intentionallies has a very unique interface, done in flash.
It's a huge collection of cards, that you can sort, drag, drop and mix around. You can then open that card, read about each item. While the card is open you can continue to move and drag that card.
The fact that they included buttons at the top to automatically sort the cards, reset the cards, have ballon help and global commands for the cards is a big help. Once I figured out the interface idiom, I was hooked. It was fun browsing the site.
Now, if I was seriously shopping for any of these items, it would be even cooler. I wouldn't have to store items in my shopping cart. I could have a pile of cards I was interested in. I could have a pile of cards I was maybe interested in. And it would remember.
Quite interesting. I like the fact that they 'dared' try something so completely different. I think it worked.
Like I said, cute. It's definitely out of the box. But all-Flash interfaces break the browser paradigm; the back button won't work, usual widgets are gone, you can't easily bookmark your location, etc. This is what I mean by "what users expect;" I think it's reasonable to say that if someone visits a site with a browser, they expect it to share basic characteristics with other places they visit with a browser.
Okay, I can agree with the breaking of the browser functions (Back Buton, bookmarks).
But there are ways around it. And realistically, I'm not looking for those solutions at this point.
I'm intruiged by the whole concept of what they are presenting. A very different interface for moving through their catalog. Which I think has potential.
And given the fact that they do appear to be a real live site, I'd be interested in some of their stats. Does this actually work for them? Do they get business from it?
Interfaces change. Expectations can change. And I think that with some thought into those problems you outlined, those can be fixed.
Comments
Chet
Bah. Flash. It may be cute, but it destroys what the user more or less expects in terms of interface.
Posted by: Chet | March 15, 2004 09:36 AM
Tony
You're insane. How can you say that? One sweeping statement that covers what ALL users expect? Did you talk to every user? Even the Tibetian Monks?
Seriously though, I think that it's a very interesting attempt at a navigational method that is so "out of the box" that it's admirable.
Posted by: Tony | March 15, 2004 09:53 AM
Chet
Like I said, cute. It's definitely out of the box. But all-Flash interfaces break the browser paradigm; the back button won't work, usual widgets are gone, you can't easily bookmark your location, etc. This is what I mean by "what users expect;" I think it's reasonable to say that if someone visits a site with a browser, they expect it to share basic characteristics with other places they visit with a browser.
Posted by: Chet | March 16, 2004 08:53 AM
Tony
Okay, I can agree with the breaking of the browser functions (Back Buton, bookmarks).
But there are ways around it. And realistically, I'm not looking for those solutions at this point.
I'm intruiged by the whole concept of what they are presenting. A very different interface for moving through their catalog. Which I think has potential.
And given the fact that they do appear to be a real live site, I'd be interested in some of their stats. Does this actually work for them? Do they get business from it?
Interfaces change. Expectations can change. And I think that with some thought into those problems you outlined, those can be fixed.
Posted by: Tony | March 16, 2004 01:27 PM
JosÈ Jeria
I dunno, I am kind of anti-flash. I hate flash sites cause I never really understand where to click or what to do.
The link mentioned above showed a lot of cards? One by one, after like 30 cards I couldt wait anymore and clicked back here.
Posted by: JosÈ Jeria | March 16, 2004 03:50 PM