Product Management

My last job title at Trade Me was ‘Head of Product’.

If you say you are a ‘Software Developer’ or even a ‘Development Manager’, then most people working in technology will know what that means.

But, I’m not sure I’ve ever heard a succinct definition of what makes a ‘Product Manager’. In fact, I’m not even sure I’ve heard a succinct definition of a product, in this context.

I thought it might be useful to try and describe, at least as I’ve experienced it, for those who might be interested in this sort of role.

Some long time readers (there are a few of you left, right?) and a handful of former Trade Me employees may recognise this old diagram:

Product Management Process

I used this as part of the induction of new employees into the development team at Trade Me, to try and describe the broader product management process that we were part of.

There are six links in the infinite loop, so let’s go through them.

Actually it’s two somewhat separate loops: the smaller software development loop and the larger product development loop.

The work involved in the smaller loop is pretty well understood, I think, and widely documented elsewhere, so I won’t spend much time on that here.

Let’s pick it up at the point where you are ready to deploy a new feature out into the wild…


The first important thing to realise about a release it that it’s not an end point. It’s just another link in an infinite loop.

This can be tough to understand for technical people who have predominantly worked in a project environment, for example as you would commonly experience in a consulting business. In that world projects have a defined beginning and end and then everybody moves on to the next project, and the software moves into “business-as-usual” mode.

In product management there is only business-as-usual. You are never “finished”.

This has a number of consequences, not the least being the importance of pacing yourself. Managing a product is a never ending marathon, not a sprint.

The second important thing to realise about the release cycle is how you win.

It’s tempting to think that you win by doing a good job and getting everything “right”. But, remember, I just said that you will never be finished. There is no such thing as “right”.

However, there is such a thing as late. The trade off between right and late is what makes product management more art than science. The best product managers typically have a bias to roll the dice and just try stuff – “If you’re not prepared to be wrong you’ll never come up with anything original”, “if you launch and you’re not a little embarrassed then you launched too late”, etc etc.

In other words, the challenge is not to necessarily navigate your way flawlessly once around this loop, but to navigate your way around this loop as many times as you can, getting a little bit better each time.

In order to achieve that you need to make sure that the release process is baked into your tools and process. You should be able to deploy and roll-back often and easily, ideally with one click.

I’m also a fan of a bit of release theatre, so that everybody is aware when changes are deployed and can celebrate the progress that represents.


As soon as changes are released, the next challenge is to create a feedback loop.

This is where you get to listen to what people do rather than what they say. If you can start to understand how people are really using your product then it helps you to cut through debate in the next two steps of the process with facts rather than feelings. It’s how you build confidence in your theory of what users will respond to (which doesn’t always mean what users will love, by the way – often it’s a product managers job to do what is best for the system as a whole, rather than for individual users).

I think it’s really important that everybody in the team understands how the business wins. It’s the product managers job to make sure that all of the developers and testers know what the key metrics are – for example, with a big screen on the wall showing these values and trends. But, more than that, they should be able to articulate how the features they are working on will positively impact on those numbers.


Broadly speaking the first job of a product manager is to keep lists.

You have to be able to take inputs from lots of different and often competing sources and constantly organise these so that the important stuff bubbles to the top, while at the same time not drowning in the long tail of less important stuff.

I recommend a “Now / Next / Later” approach.

Firstly, you need to be aware of all of the things that are underway, ideally with some idea for when they should be completed so you can keep a schedule in mind.

Secondly, and most importantly, you need to have a strong focus on what’s next. You should be able to list the next top three, four or five projects from memory, so you can stay focussed on those.

There will constantly be competing suggestions, of course. In that situation, provided you can list off the current priority projects, the question is simply: “which of these existing projects gets bumped by this new suggestion?” That usually puts new ideas in their place (on the later list).

It’s really powerful if you can have consensus from the whole team on what the next priority projects are. A useful technique for getting to that is to organise a prioritisation session where everybody is asked to bring their top two or three project to the table and advocate for them, then as a group rank them in terms of bang (i.e. expected impact on key metrics) vs buck (i.e. expected cost to implement), then pick the ideas which have the best ratio. Ideally nobody leaves until everybody has agreed what those are.

Finally, you need somewhere to dump everything else. It may be that you don’t even need to write these things down – if you’re prepared to assume that the good ideas will keep coming up. Or, maybe having a long shopping list is handy to have, so that you can fill any gaps that come up with something useful. Either way, the key is to ensure that these don’t become a constant distraction or an overwhelming background fear (remember you’ll never be finished, so getting to the end of the list isn’t the goal).

Once you have priorities agreed you also need to consider the order. There are two different approaches to scheduling projects that I’ve seen used effectively:

The Riverstone Model

Think of your schedule as a riverbed, and your job is to cover it in river stones. You’ll start by placing the big stones, picking the most important big projects to go first. Then you fill in the gaps between the big stones with some medium stones, again picking the highest priority medium projects first. Finally, in all of the little gaps between the medium stones you scatter some little pebbles – you probably don’t have to pay too much attention to which of these go first, it could be a simple as first in first out, or whatever else works. Or, you can live with the gaps and leave some slack in the system, which is often not a bad thing.

This model is recommended if you have more priority projects than development capacity.

The Train Carriage Model

Think of your schedule as a series of train carriages. On a regular timetable one will leave the station. Your job is to make sure that all of the seats on the carriage are filled. When a new project is agreed you also pick a carriage to target for release and reserve a seat in that carriage. Once a carriage is full you need to pick the next one available. And, if a carriage leaves the station with empty seats then that is a missed opportunity, so you always need to be thinking ahead to make sure that doesn’t happen – if there are no big projects ready to fill the space available then put some medium or smaller projects in there.

This model is recommended if you have more development capacity than prioritised projects.

Scope & Design

This is where a product manager will probably end up investing most of their time.

Everything should start with the user experience. I recommend having designers in the team, so you can be constantly working on this, starting with wireframes and high-level designs and later moving onto more detailed mocks which demonstrate the intent of the user interface.

There is always going to be a blurry line between design and development in any product team, and it’s important that there is a good working relationship between them. I’ve seen examples where this breaks down and developers treat the designs they have been given as a broad direction rather than a detailed specification. It’s better if the designers are responsible for the design, and developers are responsible for the code, but with a lot of communication in both directions – the developers need to loop back regularly with designers to make sure that what is implemented is as intended, and designers need to be constantly talking to developers so that specifications take into account development constraints.

I recommend putting together a project team at the very beginning of the scoping stage. This should include designers, developers and operations people as well as testers and/or support team members who bring an understanding of the current business rules and likely pot holes from dealing more directly with end users.

One of the important questions for this group to consider is: what change are we expecting, and how are we going to measure that? As we discussed above this creates a feedback loop after the feature is released, where you can confirm that the work you’ve done has had the intended impact, or not, and learn from that for future scoping and design work. If you can’t clearly articulate what the intended change or benefit is, then you probably need to go back and think about the feature some more before you start designing the user experience or cutting code.

As scope and design bleeds into development and testing the product manager will hand over to a development manager to make sure that the build runs smoothly, and will likely become a “customer” in that process. In a smaller team the product manager and development manager are often the same person, so it’s important for them to realise the two competing roles they fill in that situation.

Everything & Nothing

To do all of these things well demands a varied and interesting set of skills from a product manager, including a lot of soft skills that are not always easy to find in technical people – you need to be able to put yourself in the shoes of an end user and have empathy for who they are, how they think about your product and how they are likely to respond in different situations; you need to be able to think analytically – you’ll probably spend more time looking at spreadsheets than looking at code; but, on the other hand, you need an aesthetic judgement, a sense of style and an understanding of design trade-offs; you need to be able to write authentically and succinctly (writing is a muscle and one of the main reasons why I maintain this blog); you need to think like a marketer, because making things that people will love is hard; you need to be able to work with a variety of different people, both technical and non-technical; and, last but not least, you need to understand that you can achieve a lot in this sort of role provided you don’t need to take all of the credit for it.

In my experience the best product managers are heads-up developers who can code but don’t want to anymore.

If that sounds like you then think about how you can get involved in some of the areas that I’ve described above within your team, so you can build your skills and over time move from a software development role into taking responsibility for product management.

I’m interested in your thoughts, especially from those who have been a product manager or worked with one. What are the other jobs of a product manager that I’m missing?

Of course, the problem with an infinite loop like this is that there is no obvious beginning. This all assumes that there is an existing product that needs to be managed and developed. It doesn’t talk at all to where the idea for the product comes from in the first place, so maybe that’s where we’ll turn out attention next…

Trade Me Browser Stats

I’m pleased to see Trade Me have started posting their browser stats again, something I used to do here, way back in the day.

Here is the latest update, for May 2010: Browsers and Operating Systems

When people talk about Open Data they are nearly always referring to government data.  But, I think there are also lots of examples like this, where private companies have data which has a public good, and which they can open up at no material cost to themselves.

Trade Me is such a popular site that their audience can pretty much be used as a proxy for the internet in New Zealand, so this gives developers working on smaller or less popular sites a good idea of the sort of browsers they should be targeting.

Remember, if the equivalent numbers for your site are different from these there are two possible explanations:

  1. Your audience is a subset of the population which has a browser bias (e.g. if you attract more technical people you’ll probably tend to see a higher proportion of newer browsers and also some lesser known browsers that are not widely used in the mainstream)
  2. Your site makes it difficult for people with older browsers to use your site, so they choose not to.

Just about everybody assumes #1, when #2 is often more likely.

Remember that the 5% of Trade Me visitors using IE6 is still 31,500 unique visitors per day, or nearly one Westpac Stadium full.  Are you happy to turn all of those people away with a message telling them to upgrade their “browser”, what ever that means to them?

From The Archives: Usability

Enhanced metafiles, 16th April 2007

“When are those of us who build these tools going to start putting ourselves in the shoes of people that don’t speak C#?”

Visualise your audience, 9th April 2009

“I love the buzz of a big crowd.  It’s exciting to soak up the atmosphere created when lots of people are all in the same space at the same time.”

Dragging a big sack, 28th January 2008

“In the early days of any new product it’s really important that you choose your customers carefully.”

We’re not normal, 12th February 2008

“We’re not normal, but if we put our mind to it we can empathise, surely?”

Authenticity, 3rd March 2008

“Why do small businesses so often pretend to be bigger than they are?”

Don’t click here, 14th March 2007

“Even the most novice web users quickly learns that links are clickable, you don’t need to tell them where to click – unless, of course, you’re obfuscating your links by not underlining them and/or making them a colour that isn’t blue.”

Consumer Unfriendly, 7th September 2007

“Sometimes people don’t know what is good for them.”

Make it work, then make it look good, 29th May 2007

“What does it profit someone to have a site which looks like a million dollars but which doesn’t actually work?”

Thoughts about “users”, 14th June 2007

“There are only two industries that refer to their customers as users: high tech and illegal drugs.”

Getting to the third user, 29th January 2008

“The scene: some developers are observing their first usability test on some software they have built…”

Form Fail, 28th May 2009

“The quality of form design, in general, on the web continues to be a huge source of frustration for users and an embarassment for all of us who are involved in designing and building sites.”

Form Fail

The quality of form design, in general, on the web continues to be a huge source of frustration for users and an embarassment for all of us who are involved in designing and building sites.

Here is a payment page that I needed to traverse recently…

Firstly, as originally served:

Payment Page

And, here once I’d disabled CSS:

Payment Page - No CSS

It took me a few attempts to even work out what was happening. Initially I just assumed that the page had somehow not completely loaded.

Then I highlighted the area where the labels should be and realised that they were actually white text on a white background!

I’m guessing that in this case the design is incompetent rather than malicious.

Perhaps it works fine in Internet Explorer? Who knows.

I was determined, so worked it out.  But, I expect I’m an exception.

If they measured their conversion rates on this page, surely they would find that a significant number of people simply give up, unable to work it out.

So, you have to assume that they probably never bothered to measure.

Of course, none of the intelligent and experienced people who take the time to read this blog would ever make a mistake as outrageous as that. Would you?

You might be surprised …

Let me try and debunk some axioms of registration page design, and in the process highlight a simple mistake that I would guess many of you have made without even realising it (I can only say that with confidence because I’ve made it myself many times).

To start, a question… what is the difference between these two forms?

Form Fail - With Tick Box

Form A: with tick-box

Form Fail - Sans Tick Box

Form B: without tick-box

Which is easier to use?  Or, to ask the same question in a more measurable way: which would have a higher conversion rate?

As we’ll see there is evidence to suggest that Form B is a much better design.

So, why are registration pages like Form A nearly ubiquitous?

Here are some possible reasons I can think of (if there are others, please let me know)…

Legal reasons

In case it’s not obvious, I’m not a lawyer!

If there are any lawyers reading I’d be interested to get an informed opinion on this.

My guess is that it doesn’t make any material difference.

Just think about how this would sound in court: “But, your honour, they ticked the box when they registered!”. Yeah, right.

And, even so, at what cost this additional legal protection? How many fewer registrations can you afford before it’s worth taking the risk?

Because everybody else does

This is probably getting closer to the major reason for the ubiquity.

And, there is something to be said for consistency. But, surely only when it doesn’t hurt!  Lemmings!

Just because everybody else does something, that doesn’t excuse us from measuring and understanding the impact of our design decisions.

How hard is it to tick a box?

Now we’re getting to the interesting bit…

I was recently talking to Nigel about some of the work he did on improving the StarNow registration page. This is the first example I’d come across where somebody had actually taken the time to measure specifically where people were failing on this sort of registration form.

It turned out, in their case, that 27.9% of people didn’t tick the box the first time, and as a result got a validation error. What’s more this only compounded other problems. When the tick box validation error was displayed the password fields were reset (as is common, unless you explicitly set these values when the page is returned, which is frowned upon by security types). So, of course, many people would read the error message, scroll down and tick the box, only to find that the form still didn’t submit successfully as they also needed to re-enter the password.

Does this sound familiar? I know I’ve been through this exact dance myself many times, and I consider myself a pretty savvy web user.

Overall they found that over 34% of people who attempted to complete the page (i.e. pushed the submit button at least once) abandoned the site without successfully completing their registration process.

By making simple changes they decreased this to 17%. That’s a staggering 26% improvement!

So, some suggestions:

  1. Ditch the tick-box from your registration page.
  2. If your lawyer complains ask them to justify the cost, which you will now be able to quantify.
  3. Re-populate password fields on post-back. Or, if you’re not comfortable doing that for security reasons, at least highlight the fields that people will need to re-enter to avoid further error messages.
  4. Most importantly: take the time to measure and understand exactly where people are failing on your site, then do something about it!

Visualise your audience

I love the buzz of a big crowd.  It’s exciting to soak up the atmosphere created when lots of people are all in the same space at the same time.

If you’re lucky enough to be the band, or sports team or speaker who is the focus of the crowds attention, then that is quite powerful.

(Or terrifying, I suppose, depending on their mood!)

If you design or develop software it’s much harder to get feedback like this.

But, it’s still useful to think of crowds to help you visualise the audience of people who are using what you’re building.

This was the idea behind the photo I use in the header this site.

Another from the same shoot is below, for those of you reading via my feed:

Idealog Stadium

These come from a 2006 article about Trade Me in Idealog, and were taken at the Westpac Stadium in Wellington on a wet and wild day (hence the slightly damp windswept look and the Icebreaker jacket).

The stadium seats about 35,000 people when it’s full.  At the time there were about that many people online at once every evening on Trade Me.

(As I type there are over 80,000 online, showing how much it has continued to grow since then!)

When you think of that many people all in one space together, and the noise and activity they generate, it changes the way you think about the people using your site.

One of the things that software developers do all the time is dismiss a percentage of their audience as unimportant for one reason or another, without thinking of them as a distinct group of people.

If you don’t think you need to worry about people stuck using IE6 (for whatever reason) or a dial-up connection, or people who struggle to read small fonts, or people who are colour blind (or completely blind), or people who don’t know how to use a command line, or people who are still nervous (paranoid or otherwise) about entering their credit card details into a website, or people who want help from a real person, or people who use Firefox on a Mac … because on a percentage basis they are not that many … calculate just how big that group is (take your unique visitor count and multiply by the percentage, however small), and then imagine standing up in front of that group and telling them to their face that they don’t matter to you.

If you don’t think it’s a big deal for your site to be broken or off line while you make changes … think of all of the people who happen to be visiting at that point and imagine what it would feel like to have them all in the room with you while you flick the switch.  No matter how small the number it would probably feel like a lot of people.  And, you might be motivated to get the site back up more quickly if they were all standing behind you impatiently looking over your shoulder.

You can use the same technique to help put other numbers in perspective.

It’s amazing the difference it makes when you start thinking of your metrics as real people.

For example…

  • 2 people = your mum and dad!
  • 5 people = a car full
  • 15 people = a rugby team
  • 30 people = a school class
  • 100 people = a bus full
  • 120 people = a parliament full of MPs (actually 122, to be precise)
  • 380 people = all of the passengers on an Air NZ 747-400
  • 550 people = the audience at Webstock earlier this year
  • 1,500 people = capacity of the Aotea Centre in Auckland
  • 2,500 people = all of the students at Auckland Grammar school
  • 6,000 people = capacity of the TSB Arena in Wellington
  • 10,000 people = population of Gore :-)
  • 12,000 people = capacity of the Vector Arena in Auckland
  • 18,000 people = all of the students at Otago University
  • 20,000 people = population of Levin
  • 25,000 people = the crowd at Augusta National each day this week
  • 35,000 people = capacity of Westpac Stadium in Wellington
  • 60,000 people = capacity of Eden Park in Auckland, post-renovations
  • 100,000 people = capacity of MCG in Australia (also, incidentally, approx. the number of people who voted for NZ First at the last election)
  • 250,000 people = capacity of St Peter’s Square in Rome
  • 475,000 people = population of greater Wellington region
  • Etc, etc.

Help me out with some more examples…

Ski Lodge

Here is an example of a beautiful iPhone app and a simple promo website:

Ski Lodge (for iPhone)   

The UI is very easy to look at – little things make it obvious this was designed rather than just developed: like the wood grain background, bold easy to read fonts and navigation elements which have clearly been designed to be touched rather than clicked.  

I especially like the trail map link on the resort page which includes a bar chart showing the percentage of runs that are beginner, intermediate and advanced – a nice way to communicate a lot of information without adding lots of noise.

Their website is great too – a single page with screen shots and an obvious link to the App Store.  

At the moment they only cover the US and Canada, but according to ReadWriteWeb they have plans to add NZ and other countries soon.

Other apps from the same developers, all of which look just as impressive:

Also, something fun… check out Burn Ball by Tim Haines!

PS: If there are any aspiring iPhone developers out there looking for a project to get stuck into in 2009 drop me a note.

Simple event logging

Measuring everything doesn’t necessarily have to involve complex analytics tools, or lots of development.

Here is a simple way to quickly log events of interest, for example if you are running an AB test.

Create a single table in your database with the following columns:


  • user_id
  • other_id
  • event_type (either a string or a foreign key)
  • details
  • timestamp

Then whenever something happens that you want to track, insert a row.  You can use the details field to track whatever data is relevant to the event.

Optimise the table for inserts, so that you can quickly add rows whenever required.  Then export the data when you want to run reports.  You can flush all of the data when you have your answer (or do it automatically every week, or month)


AB Testing

Do you AB test?

Lots of people talk about it, but I don’t see many examples of people actually doing it.

Here is one example I saw last week, which sounds like it produced some great results.

The key, I think, is to keep it simple.

For example, find something small you can change easily and run an experiment.  Find an appropriate ID and use a mod2 to split your audience in half.  And, track the results so you know what impact the change has made (more on this shortly).

Then rinse and repeat.

When I say small, I mean small – see this from the Google blog:

Search experiments large and small

If you’ve done AB testing I’d be interested to hear from you.

How did you do it?  What results did you get?

Where do I find Google?

Google has published their list of the top search terms for the year:

Top 10 searches on in 2008

  1. games
  2. bebo
  3. youtube
  4. trade me
  5. lyrics
  6. google
  7. map
  8. hotmail
  9. tv
  10. weather

Half of these are site specific brand names (in bold) – meaning that rather than using Google the person doing the search could have simple added .com or to the term and entered the URL directly into their browser and found the site they were looking for directly.

(the same trick would actually also work with most of the other terms too, but it’s not so obvious that people searching for these things were after the corresponding .com)

The one that will really surprise many web developers, I suspect, is “Google” itself – the sixth most popular search this year.  

How do you explain that?  What’s the mental model those users have of the web and of search engines specifically?

Most technology people will, I suspect, find it difficult to understand the sort of person who does this sort of search, but that’s exactly what we need to do if we’re going to build products these people will like to use and will tell their friends about.

Now Hiring: Web Designer

Interested? Check out the job description.

Too clever

Jason from 37signals last week posted one of my favourite quotes about complexity, and specifically complex systems:

“A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work. You have to start over, beginning with a working simple system.”

John Gall, from his book Systematics

Here is another along the same lines:

“There are two ways of constructing software; one way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult.”

C. A. R. Hoare, the inventor of the Quicksort algorithm

And, why do we think complexity is desirable in the first place?

“People often misinterpret complexity as sophistication”

Niklaus Wirth, the father of Pascal

Are you trying to be too clever?

A false sense of urgency


One of the dilemmas with building something for yourself, rather than for a third-party, is you are never really forced to commit to a delivery date.

Or, at least, there is nobody else who will be angry with you when you run late.

For those of you in this position: how do you create a false sense of urgency for you or your team?

I’m interested in your ideas.

Thoughts on Google Chrome

Ben GoodgerWhen I was in San Francisco earlier this year I caught up with Ben Goodger, who I first me when he was in Wellington to speak at Webstock.  He kindly took some time to show me around Mountain View and we had a nice Mexican lunch at one of his regular hang-outs.

We talked about lots of things, but exactly what he was working on wasn’t one of them.

He said he wasn’t working on Firefox any more.  And, I saw that he was running Visual Studio in a VM on his Mac.

But, I didn’t press him beyond that as he was obviously reluctant to say much at that point.

Today we all find out: Google Chrome

Even before it was officially announced there was a lot of buzz about this.  There is already a decent Wikipedia page with a good summary of the various features that are included in this initial release.

Here are my thoughts about this:

The rise and rise of WebKit

The number and variety of browsers that web developers need to consider has grown considerably in the last couple of years – IE7 has become the most widely used browser, although there are still plenty of people using IE6, Firefox has been steadily ticking up, and Safari has doubled (albeit from a very low base) probably on the back of people switching to OS X.  IE8 is on the horizon.  And, now this.

These are the most recent browser stats I have from Trade Me (from July 2008):

Browser Market Share
IE 7 54.2%
IE 6 23.1%
Firefox 2 15.6%
Safari 3.3%
Firefox 3 0.9%
All Others 2.9%

Those sites that don’t take Safari seriously at its current level may need to re-evaulate on the back of this announcement, as Google Chrome is based on the same WebKit foundation as used by Safari (and the iPhone).

Steve Job’s decision to open-source WebKit in 2005 is looking smarter and smarter.

Who said the browser wars were over?

Splendid Isolation

The Google engineers have made a big deal in this annoucement about each tab having its own isolated process and memory space and the performance benefits that will come from this design – most notably when one tab dies it won’t take the whole browser down with it.

It’s true that this is one of the big weaknesses of Firefox, especially when it’s running on an OS that doesn’t need to be re-booted too often. :-)

But, I wonder if in time the isolation under the hood won’t pale in comparison to the isolation options presented to users.

By selecting the document options (immediately to the right of the address bar omni bar in Chrome) and choosing “Create application shortcut” from the menu you can quickly and effortlessly create a single instance browser for your favourite web applications.

Over the last couple of months I’ve been experimenting with something similar using Fluid on OS X (another browser which uses WebKit).

I have created separate applications for many of the web apps I use the most: Google Reader, Google Docs, Xero, WordPress, etc.

I’ve found various reasons for doing this…

Because each site is running in a separate app I have far fewer problems with the browser leaking memory or crashing.  I also don’t tend to leave Firefox running for days on end as much as I used to, as most of the sites I tend to leave open are elsewhere.

Performance is another.  Apps which use a lot of Javascript like Xero seem to run much faster on Fluid than in Firefox.  The Javascript environment in Chrome, which they are calling V8, promises to be even faster still.

Fluid also lets you customise each application – with a nice icon (which shows in the dock – allowing you to navigate directly to the site), user scripts (using GreaseKit) and other options, such as whether to display the address bar, which URLs are allowed etc.

For example, with Nik from Code To Customer I created a Xero application with a high-resolution icon and a simple script which shows the count of unreconciled transactions on the dock when the app is running.  This now feels much more like a native OS X app.

If you’re a Xero and Mac user and you’d like to try this out: download the application and user script (the script needs to be installed manually once you’ve run the app – start with Command-Alt-N and follow your nose).  I’d be interested to hear what you think of it.

Google Chrome seems to just use the favicon, which looks pretty ugly.  Perhaps they could support an alternative link in the header to a higher resolution icon to use in this case? UPDATE: they do, see below.

I’ve even created a Fluid app for the web-based control panel on my home NAS, which broke horribly when I upgraded to Firefox 3.

In Firefox…

In Fluid…

Why are single instance applications important?

Lots of non-technical users don’t differentiate between their browser and the sites they visit in the browser.  To them the “blue e” is the internet and Google is the new http://.

How else do you explain the popularity of sites like YahooXtra and MSN NZ, other than that people don’t realise that they can change the default home page on their browser?

For those of you who run your own site, look at your referral logs and notice how many people type your URL into a search engine.  If they had a good mental model of their browser wouldn’t it make more sense to use the address bar?

My prediction… look out for icons for all of the different Google apps on a desktop near you soon (or dock if you’re one of the cool kids).

And, if you have your own site, you should be thinking about how to package it into an application.

A little bit of personality goes a long way

I’ve linked to a number of great cartoonists here, including Hugh McLeod, Jessica Hagy, xkcd, Scott Adams, HowToons, and Savage Chickens.

Add Scott McCloud to that list (see:

The cartoon book they have put together to announce the launch and describe some of the design decisions behind Chrome is really well done and well worth a read if you haven’t already taken the time.

Perhaps this is what all technical documentation should look like?

Is there anybody in New Zealand who can do this sort of thing?  If so I’d like to talk to them.

Using the engineers who built the browser as the characters is a nice touch too, and I’m sure a nice ego boost to those involved (many of the same people appear in person in this video)

They have also managed to strike a good balance with their user interface.

The blue background differentiates it from other apps and makes the tabs stand out.

They have definitely gone for the “less is more” approach, which is great.

“I have to admit, Google Chrome has one of the simplest — and the least attractive — UIs I’ve seen in a while. I didn’t realize how much I rather liked the color that the icons in most toolbars lend my apps until faced with the Spartan blue tagged interface that Chrome opens with.”

Barbara Krasnoff

Here’s how the “chrome” part of the various browsers look in Windows Vista (via VMWare):

Internet Explorer 7…

Firefox 3…


When you see these side-by-side you realise how putting the tabs on top is a great design decision (although some credit should go to the Opera team for pioneering that approach).

Also, look out for the “stats for nerds” link on Task Manager :-)


Just because Google builds it doesn’t mean they will necessarily come.

Many of the problems it solves are not problems that many people know they have.  Is it really 10x better for those people?

I remember web developers getting very excited when Firefox first launched.  Finally a browser to replace Internet Explorer, we all thought.

While that may have been broadly achieved amongst technical types, it’s not true at all for the general population (see: We’re Not Normal).

Firefox 1.0 launched in January 2005 (a long time ago now, eh?)  By August 2006 it had achieved just over 11% market share in NZ and, as per the numbers above, has since grown to around 16%.  While this is a huge number of users it’s not really the predicted global domination.

I think it was Blake Ross (one of the other original Firefox guys) who said that he appreciated Internet Explorer, because how else would people download Firefox!

He was joking, obviously, but there is an element of reality in that statement.

You could probably argue that 16% is the proportion of general internet population who have ready access to a geek to upgrade their browser for them.  Everybody else is blissfully unaware. :-)

What market share do you think Chrome will achieve?

And, how much of that will be at the expense of Firefox?

UPDATE (12-Sept): Ben got in touch with some more information about adding custom icons when creating application shortcuts in Chrome…

You actually can specify larger images to be used in your application
shortcuts when the user chooses the menu in Chrome:

In addition, you can write script in your page so you can offer UI to
create the shortcuts yourself using Gears:

Hope this is useful info!