When it comes to professional obsession with browser rendering, I’ve never met anyone quite like our own Marissa. Between multiple-IE instance installs, Browsercam screenshots and an army of test machines, she could probably tell me what’s wrong with a site in OpenWeb on a NextStep machine from 1993.

About 6 months ago, she sent a call around the office for phones to view the mobile version of a site we’d just launched on. I gave her my LG Env2 and left my iPhone in my pocket. After all, the iPhone and mobile Safari were made to browse a site just like a “real” browser on a large display — and the iPhone interface handles this beautifully, with multi-touch zooming and double tapping that expands columns to the width of the phone.  It works so great Apple just got sued.

Since then, however, a growing number of major websites are sniffing the iPhone user agent and presenting mobile versions. Sometimes this is a relatively positive experience - like Amazon’s mobile shopping version - and other times (I’m looking at you m.cnn.com) it’s just terrible.. an endless loop of trying to avoid an ugly, stripped-down content missing mobile version. And that’s where the rant comes in.

Apple: Let me change the user-agent on the iPhone. Sometimes I’d rather just pretend I’m in Firefox. More than sometimes.

Designers: The iPhone may be a device-on-the-go, but it’s nothing like a traditional mobile device. Stop feeding me CSS designed for a phones with a 100×60 pixel screen. If you don’t want to take the time to craft an iPhone version or your mobile version looks terrible on iPhoney, just give me the real thing.

Developers: Always give me a way to get to the “real” site and stay there.

Until the situation improves, iPhone users will just keep looking for backdoors to get the content they really want.

Editor’s note: With the busy holiday season upon us, the Beaconfire Staff has had no time for blogging (as you may have noticed!). But to make up for it, we’re “reprinting” some of our most popular posts of the last couple years. Hopefully we’ll be back to generating new content soon, but for now, please enjoy Tim’s post for anyone who’s had to cut emails with the new Outlook.

There has been much discussion lately about Microsoft’s decision to abandon IE as the rendering engine for HTML emails in Outlook 2007. It’s hard to conduct a level-headed exchange on this topic because of strong feelings about HTML vs. TXT emails, and personal, professional, philosophical, or theological issues with Microsoft. Putting aside the endlessly repetitive and unproductive argument about whether Microsoft has any idea what they are doing, and whether or not it is a good idea to send HTML-formatted email messages, let’s look at the facts.

Molly Holzschlag’s (molly.com) post on the subject says that the impetus for this change was the unacceptable differences that MS Outlook users were seeing between what they saw in their inbox (rendered by IE engine) and what their friends saw when they forwarded those messages on to them (Composed by Word engine). Or when they composed messages from scratch (Word in Outlook) and their friends tried to read them (IE engine again). So it makes sense that you’d want the same engine to create a message that you use to view it. But Word? Really?

The problems enter in when you consider Word’s HTML engine: It’s inarguably sub-par. Already, those of us who create the HTML for use in client’s campaigns are forced to utilize a mish-mash of HTML coding techniques, some of which we’ve long left behind in building web pages. This isn’t just Microsoft’s fault; ALL of the email clients we test in have slightly different quirks and shortcomings. As a result, we are still using tables, spacer gifs, and (in many cases) font tags to layout our templates. So this is a situation of something broken being broken in a different (and perhaps worse) way when it really could have been a step toward fixing it.

So what do we do? Test about a bazillion times. This has always been the case. We have always had to test the rendering of our HTML messages in (at least) Gmail, Hotmail, AOL, Yahoo, Outlook, Outlook Express, Thunderbird, Mac Mail, Entourage and — if we can, and depending on the client — Eudora, Pegasus, Lotus Notes, or Groupwise. The testing required for Outlook 2007 adds a new wrinkle to the Shar-Pei, but regardless of Microsoft’s decisions regarding rendering engines, did anyone really think that 2007 would render the same as previous versions? Not likely. However, most of us thought that we might see an improvement due to IE7s increased support for CSS.

Anyone using email newsletters as a mode of communication urgently need to have their templates reviewed in order to ensure that future messaging remains successful. Many existing templates will not be Outlook 2007 compatible, and can almost be counted on to break when viewed. After all, nobody in their right mind has been designing email or web pages to be viewed in MS Word! It just wasn’t ever something we dreamed we’d have to test.

Were not entirely in the dark, however. Microsoft is supplying us with some information on Outlook 2007 HTML and CSS support, as well as a validation tool. Read up, test twice as much and we’ll all pull through. If we just stick together.

Microsoft Tools:

• 2007 Office System Tool: Outlook HTML and CSS Validator
• Word 2007 HTML and CSS Rendering Capabilities in Outlook 2007 (Part 1 of 2)
• Word 2007 HTML and CSS Rendering Capabilities in Outlook 2007 (Part 2 of 2)

Other articles and discussions:

• Excellent article by Dave Greiner of Campaign Monitor
• SitePoint post by Kevin Yank
• Arstechnica post by Jeremy Reimer

A group of association executives from a variety of organizations joined Jeff, Amy, and me last Friday, November 14 at the Greater Washington Board of Trade to talk about web usability testing and how it can improve the online member experience.

After a short networking reception and introductions, Amy, one of Beaconfire’s information architecture and usability consultants, led us through a brief discussion of what usability testing is and why it’s used.  Often, when organizations are designing or redesigning their Web sites, the focus can end up being primarily internal.  That can result in a site that makes sense to association staff but is incomprehensible to members and other constituents.  Usability testing shifts the focus to the user to ensure that your audiences can find what they’re looking for and accomplish what they want to do online.

Amy recommended that usability testing should be a continuing process throughout the entire development and design project to keep the new Web site on track.  Organizations sometimes skip usability testing because they fear it will be too costly.  Amy dispelled that myth by sharing a general rule that, while well known among information architects, came as a bit of a surprise to the session participants:  you can find 90% of the problems on a page with only five testers.

That said, there are a number of factors to consider when engaging in usability testing:

• Where are you in your process?
• What’s your budget, not only in terms of money but also of time and staff resources?
• Who are your audiences?

Amy and Jeff then walked through the various types of usability testing Beaconfire recommends, ranging from heuristic analysis, in which a small number of experts evaluate the Web site against a pre-determined set of usability criteria, through card sorting, which can be done face to face or online, into wireframe prototype testing and even post-launch function testing on the live site.

Amy then led two volunteers through a live wireframe prototype testing exercise both to demonstrate to the participants how usability testing works and to show how much can be learned just from asking two different people to try to accomplish the same task on a wireframe site.

For more information about usability testing, check out the presentation from Friday, read the BFWire interview on usability testing with Amy and Brad, another member of Beaconfire’s functional analysis team, or feel free to contact us to discuss your needs.

On November 4th, 2009 Obama the candidate became Obama the President-elect. True believers, we called this a watershed moment in U.S history, change we can believe in, even called it a miracle. But for those of us in the design world, we recognized it as something no less significant: The complete success of Obama the Brand.

I’d like to say I was prescient enough to know Obama would emerge victorious the second I saw his campaign’s logo, but you would call me a black-turtleneck-wearing-
abstinithe-sipping-the-revolution-will-be-designed-hippie.

But I really did.

Why? Because short of the ubiquitous American brands of our generation (Coke, Harley Davidson, Nike, Chevrolet) there has not been one as seamlessly versatile, and consistently leveraged without breaking a sweat, as the O.

Much has been said about the unique choice of font (Yay, Gotham) and the multi-channel appeal to a variety of audiences, but I propose one more reason for it’s success: The unspoken sense of hope the “Obama rising” visual has conveyed to a world thirsty for inspiration. When a brand becomes more than just a graphic, but invokes a sense of “what could be if you just believe”, there is truly no stopping it.

This election cycle has proven, in many ways, the power of web organizing. From plugged-in (or battery powered) voters donating their Facebook statuses in honor of their favorite candidate to the Obama campaign’s success with micro donations, politicians and non-profits found new and effective ways to get out the vote and personalize web experiences for millions of Americans.

So now, a week after the election, with all the organizing, campaigning, advertising and funny/scary/illuminating viral video-sharing behind us, we can step back and ask - what’s next? How can non-profits harness the energy generated throughout the campaign and continue to engage supporters without the glitz and glamour of an impending presidential election? Has the online advocacy landscape changed as a result of the election?

A glimpse at a handful of post-election blogs provides some answers.

(more…)

Microsoft quietly launched their free Microsoft Search Server 2008 product earlier this year as a product that heavily leverages the same Enterprise Search technology found in their Sharepoint 2007 product. That quiet introduction belies the fact that Search Server is directly poised to take on the de-facto market leader in low cost website spidering and searching, the Google Mini. When the Mini was first launched it had a great price-point, the Google name, and a slew of glaring deficiencies that have now been largely patched out of existence. Search technology, which used to be the largest feature gap our company had to account for in implementations for content management systems without their own search provider, had started to become a new brainer – sometimes clients without the slightest idea what sort of technology to use for a website redesign were coming to us with a Mini already purchased. That is, until MS Search Server 2008 arrived, immediately becoming the Mini’s foremost competitor in the low and mid-tier market and presenting a compelling case for those clients already heavily invested in Microsoft technology.

Right now, we’re in the midst of a website redesign that utilizes Search Server 2008. It’s a pretty common type of redesign for us at Beaconfire – a website built on a content management system that doesn’t have a built-in search technology, or at least not one we want to use. The client’s search needs are also pretty typical for a lot of site builds:

1. The search is primarily targeted at the site being redesigned – federated searching of external content might be a plus but takes a back seat to getting good search results for the site the user is searching on.
2. The focus in on public HTML content, not documents or database items, and there’s little in the way of heavily role-based content restrictions
3. The need for advanced filtering is minimal but needs to be expandable for the future
4. The search is fully integrated into the main website. The search and the results returned are displayed seamlessly in pages on the site instead of shuttling users off to another server.
5. Emphasis is placed on returning the best results possible through keywords and “best bet” mechanisms

Those requirements result in what is decidedly not an Enterprise level of search, but a very good example of the type of search plenty of customers want in a redesign – not a fancy search, just a particularly smooth and relevant one.

With those requirements in mind, here’s the my quick take on how the two technologies stack-up based on my impressions with both, right after the jump.

(more…)

Back in January, I wrote a post lambasting John McCain’s campaign for putting their email list up as collateral.

Now, as the Washington Post reports (h/t The Notion via TechPresident), we learn that Barack Obama considered the same thing: offering their email list as collateral for a loan. While they never actually needed the loan, it would be hypocritical not to be equally disappointed with the Obama camp as I was with McCain’s.

Anyway, most of my thoughts on the issue are laid out in my original post, so go read that if you want more details on why I think that this is bad, but here’s the bottom line for candidates, non-profits, and anyone with an “enter your email” field:

Your email list should not be used as collateral. Mortgaging it is mortgaging your credibility. Using your email list in this way risks ruining email marketing for everyone.

As a Democrat, I’m not terribly writing the “Why we won” posts after an election. That said, it hasn’t even been a week, but a casual browser of the internet can already find more than 300,000 posts about how Barack Obama was elected the forty-fourth President of the United States. This blog isn’t about electoral politics, but rather the use of technology for non-profits, so I’m going to focus on a very small part of the Obama electoral machine and the lessons non-profits can take away: merchandise.

Many non-profit fundraisers cringe at the thought of premiums and merch. “If you get your supports hooked on premiums, they won’t donate without them” is the conventional wisdom, and there’s certainly some truth to it. Merchandise, on the other hand, requires significant outlays to produce and may just sit around your fulfillment house for months (or longer).

Barack Obama’s campaign didn’t see either of these as a barrier. Part of that was due to the volume his campaign could expect - it’s no problem to get a hundred thousand union-made, environmentally-friendly T-shirts made when you’ve got three million donors and sixty-five million (and counting!) voters. That basically puts his supporter base in a tier that few non-profits can match - add in about a million percent name recognition and you’re seeing a consumer base closer to that of Apple or Nike.

Adding to this is the strong brand identity that Obama established - not only with the distinctive logo, but with the general energy of his campaign that made people want to be a part of it - it was cool to be an Obama supporter and show it off in a way that just wasn’t the case with Gore or Kerry, and certainly not with McCain or W. My colleague Eve is going to chime in later this week with a post about the Obama brand, but it seemed to be a big part of what made Obama gear more than just an obligation and into an important part of their fundraising arm.

So what lessons can non-profits take from the Obama campaign if they aren’t as big or cool as Obama? Four do’s and one big don’t, and how your non-profit can learn from their example, below the fold…

(more…)

Beaconfire is hosting a round table in downtown Washington DC from 3-5 pm on Friday, November 14 on the topic of Web Usability for Associations: Designing for Your Members.

During this casual gathering, we will share examples from some associations we’ve worked with, showing how small changes to their Web sites led to major improvements across a wide range of online activities: joins, renewals, registrations, purchases, participation, advocacy, and volunteering.

The session is designed to encourage networking and learning. A wine and cheese reception will be followed by a short presentation of several association case studies and a free-flowing discussion about how your association can implement, test, and benefit from usability improvements.

For more information, please contact Elizabeth Weaver Engel at elizabeth.engel@beaconfire.com or 703.894.0080 x257.

Apologies to our readers for the lack of activity on the Beaconfire Wire lately - the whole staff has been busy with a variety of exciting projects, some of which we hope to announce later this week. Unfortunately, our work on behalf of our clients has kept us too busy to blog, but here are a few things to check out on election day that I wish he had time to blog about in depth:

• Google has a bevy of cool tools to help voters - there’s a map to help you find your polling place, indexed audio of ads and speeches, so you can find what candidates have said about your key issues, and, as the polls close, live results.
• Twitter is featuring an election update page that moves really fast, but is nonetheless cool. Though the candidate statuses on top make me wonder if one candidate might be more connected to Twitter than the other…
  
• When you log into Facebook, you’ll note that it’s asking you if you’ve voted yet - there’s a running tally of people who both voted and checked their Facebook today, and while it’s lower than expected, that’s probably a good thing because it means that people are getting out the vote rather than visiting Facebook.
  
  Facebook also features an “election central” page, which isn’t as useful as Google’s, but does hawk their gifts. This made me laugh a little bit - first of all, how can a virtual gift be sold out, second, it’s probably not a good sign for McCain:
  
• TechPresident is going to be the place to be throughout the day, particularly after 4 PM Eastern when they start liveblogging. I’ve found TechPresident to be one the best blogs in the business for those of us interested in technology and politics, and their cross-partisanship gave me a look at McCain’s operation.
• My favorite electoral vote calculator is Daily Kos’s scoreboard. For now,it’s just in prediction mode, but it’s supposed to start getting a feed of AP data tonight as polls close. It also shows off downticket races that won’t get as much play on TV.

Look for more on the Beaconfire Wire later this week and month, as we resume our regular posting schedule. For today, though, do what you can to Get Out the Vote!