Ok, so we have this email alias for winfx setup and typically I let all the experts send out stuff and I check it out so I can learn and try to stay on top of things. There was this thread about readers and reader clients and talk about this one from the New York Times that some of my peers worked on. It really does have some cool features. Anyway Here is a bit of a thread that I started when I asked basically some questions about what the deal was? I put these in order that they were sent out starting with the email I sent out regarding this dicussion about readers.
From: David Kelley
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 8:06 AM
To: winfx
Subject: a little help?
Ok, so maybe I spend a little too much time with algorithms and databases (they are so inspiring) J But I really do not see how the times reader (based on the screen shots) is any better then something that could be done in HTML or any of the other readers I have seen, and for that matter cnn.com, msn.com, space.org etc. all are just as easy to read as any other RSS reader? It all seems a bit much to about I’m not really sure. For winfx, WPF, .NET 3.0 etc it seems to be about better UI. With the work we have done here we have taken it to the next level with ‘finesse’ (whooshing) where applications are easier to use, more pleasant to use, better data visualization etc but when it comes to reading text- reading text is reading text. Maybe one font might be better then others but still? I’m not sure I understand what all but fuss is about?
From: Mark Brown
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 8:51 AM
To: David Kelley; winfx
Subject: RE: a little help?
Whoa.... I hope we didn’t start a firestorm here. Seeing is believing (the screen shots don’t do the Times Reader justice). There is a fair amount of whoosing in the app (especially in the Topic Explorer). :)
Personally, I LOVE the New York Times Reader experience, and our own Nathan Dunlap and Robby Ingebretsen have made significant contributions to this app prior to joining IdentityMine.
I think what some of us are struggling with is the potential proliferation of branded WPF reading experiences (as Ashvil refers to as the 'closed reader') that are each a separate install on the client.
From: David Kelley
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 9:12 AM
To: winfx
Subject: RE: a little help?
I did download it and it is cool. Lots of whooshing, I like that in any application but I mean any reader either a web page, some rss reader or this slick times reader; when you are just reading text I didn’t see what makes one different then the other that adds to the 'reading' experience?
From: Nathan Dunlap
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 9:25 AM
To: David Kelley; winfx
Subject: RE: a little help?
Ok now you pushed my buttons :) Actually no firestorm on my side because I am used to explaining the app to people. Most people don’t get the app until they have used it for a few days consistently. Even then I don’t think most people can put their finger on what it is that is better. I was going to do a blog post but you now get my preview:
Reading text is not just reading text... Maybe it is for you. But by and large the mass audience of 'text' readers have not found a suitable digital replacement for the paper reading experience.
Having a little bit of insight into the NYT app and its design decisions I want to point out that there is no one feature in NYT that is a silver bullet that solves the reading problem. Rather I would argue that there are multiple features used together in the right way that reduce the reading problems.
NYT was designed with the concept that readers used to spend 20 minutes a day reading paper news and now they on average are spending about 5 minutes a day skimming news headlines. This defeats both advertising and subscription models. The reader is betting big on devices (Tablets, UMPCs, etc) being core to solving this problem.
The core features that reduce reading friction are:
- offline support - Show me a web based reading experience that is a no touch offline solution that you technology challenged friends and family can use. Think about where you see people reading newspapers these days... Subways, airports, waiting rooms... All places that are "sometimes connected".
- Ease of Use - you are capable of navigating and reading the news with just the four arrow keys. This is especially useful if the app runs on a device like tablets with directional buttons or is used with a remote. Try reading in bed with a laptop using the track pad or nub, or mouse every time you want to flip a page. Book reading experiences do not require near the muscle movement that is required to interact with computers... Especially in scrollable websites. Changing articles or flipping pages becomes a twitch muscle movement that with the right device is easier than flipping a paper page.
- Adaptability - There are no reading applications that truly adapt to the size of the device as the NYT reader does. Acrobat has flow capabilities that most people aren’t aware of but they aren’t nearly as robust as what NYT does. The NYT Reader has specifically designed templates made for most popular tablet sizes available in both landscape and portrait positions.
- OS integration - run the app on Vista. Use the start menu and type in an article and it searches cached content in Vista not in the app. Imagine when you can start tagging these articles and living the WinFS dream.
Features that are compelling to businesses:
- Branding and differentiation - this app was actually designed in coordination with the NYT print designers.. Not the web designers. Print professionals have historically felt that the web has destroyed the heart and soul of the art and science of print design. This is not just about typefaces but they are p art of it. This is about line height, kerning, leading, ligatures, stylistic variants. Paragraph width is a major issue with reading fatigue and our ability to read more effectively. If you haven’t heard Bill Hill talk about type then I highly recommend watching this http://channel9.msdn.com/showpost.aspx?postid=146749
- Advertising - coordinated advertising that takes advantage of the adaptability features and the offline support is very compelling to advertisers. Especially since there are new advertising holes available because of pagination and interstitial navigations.
- Stickiness - A major problem with websites and browser based applications is that you lose context really easily... How many times has a hyperlink in an email hijacked one of your browsers? Publishers hate this and its one compelling reason to become a standalone app. Getting icons on the desktop, in the start menu, and registering a file type are all much more compelling than the current bookmark, address bar options that websites currently have.
Why is it a closed reader? Why not an browser based application? Its not because those weren't valid ideas on the table. It’s mostly about timing and technology. It’s a very realistic solution for NYT to build an XBAP solution. In fact that is core to the MS Reading starter kit. But again a browser based solution only solves a few battles (mostly reading display) which I don’t think is the reason NYT is innovative.
From: Nathan Dunlap
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 9:51 AM
To: David Kelley; winfx
Subject: RE: a little help?
Very relevant and posted today 'Does Reading Really Matter' http://blogs.adobe.com/billmccoy/2006/09/does_reading_re.html
From: David Kelley
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 10:09 AM
To: Nathan Dunlap; winfx
Subject: RE: a little help?
I think the ‘magic’ or silver bullet is when the times reader is part of outlook and built into a Teflon plastic thingy I can roll up and put in my pocket. Then when it is displaying it is just as easy to read as a paper magazine and plus maybe has most of the functionality of a tablet PC and for that matter when you look at it, it looks like a printed page and doesn’t need a back light... or batteries...
So some one showed me the topic explorer... now that is cool! But still, I have my little wiz bang app I plug in each morning and launch 8 portals and I skim all the head lines and only read technical material that is particularly relevant. Should I now install a reader for each one of those portals? Right now IE is my reader and it doesn’t do all the whooshing but it seems to work. Maybe a nice plain RSS reader that gets rid of all the adds and works offline would me cool and is all I would want short of that topic explorer and the magic bullet above.
Now really that Topic Explorer is worth it all by itself. THAT is in my mind an example of what WPF really gives us from a business stand point. I’m not even sure how you could do that kind of functionality any other way visually. (I suppose one could get really warm and fuzzy with their C++ compiler for a year or 3 but that gives me chills...) Being able to visualize information in a way that is easy and logical that couldn’t really be done ‘reasonably’ with other mediums really is where I think we really get bang for our buck. I will keep the NYT reader around just for that one feature.
Anyway this did shed some light onto the whole reader experience thing for me. And I appreciate your explanation.
One more issue though... about that 'Does Reading Really Matter'...
Personally I love my books, in 2025 I will still be collecting them and worst of all (gasp) I will still be 'reading' them. They are all special to me. J So I don’t really see my self getting away from paper books until that magic e-book, rss, page computer, email wiz bang client with lots of whooshing and a topic explorer with no batteries is rolled up in my back pocket or better yet implanted under my skin and the UI is piped directly into my optic nerves...