Tag Archives | Usability

More About CloudOn for Lawyers

I recently wrote a couple posts about CloudOn, a new app that brings full Microsoft office applications to the iPad via a virtual workspace. Since that time, a similar app, OnLive, launched (to less than stellar reviews and comments) bringing a full Windows 7 virtual workspace (including Office applications) to the iPad. While I find these apps technologically interesting and of importance to our profession, I think they are far from the best of tablet computing.

Rather than capitalizing on the strengths of the iPad, these services bring the worst bits of desktop applications to our tablets: overpowered software, cluttered, unintuitive interfaces and uninspired design. I’ve always believed that the best apps are the ones that make deliberate choices about what features to include (and exclude) and how best make those features available to the user. These virtualization apps have done the user no such favor. The result are tools ill suited for the device and a chore to use. These apps require that the user bend to work as demanded by the tool rather than the other way around.

Even with those criticisms, I think these are important tools, especially for lawyers so I’ll continue to cover them (at least CloudOn) at TabletLegal. Without a doubt, when you need to regenerate table of contents, create tracked changes in a document or properly format a brief for filing, there is no tool other than a full version of Microsoft Word that will help you do that. Also, from writing this blog I know that many attorneys are reluctant to try non-Word based workflows. For these people, these apps provide a familiar writing environment and require little change in one’s workflow in order to use.

So what do you think? Are apps like these a step back for iPad users? Would all that venture capital money been better spent on developing a native touch-based Word clone?

Comments { 1 }

Exhibit A: Annotation Flexibility with Interface Issues

Shortly after my post about TrialPad (which spawned the most comments on a single post for this blog) the developer of competing app, Exhibit A (iTunes link), forwarded me a promo code to give it a try. While I originally intended to write a “review” type post, this became more of a critique about app interface design. I’m no UX expert, but I know what I like and I know when an app has me confused. Though Exhibit A succeeds in it’s core function of allowing presentation and annotation of multiple file types, I found the app’s interface frustratingly difficult to use.

Exhibit A organizes groups of exhibits into “Projects” denoted by briefcases that can hold PDF, jpg and video. Files can be imported via email, Dropbox, through iTunes, by mounting the app as a wireless USB drive or by FTP (this last option seems quite odd to me as I can’t think of any lawyer I’ve met in my 14 years of practice that manages files with FTP, but perhaps I’m behind the times).

While all these import options are nice, I couldn’t find a way to import directly into the project of my choice. Rather, imports all land in the “Imports” project. From there, the user can copy them into specific project folders. Moving files into projects is far from intuitive, however. When visiting an empty project, the user is prompted “to add an exhibit or folder, tap either button in the toolbar below.”

Empty screen, confusing instructions.

But instead of the typical icons for such actions one might expect, the user is met with six somewhat confusingly labeled buttons (spoiler: the button you want is Imports, not Files). I always thought “either” meant two but in any case, why wouldn’t the instructions simply say “To add an exhibit or folder, tap the Imports button.” Or perhaps highlight the button I’m supposed to tap? More to the point, why can’t I import directly to a Project?

Case navigation also has quirks. When looking at a project on screen, there is no indication that the app contains multiple projects other than dots toward the bottom of the screen. While these dots match how multiple screens full of apps are navigated in iOS, I don’t think they translate as well to the page or project metaphor.

Where are my other projects?

Compare switching between documents in an app like Penultimate (shown below) or any of the Apple apps like Pages, Numbers or Keynote. When focused on one document, the edges of other nearby documents (with contextually appropriate thumbnails) are visible giving the user a clue as to where other projects are and how to get to them. Exhibit A offers the user no such contextual clues which often left me hunting for my other projects and swiping about aimlessly. I frequently felt lost navigating the app until I had an “oh yeah” moment.

Penultimate provides context for where my other projects can be found.

Similarly, I found disorienting the Project icon of an open briefcase that appears to be full of photos, videos and PDF. This icon is static regardless of what is inside the actual project. Empty Projects represented by a full briefcase? Completely different projects represented by the same full briefcase? (Note: I had the same criticism of Penultimate during its early iterations when the face of each notebook was identical. This went away when Penultimate was updated to allow the user to customize the cover of a notebook with a title.)

Gestures in the app led to similar frustrations. If you swipe to move to a new Project but accidentally start your swipe touching the project briefcase, the swipe is read as a tap to enter the project. This is made more confusing because the resulting animation looks like you have successfully moved over to the next project (a sliding pane) but instead you have entered a project (also a sliding pane). Again compare how Penultimate or Pages zooms in to a selected project rather than sliding into it. In sum, trying to navigate multiple projects left me disoriented and frustrated.

Once you enter annotation mode, things improve. Tap a file to display full screen. A choice of annotation tools including yellow highlight, freehand pen (with five ink color choices), eraser and laser pointer are at left. The pen and highlighted thickness are adjustable by a slider at the bottom of the screen. Rotate, undo, redo, clear, save and show buttons at the top have their expected functions and can be hidden by a tap. I like how undo/redo and the clear/redraw can be toggled on and off to highlight a particular annotation. I also like how the highlighter is a pen rather than a selection block, though the color seems to obscure rather than emphasize the text being marked. I appreciate than an annotation tool stays selected until I deselect. This saves me a number of trips to the annotation toolbar.

Again, the interface could stand to be improved. The buttons for Rotate, Undo, Redo, etc. are white text on transparent menubar. When overlayed on a white document (as many are), these buttons become difficult to see. Another miscue: page navigation is offered in two conflicting ways on the same interface – forward and back page turn buttons and an up and down slider. While the slider is nice for jumping to the back of a long document quickly, the up and down slider is inconsistent with the left / right gesture used to turn pages.

Exhibit A annotation interface.

I think with some effort, a person could learn to work around the idiosyncrasies of Exhibit A’s interface. Indeed, I have heard from a couple folks who either aren’t bothered by these interface issues or have become accustomed to them and use the app successfully. I, however, am not that person and I think most other users would be similarly frustrated.

Comments { 3 }

Lawyers: Is the iPad Right for You?

The Daily Kos posted today an excellent take on an issue I’ve been noodling for some time. Rather than rehash extensively, I commend it to your attention.  I like this article especially because it is from a technology user, but not someone who is a technology pundit or self proclaimed hacker. Kos concludes:

My iPad scored big as my new travel machine. I needed it for basic word processing, downloading and viewing business documents (like the PPT presentation), web, and email. It did those tasks perfectly. The lack of third-party multi-tasking was at most a mild-annoyance, as I had no problem switching between Tweetdeck and whatever other task I was working on at the time. On my laptop, I can switch between apps near instantaneously. On the iPad, it might take 4-5 seconds, and that mild annoyance will be gone with the new OS upgrade this fall.

Will this work for you? Beats the shit out of me. It depends on what your job is, whether there are apps that fill your needs, whether you’re happy or not with an on-screen keyboard, and whether you care enough about “open versus closed” systems to let Apple’s heavy-handed control over the device’s hardware and software bother you.

For me, all I care is whether a device makes my life easier. I could give a shit about whether the hackers love or hate it, or how much hype something has. The iPad filled my needs seamlessly, with only minor hassles. It was better than a laptop, allowing me to travel more efficiently.

Key takeaway here is really figuring out what you need. I think the use case Kos describes is pretty typical of most lawyers. Add that to the “family friendly” features that many people use at home (photos, music, videos, games, internet, etc.) and the iPad becomes a pretty compelling tool.

Comments { 1 }

iPad Quick Review: Writing for Lawyers

I’m putting together a series of quick reviews about iPad features in the next few days. There is lots to talk about regarding the iPad, but my goal is to keep things as focused as possible on issues that I think will be of particular interest to lawyers. If there are any features or capabilities you’d like me to tackle, please let me know in the comments.

For this first review, I gave Pages a quick spin to see how writing works on the device. Words are stock in trade for many lawyers and being able to wield them efficiently on a mobile device is critical. This post and the documents attached below were all written on Pages for iPad using the virtual keyboard only (some minor edits excepted). My real review is in the body of the attachment, but I’ve also pasted it below.

The attachments are .doc and .pdf versions of a my review written entirely in Pages for the iPad (WordPress doesn’t allow Pages files as links for some security reason I’m not able to figure out at the moment – suffice to say the native version looked fine). The exports were also created by Pages for iPad as well. You’ll see that the PDF export looks fine. The .doc export lost some formatting (seemingly related to the image mask), but the text is intact. Hopefully something that will be remedied in a software update.

Hello All:

Hi. Just test driving the Pages word processing application on the iPad. I am using the iPad in landscape mode which gives you a big keyboard. It is almost as big as a the standard Apple wireless keyboards (pictured below). I the iPad keyboard is shorter than the Apple wireless keyboard by about half an inch (from Q to P).

I was able to use the browser to snap this photo from the web (press home and power buttons simultaneously). That saves the image to the photo library. From there, I could easily insert the image into this document. I was also able to adjust the mask to hide the rest of the image (very pleasantly surprised to find that feature).

The keyboard is different in that you don’t rest your fingers on it. You sort of hover over it (even the slightest touch registers as a key press) Also, just sitting here in my bed, I find that I don’t use my pinkies to type. Sort of a three finger plus thumb thing. My typing is fairly accurate (I’ve had to go back and correct about 4 words in this letter). Now, this is all with the virtual keyboard. It also connects with any Bluetooth keyboard – in that case, the typing is normal.

In my testing, the .doc exports were a mess. The PDF exports appear fine. I’ll post all thee versions at TabletLegal for review.

My initial review is that I could easily draft letters or even simple contracts using just the virtual keyboard. Emails and such are also easily manageable from the iPad. Formatting is a bit slow going, but I’m attributing that to just not being familiar with the interface (having a pre formatted template from which to start would solve most of that) For longer bouts of writing, I’d want to have a Bluetooth keyboard.

Yours in Testing,

TabletLegal

Here are the exported versions for your viewing pleasure.

Review Letter – iPad Pages – .doc Export

Review Letter – iPad Pages – .pdf Export

Comments { 8 }

Lawyers: Use an iPad to Close the Deal

A reader e-mailed me the other day asking about solutions for getting documents signed using your iPhone. While I’ve tried one such product in the past, the question got me looking at what else is out there. I think the iPad is the natural platform for these products. While there is no emotional substitute for wet ink on paper at the end of a long transaction, many signatures are almost a formality and the iPad offers an opportunity to collect such signatures with little overhead. Expect to see the apps below and similar products more fully utilized on the iPad.

I looked at two products for this post – both of which I’ve used. For each, I gave them a quick run through with a focus on how these products might be deployed or extended on the iPad.

RightSignature. This SaaS product pairs with an iPhone app to provide “easy online document signing.” A user uploads documents for signature to the RightSignature website. From there, documents can be distributed, signed, monitored, and archived. While the iPhone app doesn’t allow management or distribution of documents for signature from the device, it does act as a digital signature pad, allowing you to obtain signatures while mobile.  The RightSignature online interface also allows users to create custom input fields on documents. RightSignature looks like it shines for users with high volume of contracts or users that need signatures on lots of different standardized forms. I used the free trial and found it easy to use (as did the recipients of contracts through RightSignature). They offer three different pricing models, with the first starting at $14 per month. RightSignature is a very powerful tool and for the right user could be indispensable – a full description of the service is beyond the scope of this post. For a full tour and explanation of benefits, check out the very informative RightSignature website.

RightSignature wrote on its blog the day the iPad was announced and spilled the beans about iPad development straight away:

You’re probably already thinking ahead, so we’ll spare you the drama and answer the big question. Not only will the RightSignature app be fully compatible with the iPad, it will thrive on this groundbreaking device. You’ll be able to have clients fill out and sign documents anywhere … in the lobby or waiting room, on a job site, or at a trade show. Imagine handing over your iPad and having a client sign with his finger on the vibrant 9.7-inch color screen. RightSignature on the iPad will satisfy a host of new use cases and has the potential to make the clipboard a thing of the past.

The image at right looks to be the RightSignature website in mobile Safari. While RightSignature has an iPhone app, its strength is in the SaaS application which one would expect to operate identically to its desktop companion. I think the size of the iPad is no accident and its parallels to a standard piece of paper make it a compelling device for document management. I’d expect people to consider using RightSignature on the iPad even more than on the iPhone because of this.  That said, I wonder if the pricing structure could benefit from a plan for the “occasional” user. Even though the web app is very powerful, many of its features aren’t needed for simple signings. If an iPad app is deployed, I’d like to see the core functionality of easy document review and signing brought to the fore with the document distribution and management tools pushed to the back or offered in more contextually appropriate places.

Zosh. Zosh is at its heart a pdf annotation tool that allows users to sign, annotate and deliver documents all from the iPhone. Zosh lacks some of the powerful document management features of RightSignature, but its iPhone application is much more powerful. More than just a signature pad, the Zosh iPhone application controls the entire process. Users set documents for signing through Zosh by emailing them to their Zosh account. Docs in your Zosh account appear on your iPhone library where they can be annotated, signed and delivered. Zosh’s strengths are many. Its iPhone app is soup to nuts document management and has the ability to add more than a signature to a document while on the go. It also supports a variety of document formats including .doc, .pdf, .xls, .ppt, .jpg, .png, .tif and .bmp. The gallery below gives hints as to the features of the $2.99 app. For more details, check out the Zosh website or iPhone J.D. for a full review.

I’ve not seen specific mention of an iPad specific version of Zosh though I’d be surprised if one isn’t already in the works. Of course, full screen document viewing will make the annotation and execution process much easier. The menu system will need a rewrite to take advantage of the iPad form factor, though I suspect we will see the screen split with library and tools to one side or available via contextual menu. I like the more robust annotation tools and I’d like more development in that area. I’d especially like to see integration with file storage services like Dropbox or MobileMe to avoid having to go through the Zosh servers. Zosh is terrific for a periodic need or where price is an issue.

Note a key difference in the core of these applications: RightSignature is at its core a SaaS product while Zosh is an iPhone/iPad app. The full page views and power of the online app through Mobile Safari will make RightSignature a compelling product. That said, one of the great things about Zosh is its simplicity and integration (a fortunate byproduct of good iPhone development). If redesigned for the iPad, I think Zosh may be a compelling tool and a terrific fit for many users. RightSignature on the other hand allows power without compromise through its full featured website through mobile Safari. How these products develop on the iPad might be an interesting test case for apps generally: is the better bet more robust SaaS development for use through mobile Safari or will lean and integrated iPad/iPhone apps with highly customizable interfaces be preferable to users?

What are you looking forward to?

Comments { 7 }

iPad Design: 20% is the new 100%

Great post with lots to consider about iPad design by Cameron Daigle. Is the iPad a big iPhone he asks? While many have said yes, Cameron gives compelling reasons why this simply isn’t the case and how great design – not features – drives usability. I share Cameron’s curiosity about the first wave of iPad apps:

The first round of iPad apps will be extremely interesting to experience. Many will feel strangely sparse. Others will attempt to compensate with freakishly oversized controls. Others will go off the deep end and become cluttered and confusing.

As I’ve said before, I think a limited feature set is an advantage for users, like lawyers, whose typical use case is fairly limited: reading text, writing text, using the Internet.

Comments { 0 }

Less Functionality in the iPad is Better for Lawyers

Now that is a linkbait blog title if I’ve ever written one…But I think it is accurate.

It isn’t a novel concept to suggest that having fewer choices is better than having more. Much has been made (including by me) about the ostensible limitations of the iPad and I’m sure more will be revealed once we get the device in hand. Notwithstanding, I think the iPad will succeed as both a consumer and work device in part because of its shortcomings.

The limitations of the iPad, iPhone and similar platforms force software designers to make choices that developers for a desktop platform aren’t faced with (or at least not as regularly). The feature set in a device like the iPad or the iPhone must necessarily be limited by screen size, processing power, available buttons and the like. Indeed, many modern and successful SaaS products are built on the theory of this kind of simplicity. Where these omissions might be a problem for someone who conducts scientific experiments or edits motion pictures, I think missing features are actually a boon to lawyers.

Consider what lawyers do and how they use tools to do it. In terms of computing devices, how lawyers use them can generally be summed up in a pretty short list:

  • send and receive emails
  • write and read documents
  • use the Internet
  • talk

More features don’t help lawyers – they probably even hurt. Consider the proliferation of writing applications like WriteRoom. Gone are rows of toolbars and buttons leaving only text – the stock in trade for many lawyers.

When you need to work, you close your door, shut off your phone and simply concentrate on moving the cursor to the right. In most instances, a light and deliberately chosen feature set will better help you accomplish your task than multitasking and Flash. This isn’t to say that extra features wouldn’t be enjoyed, but they certainly aren’t even in a top ten list of needs for most work a lawyer would typically do away from the desk – or even at one.

Comments { 4 }

iPad: Easy Enough for a Lawyer to Use

Is it possible? Could Apple have designed a product so simple and so intuitive that it is easy enough for a lawyer to use?

While I write a bit in jest, an outsider might wonder about the technological acuity of lawyers given how terribly slow they are to adopt technology. I keep reading about how the iPad is so intuitive that your grandmother, a luddite or even a lawyer can use it. “Perhaps Apple is really on to something here,” I thought to myself. But on reflection, the comparison fails. The reasons your mom surprisingly ends up using an iPad will not also convince your lawyer to do so.

Lawyers are (generally) smart even if sometimes cantankerous folks, so why not giving something new a go? There reasons have been blogged about to death, so I won’t belabor them here. What I think it comes down to is precedent. Lawyers like to follow a path that has been blazed before. Preferably many times before. In a lawyer’s world, staking a new path or even a lightly worn path (or a path only recently recognized by a different circuit) exposes them and their clients to risk.

While taking a new position in a system that has at its heart a huge respect for prior decisions may create risk for a client, the metaphor is more difficult when deciding whether to use a new device or technology. The part lawyers forget is that the status quo has risks and problems associated with it as well.

Side Note: I informally consider the extent to which an opposing lawyer uses technology as a tell as to how they will advise their clients. If I see a luddite on the other side of a deal, I infer that the advice they may provide will be very risk adverse or reflect older paradigms. This can be helpful information when trying to move the other side off a position. I wouldn’t say it is 100% correlative, but it can be helpful.

But, mom doesn’t have this kind of hangup. Other hangups possibly, but probably not the curse of stare decisis. The iPad presents as a device that is easy to use and allows access to the things your mom enjoys: an email from the kids, pictures of the last vacation, a movie of the grandkids, etc. In contrast, a lawyer isn’t avoiding the iPad because it is hard to use or because they are stupid, but because it requires doing something differently which a lawyer perceives as risky.

So even while smartphone adoption by lawyers has been relatively high, an iPad is something different. As a result, I don’t anticipate the rate of adoption by lawyers to be terribly high. The tipping point for lawyer adoption is probably much farther off…probably after   development of a killer app or two specific to the legal profession. It won’t be legal research, matter management or time and billing. I’m not sure what it will be, but I look forward to finding out.

Comments { 1 }