Readville web agency
Hello and welcome to this web agency Web Designer Readville video tutorial.
I’m Owen Corso from Google.
And today, we’re going to build a rich media expandable creative with video.
Let’s start by selecting file, New File.
This opens a dialog box where we will set up our ad.
First, let’s make out high of project.
We have four options– The default is Display & Video 360so we will leave that as is.
Data Driven Templates for Display & Video 360 Ad Canvas - Google Web Designer
Ant (GitHub) is much more than a React UI kit with a minimalist design aesthetic and every component under the sun. It is a rabbit’s hole that leads to a giant maze of interconnected libraries, with a serious ecosystem surrounding it. There’s a custom build tool based on Webpack called ant-tool, several CLI apps, community scaffolds, and a complete framework (dva, which has its own CLI as well). And the UI components are mini-projects in and of themselves — see this repo for information on each component.
Many of these libraries appear to be very polished, including an entire React animation library. And I’d love to learn more about them, but Ant comes with a challenge — the majority of the documentation is in Chinese.
How’s Your Chinese?
Let me preface this by pointing out that the components library and its terrific style guide have been translated into English by generous volunteers, so the UI kit is completely usable. And the translation effort demonstrates the project’s intentions to open up Ant to a wider audience, boding well for companies considering adopting it.
However, there are some language issues that remain. The English is sometimes confusing or obscure. The maintainer of the library has commented here that they welcome PRs for improving the documentation, so that could be a great way to get involved in this amazing project.Good luck hunting down issues!
Another issue is that issues in Ant.Design are mostly filed and debated on GitHub in Chinese. This could be a deal breaker for enterprise applications, but I’m not sure it should be one for early startups since Ant can be used quite minimally, without making use of smarter features like built-in form validation. Still, if you find an issue or bug with the library, it will be difficult to research previous solutions to your issue, and that’s why I recommend making minimal use of the surrounding ecosystem at this stage.
Popular UI libraries for React include Material-UI, Semantic-UI, Foundation, and Bootstrap (this and this), and they are all fairly mature. Material-UI should be singled out as it massively eclipses the others in popularity, with over 22k stargazers — and over 600 open issues. But it turns out that Ant.Design is a surprisingly worthy candidate as well. It’s battle tested by some of the most well-trodden sites on the web (Alibaba, Baidu), and it boasts a brilliant style guide, custom tooling, and, of course, a comprehensive catalogue of components. It also has only 85 open issues at the time of writing, which is a good thing considering its popularity.
So let’s take a tour of the library, see what it has to offer, and how to get started using it.
The Ant components list is dizzying. Sure, it contains the basics — modals, forms (inline and vertical), navigation menus, a grid system. But it also contains a ton of extras, such as a @mentioning system, a timeline, badges, a seriously nice table system, and other small fancy features, such as an involved address box (see the Habitual Residence field). Have a look — it has everything that a modern web application should, with a tasteful, minimalist aesthetic.
There’s a nice, concise section in the documentation on the guiding principles of Ant.Design. I found it a great read as it got me thinking a lot about UI/UX considerations, especially the “Provide an Invitation” section, where they discuss different ways of making interactions discoverable by a user. By the way, if anyone can recommend me a good book on UX, I would be grateful.
The Ant layout system is comprised of a 24-aliquot (a great new word that I learned from the translated documentation — it means parts of a whole) grid and a separate Layout component than you can choose to use. The grid uses the familiar Row/Col system, but you can also specify a prop called flex which allows you to harness Flexbox properties to define a responsive UI. (See a previous blog post of mine for help grokking the Flex standard.)
Flexbox is now fully supported on just about every browser (with partial support on IE 11 as well as some older mobile browsers), so it should be fine to use. If your customer base is largely Internet Explorer users, which does happen in some industries or countries, you would be wise to abstain from using flex Rows or the Layout component, as Layout is built strictly on Flexbox.
Layout includes components for a Sider, Header, Content, and Footer. Again, these are strictly based on Flexbox, so there’s no choice here — but to be honest I’m not sure what these components give you on top of using the standard Row/Col grid system, aside from a couple extra props you can make use of and possibly some built-in design choices. All in all, it doesn’t seem to me to be hugely useful.
Col elements can be supplied with a span prop to define how many aliquots a column takes up and an offset prop to define an optional offset; Row can take a gutter prop to define space between columns in a row (in pixels, not aliquots).
Here’s a UI example from a side project of mine. It contains one row with two columns:
The code would look something like this:
Ant does not let you down as far as forms are concerned, with options for inline, horizontal, and vertical forms, amazing select boxes, and clear validation messages and icons. In fact, it goes a little overboard here. It allows you to wrap your entire form-rendering component in a higher-order component à la Form.create()(<Component />) to gain access to a built-in validator syntax and custom two-way-binding system (cue audible lip biting). You can then specify standard rules such as ‘required’, or supply custom validator methods. (What are Higher Order Components? Check out this excellent post by James K. Nelson.)
Do you need to use their HOC? Absolutely not, and I’m not sure you should. As I said above, going down that path could expose you to language risk should you encounter bugs and I don’t see why you would want to use a custom two-way binding data system anyway. But you could easily use the HOC and just not use the two-way data binding.
Au Naturel — Plain React Forms
So let’s go over how to use the Ant validation messages without using their higher-order component.
Ant gives us three props that we can supply to each Form.Item component to display validation messages or icons:
- validateStatus — This determines the colour & icon scheme of the validation message (see photo above) — valid options are success, warning, error, and validating.
- help — The validation message to display.
- hasFeedback — This is one of them props that don’t require a value. Just include if you want to display the associated icon, and it defaults to true.
Here’s an example of a simple form element that displays a validation message:
Notice that I used the long-form Form.Item component name. You can make yourself a shortcut for this and any other Ant sub-components as follows:const FormItem = Form.Item;// .. allows you to use:
Form Validation using the Ant Higher-Order Component
Now what if we do want to make use of the Ant Form decorator? It’s fairly straightforward to implement. Create your React component class, and then pass it as an argument to Form.create(). The component can then be exported:class SomeComponent extends React.Component
render() <place_form_here.. />
FancyFormComponent = Form.create()(SomeComponent);export FancyFormComponent as default ; // imported as SomeComponent
Inside your form, decorate your Input fields using the getFieldDecorater method, which exposes a ton of extra props on your component. You can now manipulate form elements directly from the props (eek!).
This example in the documentation gives a thorough demonstration on using the complete higher-order component.
Interactive Components — Message (Alert)
Ant provides a number of other components that give web applications a high degree of interactivity. A great example is alerts — or messages, as they’re called in Ant. Adding an alert is as simple as calling message.success('Great! Item has been saved.') in your component. Message types include success, warning, or error. Just don’t forget to import message (lowercase) from ‘antd’.Minimalism at its Best
As I mentioned above, you can either go all-in on the Ant ecosystem (with its custom Webpack adapter), or just opt for the design framework. I went with the latter and I suspect you might too, not the least because using other parts of the ecosystem could require a working knowledge of Chinese. But I’ll cover both options.
Option 1 — Use the CLI
Ant comes with antd-init, a CLI for generating a complete React application with Ant installed. I do not recommend this route for non-Chinese speakers, but if you want to try it, getting started is easy. Just install the CLI using npm, create a new folder, and run antd-init:npm install antd-init -g; mkdir demo-app; cd $_; antd-init;
You will then be greeted by the following message:antd-init@2 is only for experience antd. If you want to create projects, it’s better to init with dva-cli. dva is a redux and react based application framework. elm concept, support side effects, hmr, dynamic load and so on.`
It’s a rabbit’s hole. Open your new application and you will see that your familiar webpack.config.js file is no longer familiar — the CLI uses ant-tool, a “Build Tool Based on Webpack” that I mentioned above. The documentation is in Chinese, but it appears to set common defaults for Webpack and then allow you to just supply values that you want to override. Here’s what the config file looks like:// Learn more on how to config.
// — https://github.com/ant-tool/atool-build#配置扩展module.exports = function(webpackConfig)
]); return webpackConfig;
The index.js contains a lovely demo page that uses the understated Ant styling.
Option 2 — Use Standard Webpack
This would be my preferred route, but it can be more complicated getting your Webpack settings right at first. The Getting Started page includes some good instructions. First install Ant in your React app:$ npm install antd --save
Ant recommends using their own babel-plugin-import in your .babelrc:"presets": [
"plugins": ["transform-decorators-legacy", ..., ["import", [ libraryName: "antd", style: "css" ]]
Make sure your Webpack includes loaders for .js and .css files, and you should be good to go. To use an Ant component, import it in the module file. E.g.import Row, Col, Icon, Button from 'antd';
There’s no doubt that Ant has a lot to offer as a UI framework, with a formidable catalogue of components and a serious ecosystem around it. It does, however, come with some risk. If you experience an issue with the library, you may be stuck communicating in Chinese. Ultimately I recommend trying it out if you like the minimalist aesthetic, while keeping usage of the peripheral Ant ecosystem to a minimum.
Readville web agency
Next, we can select the type of ad.
We want to make an expandable, so we select Expandable on the left.
Next, we can set again ad’s dimensions.
We are building a 320 by 50that expands to 480 by 250.
So I will make those changes.
We then assign the Readville creative a name.
I will leave my Save ToLocation as the default, and leave the talk about set to Quick.
Once I’m happy with my settings, I click OK.
Google Web Designer creates the initial pages of the ad for me with the dimensions I defined.
The collapsed page already contains a Tap Area event to expand the ad and an expanded pageReadville with a close tap area to collapse back down.
Latest Dental Implants To Be Used
1. Gestures are the new clicks
We forget how hard scrolling webpages used to be. Most users would painstakingly move their mouse to the right edge of the screen, to use something ancient called a ‘scrollbar’:
As a pro, you probably used a mouse wheel, cursor keys, or trackpad, but you were way ahead of most users.
In 2015 it’s far easier to scroll than it is to click. On mobile, you can scroll wildly with your thumb. To click on a precise target is actually more difficult — the complete opposite of what we’re used to on the desktop.
As a result, we should expect more and more websites to be built around scrolling first, and clicking second. And of course, that’s exactly what we’ve seen everywhere:
There’s every reason to expect this trend to continue as mobile takes over more of the market. Modern sites have fewer things to click, and much more scrolling. We’ll see fewer links, more buttons, bigger ‘clickable’ areas, and taller pages that expect to be scrolled.
Websites which spread their articles onto multiple pages will soon learn this lesson. Expect these to turn into longer single pages or even, like TIME magazine, into infinite scrolling pages:
It’s too early to know if the web will expand itself onto devices like watches, but if it ever does, you can bet it’ll be almost entirely driven by gestures.
2. The fold really is dead this time
Now scrolling is so cheap, and devices are so varied in size, ‘the fold’ is finally becoming irrelevant.
Designers are increasingly free to not cram everything at the top of a page. This leads to a design trend popularised by Medium — full-screen image titles, with no content visible until you start scrolling:
With tall, scrolling pages, designers have the chance to do what magazines have taken for granted for years: fill their pages with big beautiful images. In 2015 expect to see more designs that take up much more space — especially vertically — and a lot of larger imagery like this.
3. Users are quicker, websites are simplifying
Today every young adult is an expert web user. And even the amateurs are acting like pros: using multiple tabs, and swiping to go back a page.
The result is that everything is faster. And we’ve all learned to become impatient. If you want to make a mild mannered person explode with annoyance, just make their Internet really slow for a minute.
Now websites are forced not just to become faster (a technical problem), but to become faster to understand. Designs which slow the user down have the same impact on their audience as these websites which don’t load at all.
Simpler designs are easier to scan, which means they’re faster to appreciate. It’s easy to see which of these two designs is newer, and it’s because it’s the one that user’s can enjoy the fastest:
This is the biggest reason for the death of skeuomorphic design: users are more perceptive, less patient, and clutter only slows them down.
Apps put most websites to shame with super-minimal, beautiful interfaces. And they’re doing this because minimal interfaces perform better.
Flat design is just the beginning. The real trend is towards simplicity and immediacy, and we expect that to go further than ever in 2015.
4. The pixel is dead
On a desktop, a pixel was a pixel. You even had an idea of how many pixels made up an average inch: 72 dpi. Nowadays very few people know what a pixel is.
With responsive design, we’ve seen a move towards grids and percentages. But one huge area remains still unchallenged: bitmap images.
Almost all of the web is built with images that have half the resolution of a modern display, and they don’t scale. With Retina displays and modern browsers, the time is right for vector images to become more popular in 2015.
We can see this trend already happening with the font-based icons and Google’s Material design. The website loads faster and scale the icons to any size without losing quality. That makes them ideal for designers and modern web browsers.
The technology exists now, but it will take time for professionals to change their habits to create for higher quality displays. Once the average desktop display becomes Retina-grade (like the new iMac), we expect designers to follow suit.
5. Animation is back
If you want to make a website look dated, cover it with animated “Under Construction” GIFs and Flash animation. But several things are coming together to make animation a rising star in modern web design.
Flat design can end up looking too consistent, boring even. Animation helps a website to stand out and to pack more information into less space.
Mobile apps have redefined what a user expects. Mobile apps use motion to convey meaning, and websites are just starting to do the same.
New technologies like CSS animation make it easy to enhance designs without plugins, speed or compatibility issues. And Web Components (#6, below) will only accelerate this.
GIF animation is back, and surprisingly effective. You’ll notice this article makes extensive use of GIF animation (if it doesn’t, you should view this version), which has never been easier to create or share.
6. Components are the new frameworks
Web technology continues to get more complicated, and less semantic. Designers must embed messy code onto their pages for simple tasks, like including Google Analytics or a Facebook Like button. It would be a lot easier if we could just write something like this instead:
And we can with Web Components, which aren’t quite ready to be used by most designers yet. 2015 is looking like their year.
Google’s Material design is here, and it may just be what gets this movement started. Powered by Polymer, and supported by all modern browsers, it provides the rich animation and interaction components from Android apps, with simple tags like these:
If that takes hold, it wouldn’t be surprising to see more component based frameworks appear in 2015. Perhaps Bootstrap 4.0?
7. Social saturation and the rise of direct email
Social media has been a huge success for consumers, but many content producers aren’t so happy.
The problem is saturation. With billions of posts every day, Facebook learns the posts that users are most likely to enjoy and shows only those. Unfortunately that means over time, what you post is increasingly seen by a smaller percentage of your followers. (A problem you can solve, conveniently, by paying Facebook).
Social isn’t going away, but in 2014 we’ve seen a lot of prominent bloggers like Tim Ferriss move their focus away from social and into good old fashioned email lists. They’ve realised that email has one significant advantage over social: a much higher percentage of people will see what you send them.
I expect this post-social trend to continue into 2015, with the under-appreciated trend of Web Notifications (which work much like notifications in a mobile app).
Bonus non-prediction: CSS shapes
This cool technology won’t get noticed, except by designers. CSS shapes allow you to flow layout into shapes, like circles:
It’s incredibly cool, but until browser support is guaranteed, this is likely to be too risky to put time and effort into it you’d need almost two complete designs, for old and new browsers. And outside of designers, we don’t think many users would notice.
It is really cool though.
What to expect in 2015
In 2014 we saw mobile use overtake desktop, but the general public hasn’t caught up. Most organisations still commission a website to look good on their computer first and work on mobile second.
In 2015 that strategy is likely to look out of touch and unprofessional. As the mobile becomes the main device for browsing the web, “mobile-first” will become less of a buzzword and more of a requirement.
Flat design may be everywhere, but when you look beyond ghost buttons the real trend is that simpler sites are faster at gratifying users.
Simplicity is not just a fashion: it’s the future. Expect it to only continue.
It will become more and more common to embed animation into blog posts, and for motion to signify both premium quality (for those who can afford it) and to support the user experience.
Pixels and the fold will slowly be set aside making more room for scrolling and click-second experiences. Web Components will make it easier to deliver app-like experiences in our websites.
Right now you see the best of mobile app design appearing in web design. With enough time, the difference between an app and a website might almost entirely disappear.
How to Be Comfortable in the Dentist's Chair
ADRIENNE PORTERFELT: You've probably tried to buy somethingonline or had to fill out some formfor your kid's school, and it's reallyhard on your phone.
It's really hard.
MUSTAFA: There seemsto be a dark art when it comes to nativeapplications, and they're such small details thatyou're actually working on.
[MUSIC PLAYING] Quite often, developers willjust throw on input fields onto a page and not reallythink about the UX that's attributed to that.
So they'll think ofa flow of a form, but they won't necessarilyfeel that individual input, so how a user struggles.
And we know thatautocomplete really helps speed up theuser experience and makes fillingforms quite nice.
What are your feelingsand experiences on autocomplete andAutofill as a thing? ADRIENNE PORTER FELT:From the user experience, you've probably triedto buy something online or had to fill out someform for your kid's school.
And it's reallyhard on your phone.
It's really hard.
It's even hard on desktop.
You don't want to get upand get your credit card out of your purse,which is downstairs.
And these browserfeatures just really improve the userexperience of using a form.
In fact, we find that peoplefill out or submit the form 30% faster if the formworks with Autofill.
So we very much suggest thatweb developers think about this.
You want people to besubmitting your forms.
Right? So if you really want yourforms to be submitted quickly, easily, work with Autofill.
MUSTAFA: And why do you thinkdevelopers don't do that? Is it very difficult to do? I'm assuming it's just a fewattributes you add to inputs.
Right? ADRIENNE PORTER FELT: Yeah.
It's actually not that hard.
So you basically need to setup autocomplete attributes, and you need to makesure that you're not doing any fancy things thatreplace the normal select and input elements withother types of elements.
I think most of these developersjust don't think about it, don't realize,that you just need to put a littlebit of extra effort in to make sure that yourform works well with Autofill and to test it out.
MUSTAFA: Is that oneof the challenges, I suppose, like people makingthese custom UI things, which are not native but justlike divs or whatever and replacing that? Is that where thingsfall down with Autofill? ADRIENNE PORTER FELT:Honestly, there's a few things that can go wrong,but that's one of the big ones.
Yeah, so someone wants thisreally beautiful custom form where the dropdown isall fancy and custom.
And as a result of that,they're using all divs.
And the browser can'tfigure out, oh, this is supposed to be a form.
And then in that case,Autofill isn't going to work.
MUSTAFA: And Isuppose there's a lot of accessibilityissues connected to that as well, it looks like.
But from your pointof view, you've got designers anddevelopers, they want to do something custom,like unique experience.
But then as someone whoworks on the browser, you want to say, now letthe browser do the work.
Do you think there'sa middle point there? How can developers at leasthave a custom experience that's unique to theirproduct, but at the same time without breaking standards? Because this is one of thebiggest challenges on the web.
ADRIENNE PORTER FELT:So there's a lot of things you can do tochange the look of the form on the page while stillusing the select and input elements that HTML provides.
Right? You can customizethem in many ways.
I have to admit, there is onething you can't customize, and it's the lookof the dropdown, like in a select element.
But everything else, the wayit statically looks on a page, you can customize.
And the browser will stillknow that they're fields.
What you see is thebiggest challenge then, for Autofillor implementation, from your point of view? ADRIENNE PORTER FELT:I think it's honestly that developers don't thinkabout it, that people don't think to themselves that theyreally need to be testing their forms in this way.
When you've made it yourself,you've filled it out 100 times.
You tested it yourself.
And you don't thinkabout the fact that a user is goingto be coming to it in a different state of mind.
They are tryingto fill it out as fast as they can on the phone.
So I think developersjust aren't really thinking about the factthat they need to take these extra small steps.
MUSTAFA: So in terms ofbrowser compatibility, the things you're using willbe Chrome-specific stuff? Or is that open source-- not open source, butit's cross-platform.
ADRIENNE PORTER FELT: Yeah,that's a good question.
So specifically autocompleteattributes for Autofill, that's standardized.
All the browsers respect them.
With that being said, thereis one part, turning Autofill off-- that's the autocompleteoff attribute-- is not respected by all browsers.
But if you say,this form should be a credit card, thatwill be respected by all the major browsers.
MUSTAFA: But eachexperience, is there slight quirks per browser? Because obviously, that's goingto be a browser-specific thing.
ADRIENNE PORTER FELT: Some are-- they have veryslightly different UIs.
For example, maybe they'llbe integrated with a keyboard widget versus a dropdown.
But I think they're prettysimilar across browsers.
MUSTAFA: You work on theactual Chrome UI itself.
ADRIENNE PORTER FELT: Yes.
MUSTAFA: So are you actuallybuilding that design and code yourself, or are youworking with UX designers in that process? ADRIENNE PORTER FELT: Sowe have a design team.
And the design team helpsus figure out what those UI elements should look like.
We actually have a bigredesign coming up this year that I think is going tomake those substantially more beautiful and also help clean upthe code, which I know that it won't affect most people becauseit won't look any different.
But from our perspective-- MUSTAFA: It's much cleaner.
ADRIENNE PORTER FELT: Man,the code's so much cleaner.
MUSTAFA: What's the actualprocess of you actually creating UI? Because for me, I do front-enddevelopment and code.
But it's like there seemsto be a dark art when it comes to native applications.
And they're such smalldetails that you're actually working on, which the user maynot notice because it works.
But if it's broken,they will see it.
What is the actualprocess that you go through with your Chromedesigners to actually making the UI or testing it? I'm asking lots ofquestions all at once.
ADRIENNE PORTERFELT: Yeah, it's OK.
So I'll talk about theprocess a little bit.
So usually at the beginning,Product, Eng, and the designer will get togetherand talk about what they hope for from the feature.
Often, the designwill then come up with some conceptualmocks of what they feel the feature could look like.
They'll get feedbackfrom Product.
They'll get feedback fromthe engineers, like can we actually build this, whatare the corner cases we need? And then we'lliteratively get closer to what we actually can ship.
So I work on across-platform team, which means that whatwe build has to ship on all of Chrome's platforms.
People think of Chromeas one platform.
But actually, it'sWindows and Mac-- which previouslyhad different UIs, but we're coming toone single standard-- Android, iOS.
And so we have to havedifferent mocks that relate to the specific platforms.
So some things may bepossible for some subset.
Anyway, the designers get allthis feedback from engineers, like, we can do thishere and not there.
And then we iterativelycome through to red lines, which isour final set of designs.
And that's what we implement.
MUSTAFA: So in termsof do the designers work with the actual W3C? Because you'redesigning something which has to beconsidered cross-platform at the same [? time.
?] So likewhen the payment request API, like I was working withsome of the team there, there seems to be thingswhere you have to really be seeing whateveryone else is doing so that the experiencethat you're creating is not so widely different.
And that can be quitechallenging for the designer and developer because youinstinctively want to make it, I don't know, "better.
" But you don't want to makeit so vastly different, because then you stick out.
ADRIENNE PORTER FELT: That'san interesting question.
The challenge here isthat with specs, we try not to specify whatthe UI has to look like.
We try to talk about what theuser experience should be so that we can have the appropriatecallbacks, et cetera, to build that experience.
But we don't like tostandardize the UI itself, which is a fine balance becauseyou have to have a UI in mind when you're designing the API.
But we try to make itas general as possible so that we can build differentUI experiences on top of it.
MUSTAFA: Are you workingwith the browsers as well at the sametime to do that, or is it you do things independently? Because there's the thing.
It's like if you do it[INAUDIBLE] the browsers, then you may be leddown a path that's not the best for everyone.
That it's, OK, it'slike a compromise.
But at the same time, you don'twant that complete disparity.
ADRIENNE PORTER FELT: Itdepends a lot on the standard, honestly.
Some of them willbe heavily driven by Chrome or some other browser.
They really want this API.
They'll drive it, and thenget a little bit of feedback along the way fromother vendors.
Whereas others,from the beginning, there's severaldifferent browser vendors working together.
So honestly, it differsfrom standard to standard.
MUSTAFA: And we're coming to the10-year anniversary of Chrome.
What do you thinkthe future of say, Autofill, or just workingwith the other browsers? Because it seems like thingsare getting much better.
I was speaking toDarren, and it was like, the implementationof Flexbox was a nightmare becausethe standard kept changing.
But with CSS grid, it'samazing that there's so much cross-collaborationbetween the browsers, which is great for the users and thedevelopers working across this.
What do you think the futureis for Chrome as a platform and, I suppose, Autofillas well as a specific? ADRIENNE PORTER FELT: Sofor Autofill specifically, it's hard to saybecause I don't think the limitation there reallyis the lack of browser vendors cooperating.
I feel like actually, there'sbeen a lot of discussion, for example, aroundpayment request.
There's a lot of collaborationbetween Safari and Chrome.
I think that thereal problem we have is that Autofill dependson developer adoption.
Right? If it's hard for thebrowser to figure out what form's in thepage, we're not going to be able to Autofill it.
And so I think thething we really care about is whetherwe can get developers interested in andusing the tools that we have provided for them totry to improve the Autofill experience.
Do you ever have toremove a feature when you see there's not wide adoption? Because I can seefrom an engineer, you're working on Chrome.
You spent your heart andsoul working on this feature.
And then you know it'sgreat for user experience.
You know from theresearch that Autofill will help transactions,and it's just nicer.
But if adoption doesn'thappen, how do you [INAUDIBLE]?? It's the biggest-- ADRIENNE PORTER FELT: Yeah,that's a really hard one.
I've been througha few deprecations.
They can be really challenging.
It's very hard.
So there are a few waysyou can look at it.
One is how many usersinteract with websites that are using such a feature.
And obviously, thatnumber is large, you don't want to create apain point for a lot of users.
But even if thenumber is very small, it might be that there are afew websites, a few companies, whose entire businessmodel depends on having access to this API.
And so that can make itvery difficult, where OK, even if it's thisreally a niche thing, it still can behard to deprecate.
So I think there have beenlots of ongoing discussions in general about howto make that trade-off.
Some of the onesI've been involved in relate specificallyto security and TLS, where if something is makingthe web as a whole as safe, we may have to breaksome connections in order to deprecate it.
And it can be areally painful thing when you've got old serverson the internet that aren't being upgraded.
And maybe it's only a smallpercentage of overall page loads, but it'sstill frustrating when a user is trying to getto a website and it's broken.
But ultimately, fromChrome's perspective, it's the user's experiencethat's paramount.
Right? ADRIENNE PORTER FELT: Yes.
MUSTAFA: And theirsafety and security.
So it's like HTTPS, you couldprobably explain it better, but there's a cutoff pointwhere if your site is not loaded on HTTPS, you're goingto get a message saying, this isn't secure.
Right? ADRIENNE PORTER FELT: Fora long time in Chrome, we showed HTTP as neutral, HTTPas just plain text and no TLS.
MUSTAFA: Sorry, what's TLS,just for my non-designer-- ADRIENNE PORTER FELT: Oh, TLSis the underlying protocol that makes HTTPS HTTPS.
It's why it's secure.
So there is HTTP,which doesn't have any of the end-to-endsecurity bits on it.
And HTTP websiteswere just shown as a neutral standard thing.
Right? Most websites on the web wereHTTP, but that's changed.
We went from a few yearsago, we were at 25% HTTPS.
And now, it's the opposite wherewe're at more like 75% HTTPS.
So made changes in theUI to back that up.
So now when you go to awebsite that says HTTP, it's going to also say"not secure" next to it so people reallyunderstand what that means.
MUSTAFA: That decision mustbe quite tough, though.
In some respects, you need toforce the developers to say users' security is paramount.
But at the sametime, does it feel like you're breaking the web? ADRIENNE PORTER FELT:It doesn't really feel like we'rebreaking the web.
First of all, Ithink people have seen this a long time coming.
We've been talking aboutit for a long time.
We've rolled it out in phases.
So first, we started showing"not secure" specifically for pages with passwordsand credit card form fields.
And then it was for allform fields and web pages when viewed in incognito.
And now we're rolling itout for all HTTP websites.
And as you can see, becauseHTTPS adoption has really increased, it's onlyimpacting less than a quarter of page loads at this point.
MUSTAFA: So really,we're just talking about protecting the user.
ADRIENNE PORTERFELT: Yeah, and I think users have a right to knowthat their information isn't secure when they'regoing to this website and help them make adecision about whether or not they want to keep using thatservice or go to another one.
MUSTAFA: And do youthink users are quite savvy now to see those things? Or is this part of theeducation for the user as well to say, look,there are certain things on the web which arenot secure that you have to take into consideration.
ADRIENNE PORTERFELT: I'll be honest.
We have literally billions ofactive users, so it's hard to-- MUSTAFA: Make ageneral [INAUDIBLE] ADRIENNE PORTERFELT: --say generally whether people are goingto understand it or not.
We think enoughpeople understand it that they have a reactionand that they can reach out to sites saying, hey, Ireally like this site, but I wish it were secure.
And we see people doing thatas we've been rolling out these warnings.
SPEAKER 1: The way thatcellular networks are set up is that there's alwaysthese fringe areas, and there's alwaysthese breakdowns.
And higher latencyis always there.
WEB DESIGN IS BROKEN but it's okay weare fixing it.
Today we are gonna follow on from the last video and we're gonnatake you further along down that path to that magical place called budget.
Yeswe're helping you to create a budget, an appropriate budget for your web designproject.
I'm still not gonna give you some magical figure because it doesn'texist; it's all relative.
So I'm not gonna talkin terms of X pounds or Y dollars but I will be talking in terms of high mediumlow investment what that means only you can really know because a largeinvestment for you might be a small investment for the next business: a smallinvestment for coca-cola it's probably gonna be most people's annual turnovers!So only you will know what a large versus a small investment actually is.
Soin the last video we laid down some key things that you really need to be awareof when you're thinking about a budget not just for a web design project butactually for anything and these are these are things, biases that that we allhave as people that can really affect how we determine what to invest inthings.
By understanding these biases we actually reduce the chance of over orunder investing in a project just simply by being aware of them.
So in this videowe're gonna look at two more very key things that are going to give you quitea reliable shortcut to determining whether the investment you make islarger or smaller.
These two things are risk and complexity.
What do we mean byrisk and what do we mean by complexity? When we're talking about risk we'retalking about the impact that it could have on your business.
Something that ishigh risk could have a significant impact on your business.
The way I like to think about risk is that it's whether it goes right orwhether it goes wrong, so it's not just down side there's also upside as well.
If there's significant upside then it's still gonna be high risk.
Low risk meansthat it's not gonna make a huge impact on your business,it's not gonna move the needle as they say.
Complexity is really just about howtechnically difficult it is to actually deliver this piece of functionality soif you look at, I don't know, take bridge making as an example: if you're buildinga small bridge across a little stream then that's probably going to be lesstechnically difficult then if you're trying to bridge the River Thames.
So it'show technically difficult it is to deliver and again it goes on a scale oflow to high complexity so why risk and complexity well if we plot them on agraph like so, we can see that they create four quadrants.
Now each of thesefour quadrants represents a different type of project: a high risk, highcomplexity project; a high risk, low complexity project; a low risk, highcomplexity project and a low risk, low complexity project.
Now just by exploringthese four different types of projects, these four project characteristics wecan actually start to make assumptions about what that project is going to belike and give you some shortcuts as to how much you invest in that type ofproject.
Let's jump into it: let's start off with the easy one low risk lowcomplexity.
So this is what I call the 'tick box' this is a website project thatis effectively just a tick box exercise maybe as a part of your business there'sa requirement that you have a web-based resource which goes over a whole bunchof really interesting things.
Maybe it'sjust a regulatory requirement, maybe you've gone for some funding and awebsite has to be a part of what you deliver.
It really doesn't make a hugeimpact on your business if it's just informational as these things typicallytend to be, then it doesn't really require groundbreaking programmingskills and cutting-edge design to actually fulfill its need.
So in thistype of project you really want to be investing as little as you possibly canjust as much as you need to to get a reasonable job done.
It's not gonna makea huge impact on your business; it's not technically difficult to deliver youjust want something that works and that ticks that box.
So if your project is lowrisk low complexity don't bet the farm on it there's no point it's not gonnabring you the return that you need pay as little as you can to get a goodprofessional job done but don't go crazy over it.
So now we've got low risk highcomplexity.
This is an interesting space and I like to call this quadrant in thistype of project the 'moderniser'.
With something that's low risk and highcomplexity typically we're looking at improving existing systems and processesusing newly available modern technologies.
With this type of projectwhat you really want to be doing is looking at a provider that hasthoroughly solved this problem so I'm thinking online payments companies likePayPal, like Stripe have thoroughly solved this technical challenge.
It's notnecessarily the type of project that you think is going to completelyrevolutionize your business; it might make things a lot more efficient andyou'll probably see some uptick in sales, engagement things like that, but ultimatelyit's not the big game changer for your business.
So you should be lookingto invest a reasonable amount to get some off-the-shelf solutions that canactually bridge this gap and help you modernize.
Let's jump into my favoritequadrant: low complexity high risk this is what I call the 'punt'.
So this is myfavorite sector because this is typically where a business has spotted anew opportunity maybe a new part of the market maybe they want to spin off anexisting product or service and they just want to test it out.
They want tosee whether their offering or messaging works.
Why this is high risk is that ifit works well then there could be significant upside.
It might be a wholenew part of their business it might be a new standalone business if it goes badlythen they lose their initial investment.
Now what you want to do when you'reworking in this quadrant you what you want to be doing is thinking aboutmultiple small investments and testing religiously.
Test absolutely everythingbecause what you're trying to do is figure out if this thing, if this ideahas got the legs to warrant a proper investment.
You want to be thinkinglanding pages; very simple to produce very easy to iterate.
You also want to bethinking about investing in things like pay-per-click advertising as well -literally buying the traffic to test against your multiple service offeringvariations.
Don't bet the farm on this it's all about controlling risk at everysingle point every single iteration so be very purposeful be very deliberateabout how you execute when you're dealing with low complexity high riskprojects.
So the final quadrant is what I call the 'moonshot'.
This is the stuff ofstartup legend.
This is that entrepreneur space where we are launching newproducts into unknown markets.
This is an area that is very similar to high risklow complexity in its approach but you should really be making significantinvestments in this area: you still need to control the risk andyou still need to test fastidiously but you might be needing to actually investheavier and produce some custom functionality.
You might need to actuallybe producing working prototypes of your product or service offering.
You can't cut corners when you're in this quadrant the risk is too high.
Because the complexity is high you're probably going to be building thingsthat have never been built before; you're needing to create technical capabilitywithin your business and understand how that impacts the delivery of yourproduct and/or service.
So absolutely never cut corners here.
The key wordsthat you should be listening out to when you're talking about the project is 'noone else is doing this', 'this has never been done before', 'this is brand new',''here's why it's different to the competitors'.
All of these things shouldbe getting you thinking high risk high complexity.
Invest well, don't cut cornersand test and iterate and measure absolutely everything you can.
So thoseare the four quadrants and hopefully this gets you a little bit closer tounderstanding where your project sits in those quadrants and the amount that youshould invest relative to, well whatever that means to you as a business.
Thus farwe've understood things about the biases and the psychology that can affect howwe make investment decisions, we've been able to identify where our project sitsalong an axis of risk versus complexity in the next video we're going to belooking at some pounds and pence examples for how you can start to createthat budget or a range of that budget based on the perceived upside or theperceived savings that you're gonna make or thatyou're hoping to make in your web design project.
That was heavy!My name is Aaron Taylor, I'm helping you to make better decisions and have betterconversations when you're buying a website.
Till next time!.