• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
The Great Software Trendkill: 12 Rules for Great UI Design
 

The Great Software Trendkill: 12 Rules for Great UI Design

on

  • 1,292 views

What if you could produce great UI design without aping the latest trends like Metro or iOS? Well, you can -- and Joe Natoli is going to share more than 20 years of UX and UI industry experience to ...

What if you could produce great UI design without aping the latest trends like Metro or iOS? Well, you can -- and Joe Natoli is going to share more than 20 years of UX and UI industry experience to show you how. This session introduces 12 immutable rules for UI patterns that instantly improve the intuitiveness and usability of any application. Joe Natoli will share more than 20 years of experience designing and developing intuitive user interfaces, engaging user experiences and successful software in a down-to-earth, clear and concise manner.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,292
Views on SlideShare
745
Embed Views
547

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0

3 Embeds 547

http://www.givegoodux.com 544
https://translate.googleusercontent.com 2
http://www.google.com 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • My name is Joe Natoli, I consider myself a UX Evangelist, and I am here to give you some good old fashioned UX/UI religion :-) A bit about me: I’ve been working in the field of what’s come to be known as UX or User Experience for more than 20 years. And for half of that time, we just called it design. But what I was taught in school was equal parts visual communication and cognitive psychology, so to me this is all the same stuff. You can’t have good design without good user experience and good usability and vice versa. No matter what you’re doing, you have to pay attention to all three, or someone loses. Which, in the long run, is usually you :-) I started out in traditional branding, advertising and design, and then this little thing called the Internet came along. Enter UI Design and what we now call UX. I ran my own Experience Design firm for 10 years, and then sold it. Hung out with the IT firm that bought us for a few years, got restless and, well, here I am. For more than 20 years my clients have ranged from mom & pop startups to 2.83 B Fortune 100 companies to Government. My experience is filled with equal parts success and failure, and I’ve learned an immeasurable amount from my peers and predecessors. Experience is without a doubt the best teacher – so the wisdom I’m here to impart upon you is not mine alone. And while we use the term USERS in this discipline, I want to point out that UX is about more than that. It’s about creating what I call a value loop — designing and building something that provides value to the people that use it — and their use in turn provides value back to you. If value goes out, value comes back. That’s the gig, that’s what creates success, that’s what creates profitability. In the next hour I’m going to give you 12 rules that you can take to the bank in terms of creating better UI design. 6 are strategic and 6 are tactical. Because before you follow the prescription, you need to adjust your thinking. Otherwise you’re just another monkey following instructions, which does absolutely nothing to differentiate you or help you create successful products.
  • We’re going to start here. Familiar, yes? How many of you here believe this? Form Follows Function, right? Sure about that?
  • The phrase “form follows function” was coined by American architect Louis Sullivan. In his 1896 article, “ The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered ,” Sullivan wrote: “ It is the pervading law of all things organic and inorganic, of all things physical and metaphysical, of all things human and all things superhuman, of all true manifestations of the head, of the heart, of the soul, that the life is recognizable in its expression, that form ever follows function. This is the law.” Intense, right? These guys took themselves really seriously. Now, in the late 19th century, technology, tastes and economics were rapidly changing. The forms of buildings were still based on innovation going all the way back to ancient Greek and Roman architecture. Sullivan, however, thought that a new form for buildings was needed -- and he thought that the form of a building should come from its function, instead of historical precedent. This new form Sullivan was obsessed with became what we know today as the modern steel skyscraper.
  • Frank Lloyd Wright, who was Sullivan’s assistant toward the end of his career, adopted the phrase “form follows function” and further promoted it. The Guggenheim Museum is a good example of Wright’s application of the principle. Its spiral shape was intended to allow visitors to easily view the artwork within.
  • Walter Gropius founded the Bauhaus — a school of thought and movement in art and design — that espoused that an object’s design should be dominated by its function. The Bauhaus was in some ways a reaction against the emotional expressionism of the early 1900s. The design aesthetic was based on simple forms, clean lines, rationality and, of course, functionality. These guys were pretty intense as well. Walter Gropius and Mies van der Rohe adopted both “ornamentation is crime” and “form follows function” as moral principles and applied them to design. Modernism in architecture — which deeply influenced visual design — emerged from both principles. Its goal was to determine the form of a building solely from functional requirements and not traditional aesthetics. Several members of the Bauhaus found their way to the United States. Mies van der Rohe migrated to Chicago after the school closed, bringing the ideas of the Bauhaus with him to the city that epitomized “form follows function.” Walter Gropius among others began teaching at the Harvard Graduate School of Design. And thus the gospel spread. From the Bauhaus to Charles and Ray Eames and beyond, everyone was pretty much in agreement: form follows function. That’s where this started. And that little axiom has popped up in nearly every development project I’ve ever done in the last 20 years!
  • Nature, however, had (and has) a slightly different viewpoint on the matter. The descriptive interpretation of “form follows function” favors simplicity to complexity. It states that beauty and usefulness results from purity of function — not from ornamentation, not from physical form. All the folks I’ve mentioned previously held the belief that form follows function in nature. Which isn’t true. Because we’ve only got an hour I’m not gonna dig into the details, OK? But do the research yourself when you walk out of here. From a purely scientific viewpoint -- the one I prescribe to, FYI -- evolution passes on genetic traits to subsequent generations without any rationale for their purpose. From atoms to enzymes to organisms, scientists and biologists across the globe will tell you that function cannot be predicted . What really happens is that organisms find functions for the forms they have inherited. In nature every form is the outcome of specific environmental circumstances and phenomenon. Flounder literally move their eyes during their lifespan to to better serve their bottom feeding habit. Every form is shaped by circumstance to perform a certain function. Function follows form in nature, folks. And guess what? All of us and the people we build things for? WE’RE nature. Human beings.
  • The prescriptive interpretation prioritizes functionality over all other design considerations -- including usability, ergonomics and aesthetics. This interpretation would seem to lead to designers to ask what should be removed, omitted, from a design. But should the form of a design be determined solely by its function? Take this to its logical conclusion, and everything would ultimately have the same design. Every functional item would have one — and only one — design. Before an object’s form could be changed, it would need to serve a different function. But it doesn’t work that way. When time or resources is limited, what design trade-offs would least harm the design’s success? Sometimes, certain aesthetics will have to be abandoned, and sometimes certain functionality will have to be abandoned. Sometimes both aesthetics and functionality will need to be compromised.
  • There are any number of forces impacting your project success – and therefore your product . And let’s pay particular attention to time and budget, OK? On top of everything else, when time or resources is limited, what do you do? You know what. You figure out what design trade-offs would least harm the design’s success. Planned functionality gets scrapped. Aesthetics get painted on at the end (lipstick on a pig). Sometimes both get compromised. So -- Form DOESN’T follow function, OK? Get that out of your heads right now.
  • All the forces we just discussed – audience needs, client desires, functional requirements, time, budget, resources – contributes to the evolution of the form, which in our case is the UI. Form is not, can not, should not ever be an afterthought. It cannot come at the end of any process. It must be evolved by the project’s influencing forces. Do it any other way and you’ll get a collective YAAAWN from your prospective users. Trust me on this. Don’t get me wrong here. Function is still damn important – but it’s a single, isolated, quantifiable aspect of the overall force driving the form. Any design process actually begins with something that doesn’t yet exist but needs to exist, and the entire process evolves toward a formal result. You take stock along the way and correct course where necessary. This one is critical. Forget this and everything else I say today is meaningless.
  • The newest technologies — computers, genetic engineering, nanotech —are all different from the technologies that preceded them in a fundamental way. The telephone, the automobile, television and jet air travel accelerated for a while, transforming society along the way, but then settled into a manageable rate of change. Each was eventually rewarded more for staying the same than for radically transforming itself. This was a stable, predictable, reliable condition." Computers, biotechnology and nanotech don't work that way, though — they’re self-accelerating. The products of their own processes enable them to develop at an increasingly rapid rate. New computer chips are immediately put to use developing the next generation of more powerful ones; this acceleration is most often expressed as Moore's law.As a result, we have all become trained and conditioned to want next big thing, look ahead, latest & greatest, etc....and the pace keeps picking up. tWe’re at a point where we’re more aware of trends that come and fade in a matter of months than we are of the core ideas and strategies behind them that remain relatively unchanged — and which are the real secret behind the public success.
  • It all started with the command line.
  • And then, hey — a graphical representation of stuff in the command line!
  • And even further graphical refinements, as long as they’re grey...
  • ...until two hippies came along and turned the game on its head.
  • but the nerds struck back, and with a lot more firepower :-)
  • and so the one-upmanship continued.
  • and right now, if you ask me, Microsoft holds the upper hand — if people take to this. The strategic approach, appearance and performance behind this are very, very solid. But change is hard — and here’s why.
  • Human cognition has remained essentially the same for hundreds, possibly thousands of years. This is what we do, no matter what the stimulus (which is the only thing that changes). The people using your software or visiting your site want what people have always wanted — they want their lives to be better. They want to feel better about themselves. And they’ll use what you’ve given them in pretty much the same way.
  • People change and adapt a LOT slower than technology does. So just because you can doesn’t mean you should . what people want, need and will use may have nothing to do with all the cool shit baked into the latest and greatest developer toolkit.
  • Human beings have a bias toward the visually attractive. There are miles of psychological research spanning the last 70 years, if you’re bored and your TV is broken. There’s a bias, OK? And while that bias may be subjective, it is nonetheless present. Otherwise, we’d never perpetuate the species, among other things. A perfect example is the first presidential debate (1960) between Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy. Nixon was ill and running a fever, he also wore light colors and no make-up. Kennedy wore dark colors and make-up. Those who heard the debate over the radio agreed that Nixon won the debate, but those who watched it on TV came to a very different conclusion.
  • Good design means that beauty and usability are in balance. An object that is beautiful to the core, however, is no better than one that is only pretty if they both lack usability. And I can tell you that in that case, neither will be perceived as beautiful. So in our quest for improvement, let’s not be usability bigots. Yes, products need to be usable. But all the factors of design must be in harmony. That means marketing considerations, aesthetic appeal, manufacturability -- all are important. The things you produce must be affordable, functional, and pleasurable. And that last one is especially important — because without it you don’t get noticed, you don’t get used, you don’t get bought.
  • Aim to make the things you create a pleasure to own and a pleasure to use.
  • whether you personally like the design is irrelevant -- what’s important here is that at the time this was a revolutionary approach. Apple thought beyond typical computing concerns -- the speed of the machine, the size of the storage, etc. -- and gave some love to every aspect of the product, most notably the outside. A revolution should LOOK like a revolution. If you say you’re different, BE different. So we get this amazing new thing. And in months, we get....well, some less than amazing things.
  • do hamsters really need translucent bondi blue cages?
  • A great quote I’ve always loved by Basho goes: Seek not to follow in the footsteps of men of old; seek what they sought . Put another way: if you’re gonna imitate something, imitate STRATEGY. Have people made a lot of money capitalizing on a trend? Sure. But do you know what the odds are of being in the exact right place at the exact right time at the exact point in history? You have a better chance of being struck by lightning. Twice. (which is 1 in 490 billion, by the way)
  • Did you see the moonwalking bear? This is an example of what’s called inattention blindness or change blindness. The point is that when people are focused on a specific task or goal, they often miss significant changes in the visual field. So when you refresh a screen and make one change on it, users may not realize they’re even looking at a different screen. What I tell my design teams is that while consistency is mandatory, repetition is not. To make sure people notice changes in the visual field, add additional visual cues (blinking) or auditory cues (beeping).
  • People want more choices and information than they can actually process. Information is addictive -- this is part of the dopamine effect. Dopamine cause you to seek pleasure, to want, desire, seek out and search. It’s why you feel addicted to Twitter or texting or Facebook. It’s why you can’t ignore your email when you see there are messages in your inbox (Pavlovian cue). It’s why every time your phone dings you look, no matter what you may be doing. This is your dopamine system at work, telling you a reward is coming. Tweets send the dopamine system raging, because the 140-character limit doesn’t fully satisfy the brain’s need for information. People are motivated to keep seeking information -- so the easier you make it for them to find information, the more information seeking they will do.
  • Too many choices paralyzes the thought process. Sheena Lyengar wrote a book in 2010 called The Art of Choosing -- “Jam” study. Set up booths at busy gorcery stores. Alternated selection on the table: 6 jars/varieties vs. 24 jars/varieties. 6 jars: 60% of people coming by would stop and taste. 24 jars: 30% of people would stop & taste. 6 jars: 31% of people coming by purchased. 24 jars: 3% of people purchased. At the point when a person is confident in a decision, he stops seeking choices. Know when to move on.
  • Resist the implulse to provide users with a large number of choices they don’t really need. If you ask people how many options they want, they will almost always say “a lot” or “all of them.” So if you ask, be prepared to deviate from what you hear. When possible limit the number of choices during any one task or on any given screen to 3 or 4. If you have to offer more, do so via progressive disclosure, e.g. a choice from 3 or 4 options, and then another choice from a subset.
  • Whether people read from left to right or right to left, one thing remains true: they never start in the topmost corner. Why? Because we’ve all gotten used to the idea that there are things on the screen that have nothing to do with the task at hand, like logos, blank pace and navigation bars. So they avoid the edges and look for the first available point where either meaning or visual impact grabs their attention.
  • People have a mental model of where things tend to be on a computer screen, and a mental model for particular sites or apps they use. They look at the screen based on these mental models. The iPhone essentially introduced a new mental model of how a smartphone works. And subsequent OS systems used the same mental model, much to Apple’s chagrin. But again, the reason Android succeeded isn’t because it mimics the iPhone’s look and feel -- it mimics the basic principles of how information is organized and acted upon -- which matches the user base’s expected mental model. And while Windows 8 seems great for the desktop....the jury is very much out on whether the mobile community will embrace it. Whole new mental model :-)
  • Research shows that a little stress (or arousal if you’re a psychologist) helps us perform tasks, because it heightens awareness. Too much stress , (or arousal) however, and performance degrades. It’s called the Yerkes-Dodson law, look it up. Don’t assume people will use your app in a stress-free environment. Things that you assume are simple may be stressful depending on the context of the operation. Trying to fill out a form on the screen with a customer present on the phone or in person, for instance, is stressful. I worked with a client once who had people filling out a form for approving whether medical procedures would be covered by insurance. “It’s just a form” they said. Oh yeah? Tell that to the 30 users across as many organizations who were worried about making mistakes -- and someone’s claim not being paid as a result. That’s stress, and you need to account for it.
  • Put the most important things -- things you want people to focus on -- in the top third of the screen or in the middle. Don’t put important things at the edges; people tend not to look there. Design so people can move in a normal reading pattern. Avoid patterns where they have to bounce back & forth to many parts of the screen to accomplish a task.
  • Good alignment is both visible and invisible. Most users won't consciously notice that everything is lined up neatly -- but they’ll FEEL it when things are out of alignment. They’ll be increasingly uncomfortable, fidgety and impatient. That’s because we’re wired -- eyes and brain -- to automatically seek and establish visual relationships, visual order. Get the lay of the land at a glance. And when we can’t easily do that we get irritated -- and we often don’t know why.
  • Good alignment is both visible and invisible. Most users won't consciously notice that everything is lined up neatly -- but they’ll FEEL it when things are out of alignment. They’ll be increasingly uncomfortable, fidgety and impatient. That’s because we’re wired -- eyes and brain -- to automatically seek and establish visual relationships, visual order. Get the lay of the land at a glance. And when we can’t easily do that we get irritated -- and we often don’t know why.
  • Margins – and negative space – give the eye room to maneuver. They provide a buffer between the main content, key actions and ancillary elements—such as related labels, links and ads—allowing the reader to focus on the text. Beyond this purely functional purpose, margins can also bring deeper harmony to the layout.
  • even though we haven’t touched the design - which is bad to be sure - the screen is instantly more visually pleasing, more clearly organized and more useful.
  • When paragraph text is left aligned, a straight left edge appears. Users can read each line by simply moving their eyes to the left edge each time. This makes paragraphs faster and easier to read because the user’s eyes don’t have to work as hard to find where the line starts each time. When you center your text, the starting place of each line changes. This forces users to work harder to find where each line begins to continue reading. Without a straight left edge, there is no consistent place where users can move their eyes to when they complete each line. 
  • I also see a lot of developers do this. Please stop it :-)
  • Pattern recognition helps people identify letters in different fonts. It’s not memorization of all these versions of the letter “A” that allows you to recognize it as such.
  • Research shows no difference in comprehension, reading speed or preference between serif and sans-serif fonts.
  • Some fonts interfere with the brain’s ability to recognize patterns. And if a font is hard to read, the meaning of the text will be lost.
  • If a font is hard to read, the meaning of the text will be lost. Two smart guys named Song and Swartz (2008) gave people written instructions on how to do a physical exercise and asked them how long they thought it would take. When the instructions where in an easy-to-read font like Arial, people estimated about 8 minutes, and as such were willing to incorporate the exercise into their daily routine. When the instructions were presented in an overly decorative font like Brush Script, people estimated it’d take almost twice as long -- 15 minutes -- to do the exercise, and they rated the exercise as difficult to do (and less likely to do it).
  • Decorative fonts interfere with pattern recognition and slow down reading. If people have trouble reading the font, they will transfer that feeling of difficulty to the meaning of the text -- and decide that the subject is hard to do or understand.
  • Primary Actions enable the most important action (completion) for the user. Secondary actions, on the other hand, tend to be less utilized -- and most often allow people to retract the data they’ve entered. Options like “Cancel”, “Reset”, or “Go Back” represent secondary actions that are counter to most people’s primary goal . So you don’t want them to inadvertently click on the wrong thing. Be RUTHLESS about visually distinguishing primary and secondary actions so people have a clear, direct path illuminating their primary goal.
  • Primary Actions enable the most important action (completion) for the user. Secondary actions, on the other hand, tend to be less utilized -- and most often allow people to retract the data they’ve entered. Options like “Cancel”, “Reset”, or “Go Back” represent secondary actions that are counter to most people’s primary goal . visually distinguish primary and secondary actions so people have an clear path illuminating their primary goal.
  • With enterprise-level apps, things get a little more complex. Now you’re likely to have primary, secondary, tertiary and even quaternary levels of actions -- so visually distinguishing them becomes a bit more challenging. These scenarios require more time spent thinking about how elements are organized onscreen and what their visual form is -- icon vs. button vs. hyperlink vs....?

The Great Software Trendkill: 12 Rules for Great UI Design The Great Software Trendkill: 12 Rules for Great UI Design Presentation Transcript

  • the greatsoftware trendkill 112 rules for great UI designjoe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • 2formfollowsfunctionor does it?joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • louis sullivan thought so. 3 “It is the pervading law of all things organic and inorganic, of all things physical and metaphysical, of all things human and all things superhuman, of all true manifestations of the head, of the heart, of the soul, that the life is recognizable in its expression, that form ever follows function. This is the law.”joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • frank lloyd wright thought so. 4joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • walt gropius thought so too. 5joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • nature, however, disagrees. 6“form follows function” presupposes that every form in thenatural world exists as it does because of functionalrequirements.From atoms to enzymes to organisms, scientists and biologistsacross the globe will tell you that function cannot be predicted.What really happens is that organisms find functions for theforms they have inherited. In nature every form is the outcomeof specific environmental circumstances and phenomenon.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • if form did 7follow function...functionality would take priority over allother design considerationsaesthetic considerations would besecondary to functional considerationsevery functional element would ultimatelyhave one (and only one) designone size would truly fit all!joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • reality check 8audience needsclient desiresethical obligationsaesthetic inclinationsmaterial propertiescultural presuppositionsfunctional requirementstimebudgetresourcesjoe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 1 9 every force evolves form.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • accelerated tech evolution 10joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • accelerated UI evolution 11joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • accelerated UI evolution 12joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • accelerated UI evolution 13joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • accelerated UI evolution 14joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • accelerated UI evolution 15joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • accelerated UI evolution 16joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • accelerated UI evolution 17joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • human cognition? unchanged. 18 perceive the state of the world interpret perception evaluate interpretations goals intend to act determine sequence of actions execute sequencejoe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 2 19 technology changes. people don’t.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • make it pretty... 20joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • which can make it useful. 21joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 3 22 beautiful things should function better.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • all this and brains, too 23joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • these guys...not so much. 24joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 4 25 imitate strategy, not form.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • changes in the visual field 26joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 5 27 don’t assume they’ll see it just because it’s there.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • the dopamine loop 28joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • my reach exceeds my grasp 29joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 6 30 less is more.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • conventions are your friends. 31 people don’t look at screen edges true top left the point where meaningful information beginsjoe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • what’s expected? 32joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • tasks are stressful 33joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 7 34 design for experience, expectation and stress.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • seeking relationships 35joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • seeking relationships 36joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 8 37 align EVERYTHING.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • accentuate the negative... 38joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • ...and create a positive. 39joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 9 40 pad EVERYTHING.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • go easy on the eyes 41 Completely impact multifunctional processes Completely impact multifunctional processes and wireless supply chains. Dynamically and wireless supply chains. Dynamically engage business meta-services for market- engage business meta-services for market- driven data. Collaboratively restore cross- driven data. Collaboratively restore cross- platform users before client-centered platform users before client-centered manufactured products. manufactured products. Assertively evolve long-term high-impact Assertively evolve long-term high-impact portals through visionary solutions. portals through visionary solutions. Professionally harness standardized portals Professionally harness standardized portals vis-a-vis resource maximizing deliverables. vis-a-vis resource maximizing deliverables. Continually coordinate stand-alone Continually coordinate stand-alone applications rather than virtual communities. applications rather than virtual communities.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • go easy on the eyes 42 Centered Headline Left-aligned paragraph text does not combine well with centered text. centered text works on buttons Unsymmetrical line lengths of the paragraph can give the headline the appearance that it’s slightly off-center.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 10 43 don’t center align text.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 10 44 don’t center align text. ever.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 10 45 don’t center align text. ever. unless it’s on a button.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • pattern recognition 46joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • serif or sans? yes. 47 Some argue that sans serif typefaces are easier to read because they are plain; others contend that serif fonts are easier to read because the serifs draw the eye toward the letter. Research shows no difference in comprehension, reading speed or preference between serif and sans-serif fonts. Some argue that sans serif typefaces are easier to read because they are plain; others contend that serif fonts are easier to read because the serifs draw the eye toward the letter. Research shows no difference in comprehension, reading speed or preference between serif and sans-serif fonts.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • ...unless they’re decorative. 48 There are many fonts that are easy to read. Any of them are fine to use. but avoid a font that is so decorative that it starts to interfere with pattern recognition in the brain. There are many fonts that are easy to read. Any of them are fine to use. but avoid a font that is so decorative that it starts to interfere with pattern recognition in the brain. There are many fonts that are easy to read. Any of them are fine to use. but avoid a font that is so decorative that it starts to interfere with pattern recognition in the brain.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • meaning and comprehension 49 Tuck your chin into your chest, and then lift your chin upward as far as possible. 6-10 repetitions. Lower your left ear toward your left shoulder and then your right ear toward your right shoulder. 6-10 repetitions. Tuck your chin into your chest, and then lift your chin upward as far as possible. 6-10 repetitions. Lower your left ear toward your left shoulder and then your right ear toward your right shoulder. 6-10 repetitions.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 11 50 sans or serif is fine – but don’t decorate.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • who’s on first? 51joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • who’s on first? 52 primary actions secondary action current choice highlightedjoe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • who’s on first? 53primary secondary tertiaryjoe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • RULE 12 54 visually separate primary and secondary actions.joe natoli | givegoodux.com
  • the greatsoftware trendkill 5512 rules for great UI designjoe natoli | givegoodux.com