Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox, August 29, 2011  

Transmedia Design for the 3 Screens (Make That 5)

Summary:
Mobile use will rise, but desktop computers will remain important, forcing companies to design for multiple platforms, requiring continuity in visual design, features, user data, and tone of voice.

Many people predict that mobile devices will be the only important user interface platform in the so-called "post-PC" future. Some even recommend designing websites for mobile first, and then modifying the design for the desktop PC as an afterthought.

I disagree.

Although it makes for a good story to claim that something new will kill the old, things rarely work out that way. As Peter Zollman once said, "with the possible exception of the town crier, a new medium has never put an old medium out of business." Despite TV, we still have radio — and, for that matter, live theater. In the computer industry, we still have mainframes, and IBM harvests billions each year accordingly.

Computers are now so cheap that most people in rich countries own several devices: one for each major need. Of course, under "computer" I include not just PCs, but also tablets, phones, mainframes, and servers. Sure, most homes won't have a mainframe in the basement, but many have a family file server to host their photo and video libraries.

(Under "desktop PCs," I obviously include Windows, Macintosh, and Linux — if it ever becomes easy to use — as well as potentially new platforms, such as desktop machines running webOS. Similarly, I include laptops as well as mini-towers and the like because the physical size is less important than the user experience. Although laptops are movable, they're not mobile devices, so I count them as a subspecies of PC.)

PCs Will Remain Important

Desktop PCs have 2 inherent advantages over mobile: Big screens and big input devices are both inherent advantages of the desktop PCs; mobile devices must be small so users can carry them around. Desktop PCs also have 4 additional advantages that will hold for at least the next decade: Bandwidth and hardware–software prowess are only temporary advantages for desktop PCs. Because mobile moves at a faster pace, it will eventually reach a level sufficient to support most user needs in these areas.

However, better input and better output are durable advantages for the desktop user experience.

I am a screen-size bigot: bigger screens deliver hugely higher user productivity. Anyone who's experienced a 30-inch monitor cringes at the idea of doing a major project on anything smaller. I'm astounded that PC makers don't offer even bigger screens. (I'd be first in line for a 40-inch screen with 300 dpi crispness.)

Sadly, Apple aside, PC vendors are universally incompetent at marketing and product differentiation. No one ever says: "Buy this machine at $500 more for a 10% productivity gain," which would indicate a great investment for companies who bought one for every employee who makes more than $50,000 a year and spends at least an hour per day on the computer. (Last week, I told one of my own employees to spend that extra $500 for a higher-end laptop to increase her productivity during business trips — but I had to make that argument myself, as it was nowhere to be found on Sony's site.)

Usage Shifting to Smaller Devices; Much Value Remaining on the Desktop

IDC estimates that PC sales this year will increase by only 4% over last year — which is actually not a shabby growth rate for a mature product in a recession. Still, it's certainly true that desktop PC dominance will decrease in the future, as a large percentage of usage shifts to phones and tablets.

Photographers have a saying: "The best camera is the one you have with you when something worth photographing happens." This will often be a pocket camera or a phone camera; people typically carry professional-grade cameras only when they plan to shoot photos.

Similarly, the best computer is the one you have with you when you want something done. This will often be your phone or tablet. I move my iPad around the house so it's close at hand when I want to look up something on the Web. For example, I often make dinner reservations using the OpenTable app on my iPad. Although that app is clunkier than the OpenTable website on my desktop PC, I'd rather suffer 20 seconds of extra interaction overhead with a bad app than spend a minute walking upstairs to the PC.

Much use will thus shift from desktops to phones and tablets, but a big percentage of use will remain on the desktop. It's hard to estimate the exact percentage for each device class, but it's fairly certain that the highest-value use will stay predominantly on desktop. Thus, the percentage split of value between devices will be more favorable to the PC, even if the percentage split of time increasingly turns more toward tablets and phones.

Of course, it's value (i.e., money in our pockets) and not time that matters when we allocate our investments across user experience projects.

We've known since our early mobile user research in 2000 that killing time is the killer app for mobile devices. This again means that much small-device use is fairly low value: playing casual games, checking social network updates, reading celebrity gossip and other generic news, and using intermittent-use apps.

Yes, a few providers of highly successful time-killers can score good coin: Angry Birds has sold more than $300 million in downloads. But this equates to about 3 cents per hour of user time spent slinging those addictive birds. Similarly, celebrity gossip is probably worth 0.02 cents per page view. (Clueless marketing managers might currently pay more for banners nobody looks at, but eventually CPM for generic content and generic traffic will drop far below a dollar to match their real value. Advertising budgets won't be misspent forever.)

Other mobile use is worth more: the minute I spent making a dinner reservation on the OpenTable app translated into $115 revenue for that restaurant and about a dollar for OpenTable itself. Let's say $60/hour = 2,000 × the value of playing Angry Birds.

Conversely, much desktop use is of little commercial value — such as when people email their friends and family. Still, much other desktop use is of substantial business value:

In summary: use of mobile devices will dramatically increase, but much high-value use will remain on desktop PCs. Most companies must support both device classes, and our usability research shows that this must be done with separate UI designs that target the different characteristics of the two types of user experience. One size UI does not fit all screen sizes.

The 3rd Screen: TV

After mobile devices and desktop PCs, the 3rd main category of screen-based user experience is television. It's quite valuable, at anywhere from 20 cents to $2 per hour of user time. (In my household, we pay the cable company about $2/viewer-hour, but we watch much less TV than most families. Amazon.com charges $1.99 to stream any Star Trek episode, which also seems on the high end.)

I focus on mobile and desktop usability because so few companies engage in TV-based interaction design. Usability is typically horrible, as exemplified by my article on remote controls. However, there's some hope for the future, as exemplified by the Kinect gestural UI.

Currently, designing for TV is relevant primarily for companies in the entertainment or consumer electronics industries. If interactive TV usability improves substantially, more companies will need to pay attention to this platform. At that point, one thing is certain: TV will need a 3rd UI that's distinct from both your mobile and desktop designs.

Screens 4 & 5: Tiny, Huge

As if it weren't enough to design 2 or 3 different UIs for mobile, desktop, and possibly TV, there are 2 even more extreme screen sizes to consider: really, really small and really, really large. Again, each will need its own UI.

Tiny screens include the postage-sized displays on lots of consumer electronics — even my toothbrush has its own display these days. If we stretch the definition a bit, we can also include the user experiences driven by items with embedded RFID chips and QR codes.

Huge screens go from meeting-room-sized displays to smart buildings, and even smart campuses such as hospitals that guide visitors and patients to the right buildings and rooms.

As yet, there hasn't been much usability work done on these two extremes, but they definitely have their own challenges. And for sure, any decent UI will have to be very different from those on phones and desktop PCs.

Transmedia User Experience

Most companies will probably deploy only 2 UI designs: mobile and desktop. Others might need 3, 4, or even all 5, depending on their industry. Whatever the number, there are two key points to remember: Our experience with transmedia usability is not yet sufficient to provide an exhaustive list of guidelines for achieving a cohesive user experience across platforms. But we do know that it's essential to get the following 4 issues right: To conclude: cross-platform UIs should be different but similar.

Learn More

More on visual continuity in the full-day training course on Visual Design for Mobile Devices and Tablets at the annual Usability Week conference.

The full-day training course Mobile User Experience 1: Usability of Websites and Apps on Mobile Devices discusses how to allocate features between the full desktop site and a mobile design, and the course on Writing for Mobile Users covers content style.


> Other Alertbox columns (complete list)
> Sign up for newsletter that will notify you of new Alertboxes

Copyright © 2011 by Jakob Nielsen. ISSN 1548-5552