The Google design, turned up a notch
googleblog.blogspot.com
googleblog.blogspot.com
I'm surprised Google would make a mistake of such magnitude. Anyone who's read Tufte would know not to do this. They've effectively reduced the data-ink ratio of the page, when you weight each pixel by its proximity to the upper left corner.
http://www.infovis-wiki.net/index.php/Data-Ink_Ratio
http://inspiredimpressions.files.wordpress.com/2006/04/Googl...
Oddly enough, it would actually be better if the left bar were entirely boilerplate, because that would make it easier to tune it out.
http://www.useit.com/eyetracking/eyetracking_corporate_site_...
Then the new design would merely waste space. Filling the left side of the page not merely with crap, but with changing crap, is the worst case scenario.
And please infovis-wiki, that criticism with just Inbar et al. seems pretty lame (their subjects were 87 students - not a good sample at all for something about perception!)
I would argue that there are consequently very good reasons to believe that the problems you described are not a issue with the redesign or that there are certain advantages to the redesign which make up for other disadvantages.
And yet it moves! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_pur_si_muove!).
Google "testing it" isn't an iron clad guarantee that the feature doesn't suck.
Anyone who has worked in a large company can well imagine how "tests" can support predetermined positions of higher management (say). I suspect the reason is simpler - these days Google is fat and slow and infested with mediocre MBA types who love nothing better than to "launch an initiative" like this. Never attribute to malice etc.
Irrespective of how well Google tested this, if enough users say "And yet it sucks", then that's that.
You could argue about how many users are "enough", but "Google tested it so they have to be right and everyone else is wrong" is a very fragile argument.
A couple of ways to do it.
(1) On Firefox install the stylish plug in (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2108/). Then go to http://userstyles.org/styles/29418 and install the style.
After installation, if you are not using google.com(say google.ca or google.co.in), edit the css (left click on icon at bottom right, select manage, select the style edit) to reflect whatever google engine you are using.
(2)In Chrome the Hide Google Options addon works perfectly (http://www.seotools.com/hide-google-options/#Chrome). There is a firefox equivalent but for some reason it didn't work for me so I went with the above (stylish) option on FF.
No idea about any other browser. Sorry. But I guess there is always GreaseMonkey?
The search features on the side are nice...but I used them so rarely in the past and don't see myself using them any more now. It seems like google wants me to spend more time searching then clicking links, when in reality I usually use google as a quick 10 second shortcut to finding info. The last time I clicked "next" on a search was........a long time ago.
For example, if I want to see a recent Obama speech I missed. Its nearly impossible to find the one you want without time-based filtering.
Yes! This is totally what was missing for me. I had great search results from Google every time, but where was the fun? Where was the quirky personality damn it?
One other thing Google have been good at in the past is rolling back mistakes. I bet this one doesn't last long.
Also in FF 3.6.3 the text is not centered vertically in the search box. It's an FF CSS issue. I've seen it a few times before.
I personally like the sidebar, I think the date-based filtering is great.
Screen shot here, the Extension seems to be enabled.
http://asmo.kortis.to/misc/shot_07052010_125200.png
I guess it's time to start using duckduckgo.com for real.
Then just go to www.google.com/custom and make that your default firefox search.
I found this solution more elegant, as I already used the add-on.
The biggest change is the top left position of the first search result relative to the top left position of the document. In other words, the average scanning pattern has completely changed with the addition of a fixed side bar.
It will take a lot of people a long time to adjust and its effectiveness can't be judged by a couple of hours of usage. It's not unlikely to assume Google is very willing to take a slight hit in this area and win in the discoverability of their different ways to use Google, hopefully, eventually improving a person's overal searching efficiency.
Time will tell, but we all know Google tests these things through and through.
Edit: These images may support my contention: http://www.google.com/images?q=google%20results%20eyetrackin...
What hit are you talking about? Are people willing to leave Google to use another search engine and get used to their UI?. Unless they royally screw up with the design (which they didn't IMO) they have almost nothing to lose.
If you compare this with bing, you will see that they have a lot of similarities.
And you're right. People won't leave Google over this. But Google has done extensive testing on page speed in the past and measured its long term impact on pageviews per search. I'd argue that a change in scanning patterns like this one affects the perception of speed of the interface and might impact the aforementioned metric.
Overall, it should be a change for the better and i'm sure that Google wants to increase the efficiency per search to increase the overal number of unique searches a user might do -- while caring a bit less about the number of pageviews per search.
As for Bing, in interface design for a company like Google --a company that effectively dominates the market and sees marginal loss of users-- the competition is irrelevant. Especially for simple UI changes such as this one.
When doing a change such as this one Google is its own competitor. It needs to find a way to transition their user's habits to what they believe is a more usable one. This is by far always the hardest part and really what we are discussing right now :-)
It's awesome to see though. I'd imagine it's incredbily hard to convince a board of such changes, especially in an engineering minded company such as Google.
@-moz-document domain(google.com) {
#leftnav {
display:none !important;
}
#center_col {
margin-left: 0 !important;
margin-right: 0 !important;
}
}
I think the ads to the right were already hidden by adblock, so you may need to tweak this if you want to preserve ads for some reason.I'm wondering why corporations keep plastering those all over their designs.
Why can't I hide this fucking left panel?
It's really, really distracting. If I can find out a way of hiding it, I absolutely will.
Writing on a piece of paper underneath the top one that I can only see a little bit of through a little window? Putting words on a shelf and the shelf needs to look like it is deep enough to hold the letters so they won't fall out the front and down the page?
(I've been on the team that did this since we staffed up engineers, and did the first functional demos of the new design.)
So do you think you could get us a user setting to turn off the new design and get back the classic minimalist one? Right now you have to install browser extensions etc.
Searching for facebook privacy shows Blogs first, then News, searching for new york shows Maps, News, Blogs, Images and Videos. Different options in a different order.
That has advantages (displaying Maps first when searching for places seems like a great idea) but also disadvantages: options switch places and are not always immediately accessible. Keeping the top bar (where services have a fixed location and are always displayed) seems like a good compromise. Admittedly not the most elegant thing.
First I hide all the left column sidebar nonsense with adblock.
Then I do this:
#center_col {margin:0 !important;}
.gl,.sla {text-decoration:underline !important;}
.tsf-p {width:65% !important;}
Problem solved. Back to wide.Fixed!