What is it about applications that "feels" different than a web application?

And by "feel," I mean in terms of design and interaction. An example recently was when I was trying to find a web based alternative for OmniOutliner. It simply can't be done. Basecamp & Backpack, for all their javascripting goodness just don't have the same gratification levels. RememberTheMilk is the same kind of thing I guess. Something about the way I interact with OmniOutliner trumps it all.

Analyzing my use of OmniOutliner and trying to figure out what exactly it is that I like so much causes me to consider what it'd take to bring it to the web. It's certainly not features -- all I really use it for is my todo list. It's whatever feeling is generated by me using it that causes the satisfaction (and subsequent attachment). Is it the ease and speed of an application that does it? Is the browser the problem (as opposed to the delivery/protocol), or is it the style of widgets and layout differences? Actual net speed? I'm not sure.

It's almost like trying to define what "felt" right about the BBS world of the 80s/90s. Most who experienced it agree that something was fundamentally different -- better -- but hardly anyone can define it.

Any thoughts? Am I alone on this?

College Football:

Amazing weekend for college football. 7 top 25 match ups, and the beginnings of conference play for lots of folks. It's also the UCF/USF game. USF had to return half of their 5,000 ticket allotment last week. For a "BCS" team that's simply incredible. UCF is 70 miles down the road. I guess it shouldn't be a surprise. Their first ever bowl game in Charlotte only drew a couple thousand USF fans. Attendance tomorrow is looking like 45-50k at the Citrus bowl though, so, it shouldn't matter all that much. Good times regardless! Go knights.

Emurse:

We did an Emurse ad on Fark classifieds the other week. I'm sure many of ya'll have heard how effective they're supposed to be, as had we. It's also a great way to get negative feedback. I know that sounds crazy, but negative feedback is truly the best kind. The community over there is overly cynical towards just about everything, and our product was no different. Evidently, Mike Propst used a "template" for the web design and none of us know anything about usability ;). But alas, these are users that are "thankful that Fark has avoided the web2.0 craze". It took me 15 minutes to figure out how to create a new account so that I could respond. Gotta love the irony, but to each their own. The take away from that is there may be a brewing backlash to the design trends as of late.. I certainly wouldn't doubt it -- buzzwords and trends all have a life span. Thankfully, Mike's amazing at what he does and our site is now completely skinnable in about 25 minutes.

Anyway..

Here's the traffic details from that $100 ad - about 386 clicks, which means a rock bottom ~0.25 cents a click. The thing is, it's not clicks we're after, it's actual conversions (signups). For comparison, Google will bring in let's say, 25% of that 386 for the same overall price on our keywords, but the kicker is we'll convert anywhere from 30-60% depending on the day of the week. Fark? A ~3% conversion rate ;) In the end, we'll get 3-4 times the number of new users via targeted advertising on Google than on Fark. It won't show up that way on a AWStats or Sitemeter graph.. but.. Yeah.

We'll keep exploring various sites and methods (on a strict budget) to see if we can find hidden gems.. but man.. Google is just straight up effective (then again, I remember the days when a 3% conversion rate would have been overwhelming positive.. and for some sites, it still might be.. I guess.)

Links:

• Alcohol use boosts income
• Giving usability methods the critical eye
• Are your employers leaving? The Unintended Consequences of Shining Up that (virtual) Resume
• Lessons Learned From a Job That Sucked

Kathy Sierra is a great writer. I love her style and have been a fan of her Head First books since my java "greenhorn" days over at javaranch.com. By the way, I credit the cow game for my certification ;).

Her blog, Creating Passionate Users, is a great read. I tend to be really busy though and sometimes bloglines gets really backed up on me. Her posts are usually cut out of the "catch up" routine. Not because of quality, but because of size. They take a committed reader, a passionate reader if you will (hah), to make it through.

Anyway, my bloglines account was backed up again tonight, only this time I decided to read one of her entries. I'm really glad I did.

"Hooverin' and the space between notes" is about things not said. The pauses in a great debate or a speech, the space between notes in music, the empty spaces on a clean design, the timing of a comedian.

There's something special about being calm, cool and collected -- in design or in presentation. It's an easy going confidence that draws your audience in. You can usually tell when someone is full of bull by their insistent need to fill silence. You can see a comedians nerves shake if they're timing is wrong. To bring it back home, you can tell when web sites are overcompensating for their lack of defined mission or focus by their clutter. Same with their feature set. Don't try to "boil the ocean", as someone recently advised us.

It's not just about the notes, it's also the spaces between them. That's sound advice that I'll gladly listen to ;)
(my attempt at an Alveyism-tie-in)

A few years ago when I first started getting into the wholeusability craze, one of the things that came up in my conversationswere the various metaphors used to interact with computers. The classic, most known metaphor is theconcept of a Desktop. I've seen ways to categorize information byit's meta-data and organize files in a Rolodex type of fashion aswell. Anyway, what if we were to invent a new metaphor with todaystechnology, now some 20 years after the creation of the desktop?Alan Kay andcompany are attempting just that.

Croquetis something I stumbled across way back when and its programmed inthe ever-so-rad Squeak. They've justreleased a beta available for download (its been in alpha for along time now). With it, you can basically create highlyinteractive 3d or 2d environments for multiuser applications. Inone example, an avatar is interacting with a 3d window. Thecontents of the window, are located on a computer that the spacebelongs to. The avatar is able to walk from space to space(computer to computer) interacting with different objects.

While this style of interaction is unlikely to replace the existingdesktop metaphor (3d spaces just don't do it for me), it highlightsan important step in creating the next level of applications. Onewhere the distinction between what is and isn't local is blurred inthe presentation, and the interaction amongst users issignificantly heightened. The ability for multiple users tointeract and manipulate objects (whether 3d or 2d), work ondocuments simultaneously, share information and work flows, arevariations of how the framework can be implemented.

I'll be curious to see if this shows up on the radar enough togenerate discussion (probably not). It's not about whether or notit's truly innovative, better than what we have, or anything else.It's merely about celebrating the fact that the creative processstill exists in this realm, and the hope that maybe someone willstumble across something better.