine and UX Magazine both use the title magazine and function much like a magazine, but are not. The biggest difference is the immersion into the medium. A website feeling like a website. A magazine has a different feel to the structure and immersion within it's pages. Although. it is not hard to see aspect of a magazine in website, mostly because the layout works and we tend to roll with what work before into the future i.e. mechanicalism vs digital.
Mechanicalism vs digital brings up ways to look at the future of design. The age that came before us is the mechanical age, and thus we use what is excepted standards user design. The iPad is the standard for tablet design. "It is only natural for us to try to draw the imagery and language of an earlier era that we are comfortable with into a new, less certain one. As the history of the industrial
revolution shows, the fruits of new technology can often only be expressed at first with the language of an earlier technology. For example, we called railroad engines iron horses and automobiles were labeled horseless carriages. (cooper)" The expectations of the technology change what the expectations of the user. The metal model changed with the iPad. We want and need to push further interactive design. It is true that the the model for a website has pieces that are used in magazines, the same is true in the development of the digital magazine. The true immersive nature of a magazine is what people want in the digital realm. Interactive elements within a digital application only set to amplify what the overall narrative is constructing within a magazine.
Are people reading more magazines on them? More books?
The data and research points towards a general increase in digital reading across all platforms. Amazon released data that shows that they are now selling more ebooks than hard cover books. magazine have just started and have real data that supports one way or the other, but sufficient to say digital print is on the rise.
Children interactive book change how people experience books. The children book Alice is an example of some of what to expect from interactive book. It, like magazine, does not take advantage of what is possible within their platform. Although, for a child the interaction may explore what they want. The books have begun to inform want interaction work of their demographic.
The other thing the current hype reminds me of was the early 90's Multimedia craze. Dictionaries were all going to be interactive, there were tons of reasons why Multimedia publishing was going to take off but it never did. People lost a ton of money on failed experiments in Multimedia as a platform. What can we learn from that failure?
The Fujitsu Stylistic, the Quadpad Slate Style Tablet PC, and the Motion M1200 where the first real attempt at creating a tablet technology. They where built from pen touch technology and developed by Microsoft, in 2001. They weren't really successful.
Bill gate made not one but three tablet to change PC driven technolgy forever, but the highest sophistication of technology at the time couldn't create a a good user experience in their tablets. The fall of Multimedia in the 90's is directly correlated to two elements UX and overall branding. The tablets also run into UX and overall branding problems as well. In full Microsoft style, they created a next gen compter with power but no attention to the consumer.
The moral is, everything matters in creation. Steve Jobs has made his living at positioning, branding, and creation of Apple and its products. He sets everything up to succeed. Ealier tablets did have the power but none of the element that really make technology great. In the late 90's publishers began to create e-book through PDFs. Technology is always changing and creating new ways to use it. the difference is the how people see that tech and what their entire experience will be.
It you go to the wired website, you will feel like this is a website. they has tab for magazines on their home page. the page takes you to, not just a page talking about that magazine, the article themselves. this scuws the line between magazine and web. Smashing Magazine and UX Magazine both use the title magazine and function much like a magazine, but are not. The biggest difference is the immersion into the medium. A website feeling like a website. A magazine has a different feel to the structure and immersion within it's pages. Although. it is not hard to see aspect of a magazine in website, mostly because the layout works and we tend to roll with what work before into the future i.e. mechanicalism vs digital.
Mechanicalism vs digital brings up ways to look at the future of design. The age that came before us is the mechanical age, and thus we use what is excepted standards user design. The iPad is the standard for tablet design. "It is only natural for us to try to draw the imagery and language of an earlier era that we are comfortable with into a new, less certain one. As the history of the industrial
revolution shows, the fruits of new technology can often only be expressed at first with the language of an earlier technology. For example, we called railroad engines iron horses and automobiles were labeled horseless carriages. (cooper)" The expectations of the technology change what the expectations of the user. The metal model changed with the iPad. We want and need to push further interactive design. It is true that the the model for a website has pieces that are used in magazines, the same is true in the development of the digital magazine. The true immersive nature of a magazine is what people want in the digital realm. Interactive elements within a digital application only set to amplify what the overall narrative is constructing within a magazine.
Are people reading more magazines on them? More books?
The data and research points towards a general increase in digital reading across all platforms. Amazon released data that shows that they are now selling more ebooks than hard cover books. magazine have just started and have real data that supports one way or the other, but sufficient to say digital print is on the rise.
Children interactive book change how people experience books. The children book Alice is an example of some of what to expect from interactive book. It, like magazine, does not take advantage of what is possible within their platform. Although, for a child the interaction may explore what they want. The books have begun to inform want interaction work of their demographic.
The other thing the current hype reminds me of was the early 90's Multimedia craze. Dictionaries were all going to be interactive, there were tons of reasons why Multimedia publishing was going to take off but it never did. People lost a ton of money on failed experiments in Multimedia as a platform. What can we learn from that failure?
The Fujitsu Stylistic, the Quadpad Slate Style Tablet PC, and the Motion M1200 where the first real attempt at creating a tablet technology. They where built from pen touch technology and developed by Microsoft, in 2001. They weren't really successful.
Bill gate made not one but three tablet to change PC driven technolgy forever, but the highest sophistication of technology at the time couldn't create a a good user experience in their tablets. The fall of Multimedia in the 90's is directly correlated to two elements UX and overall branding. The tablets also run into UX and overall branding problems as well. In full Microsoft style, they created a next gen compter with power but no attention to the consumer.
The moral is, everything matters in creation. Steve Jobs has made his living at positioning, branding, and creation of Apple and its products. He sets everything up to succeed. Ealier tablets did have the power but none of the element that really make technology great. In the late 90's publishers began to create e-book through PDFs. Technology is always changing and creating new ways to use it. the difference is the how people see that tech and what their entire experience will be.
Friday, February 11, 2011
Leister RE BlackBoard
I think the expansion is better than your question. Feel free to lengthen the question to add details that you are in the paragraph below. |
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Question
How does remediation innovate digital magazine design and experience?
Its not enough to remediate a magazine. Digital media can be pushed further. The new magazines on the iPad were "cool" when they were first released, but what makes them continue pushing the boundaries of what is possible on the tablet.
The current model of digital magazine allows the publisher to creates a "conent rich" digital magazine. They have interactive media/elements and innovative thinkers, in publishing., forging the next generation of magazine; or are they.
Adobe teamed with wired magazine to produce the next generation applications with he sole propose of developing digital magazines for the iPad. the application were design for publishers to use in an easy fashion. The result was mild interactivity and a digital magazine that functions like a magazine. there is no push to add functionality that is explores aspect of what the user wants out of the technology. the magazine is in tact but the iPad is lost.
The Ipad is the start of the next generation of tablet technology. the expectation is high to push the apps on it to the next level when it is being developed. magazine have the potential to be more than they are. what make a iPad app different than a magazine, that it has small interactivity. Should there be more to a magazine? What do people want? will the user paid the same price for an digital magazine as a regular magazine, with rough the same experience and content? Should we expect more?
Material to look at:
Its not enough to remediate a magazine. Digital media can be pushed further. The new magazines on the iPad were "cool" when they were first released, but what makes them continue pushing the boundaries of what is possible on the tablet.
The current model of digital magazine allows the publisher to creates a "conent rich" digital magazine. They have interactive media/elements and innovative thinkers, in publishing., forging the next generation of magazine; or are they.
Adobe teamed with wired magazine to produce the next generation applications with he sole propose of developing digital magazines for the iPad. the application were design for publishers to use in an easy fashion. The result was mild interactivity and a digital magazine that functions like a magazine. there is no push to add functionality that is explores aspect of what the user wants out of the technology. the magazine is in tact but the iPad is lost.
The Ipad is the start of the next generation of tablet technology. the expectation is high to push the apps on it to the next level when it is being developed. magazine have the potential to be more than they are. what make a iPad app different than a magazine, that it has small interactivity. Should there be more to a magazine? What do people want? will the user paid the same price for an digital magazine as a regular magazine, with rough the same experience and content? Should we expect more?
Material to look at:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)