Scott Berkun

TurboTax Design FAIL

I’m so hopeful when I install the new version of something. Everyone is. An upgrade, the payment of cash for the new version, is an extremely hopefully act. I imagine they’ve fixed some things, made some nice improvements, and most of all, have taken into account the things I did with the old version.

And thinking like a designer, the best time to make me feel I chose wisely in upgrading, instead of buying a competing product, is in the first few minutes of use, known in the lingo as the OOBE (out of box experience).

So here it is, in 2010, that Intuit TurboTax fails me again.

As an aside, Yes, I know, I have not be failed by TurboTax in the same way the folks in Haiti have been failed by the universe at large.  I won’t lose a limb or a family member or even, with the recession in mind, a job. I know. But still there is a corporation and a business and teams of engineers behind this thing and it’s mystifying.

Back to the story:  one thing I’d expect TurboTax to know is to notice I already had TurboTax and used it last year. You know, a returning customer. I’d just assume it would notice last year’s return sitting there and bring it into the new version for me. I was wrong.

The opening screen shows no evidence I’ve ever used the product before. It’s just a mostly blank, empty, sad little screen.

I wondered, for a moment, if this new install somehow deleted all of my old tax returns? This would be quite disappointing.  I mean, if TurboTax can’t find other TurboTax returns, it should be safe to assume no one can and that they’re disappeared from the universe forever.

Ever hopeful, I press on. I click on the “Find a Tax File” link, in the lower right, and get this File Open Dialog.

To my sadness, there’s yet another blank screen. Blank Screens are bad. It says “you are on your own – good luck”.

Why is this blank? Simple. The little filter box at the bottom. It is set to default to look for 2009 tax returns only. And since I just installed, it’s improbable there could  be anything here with this setting. My previous year returns, despite being in this folder, despite this being the first time I’ve ever used the 2009 version, do not show.

Eventually I figure it out, flip the filter, and alas my old return is there. Sigh of Relief.

But when I click on it, ha ha, the Turbo Tax programmers have another curve ball for me. This is apparently the wrong way to load my old returns.

Let me translate. What this dialog really says is this:

We, the programmers were too lazy, or are too poorly managed, to implement a good solution. Namely, to make the software, at least for the first 5 minutes, follow the natural flow of what returning users will do in this sequence of screens (e.g. start by loading last years file), or doing what’s smart for ourselves, and acknowledge you are a returning customer and reward you for it in some way. Instead we have put up a obnoxious clinical, poorly written dialog that, in the first paragraph, suggests you are completely hosed, only to explain in the second paragraph you are merely partially hosed. Fundamentally, this dialog is a testament to the fact we resolved this bug as fixed by simply putting up a sign, sweeping your lousy experience with our work under the virtual rug.

This product has been around for 15 years. What a shame.  I suppose it doesn’t say much for the quality of its competitors. Perhaps this is the best there is.

Now I know the programmers themselves might not be to blame – but whoever prioritizes bugs, makes feature decisions, or decides which part of the user experience gets invested in, and which don’t, certainly is.

I hope you’ll forward this to any Intuit employees, or friends of Intuit employees, or friends of friends of neighbors of Intuit employees ex-girlfriend’s cousins, who might know anyone on the TurboTax team who hopefully, when they see this missive, will hang their head in shame?  and perhaps promise to get some low hanging but very tasty fruit like this right next time?

Thanks.

Today is World Usability Day

Today marks the third annual World Usability Day. There are many events taking place online and more in various cities around the world, possibly near you.

My favorite event is the Alarm clock rally: You have to guess how hard to use each alarm clock is.

In years past I did tons of free usability reviews of websites and things, but I’m sitting this year out.

Usability review #4: Simplygoogle

#4 on the free review list is SimplyGoogle a utility page, exploding out many of the google options onto a single page. Since there aren’t that many user tasks here, there wasn’t much to work with. The core problem with the page is layout – it’s an endless series of command buttons running down the middle of the page.

The easy remedy is the ever handy radio button: as a rule of thumb, if you can get away with one command button instead of ten, you’re making an improvement. You get tons of real estate back, and it’s easier to scan the list of options.

Before:

After:

Usability review #3: Ginablack.net

#3 on the free review list is a site for the writer Gina Black. It’s a simple site and does many of the basics well, but the home page makes some fundamental mistakes.

Issue Summary:

• Border pattern distracts from the page. Like ParkingFriend, this isn’t a poster and there’s no need to draw attention to the page. Patterns in the page gutter, unless they are sublte (e.g. grey on white), ask people’s eyes to look at them.
• The picture, and page header, is way too big. Any header item appears on every page, which means it should earn it’s keep. A big photo of Gina takes up almost half of the screen, forcing me to only get about half the page to see whatever it is I clicked on.
• Vertical text is hard to read. There’s a reason newspapers run text left to right – written language is designed for horizontal scanning, not vertical. You can get away with it now and then as it can create interesting visual patterns, but if the site is designed to promote a person I’d keep it simple.

Before, with issues flagged:

After

What else I’d do:

• Find a new picture. I just cropped the existing one to fit, but I’d find a picture that has a natural horizontal composition.

Usability review #5: Freetheslaves.net

#5 on the free review list is a site that has a purpose that’s hard to top: Freeing slaves.

This site was tricky to work with. The visuals are strong, but way too strong. And the site is trying way too hard to grab attention that it defeats it’s own purpose. With a cause this good the site doesn’t need to do very much: just explain the situation and then tell the viewer what they should do.

Problems

• Visual overkill. Every element is asking for extra attention. It’s visual a deathmatch, and the viewer is the loser. Compare freetheslaves.net with similiarly themed site, Darfur wall. Will messages this powerful, the cause can speak for itself.
• Confused message. There are so many stories presented, but only one or two are needed. Too many choices. What am I supposed to read first? Second? What is the most important action this organization wants me to take?
• Too much navigation. There are at least 3 layers of navigation for what should be a simple experience.
• Kill the movie. First, if you need a special caption saying “Click here for volume” you’re acknowledging the movie UI is confusing. Get rid of it. We all know what slaves are, and any of the great photos you have are more powerful than video anyway. Also, the site is slow and video ain’t helpin’.

What to do?

It’s hard to work with finished pages, so I made a reverse-wireframe. It helps visualize the elmements and see how they match up with a grid. A clean design respects some kind of visual grid, meaning there are a minimal number of left edges: every left edge should line up with another left edge.

A proper wireframe for the same website, should look something like this. The exercise for the reader, or the designer, is to eliminate elements and make stronger decisions to fit this kind of design. This will force more decisions to be made (e.g. we only have room for 3 things, but had 5. Which 2 should go?) but that’s good.

The other major issue is unnecessary visual flares. These elements make the layout a battlefield, where they’re fighting for attention. By simplifying the design and respecting the wireframe, the layout is cleaner, easier to read, and simpler to understand.

Here’s one before and after example, showing how to clean the visuals.

By sliding the freedom awards into the right column, the element no longer screams “Look at me!”. Instead it’s in its respectful place in the right column. If the freedom awards are really so important, than fit them elsewhere in the grid, but don’t violate your own design by breaking the grid.

Is this more boring? Perhaps, but the goal of this site isn’t visual excitement is it? It’s (I assume) to present a serious problem and compel people to donate time or money to the cause. The design has to get out of the way. The above cleanup can be repeated in dozens of places on the homepage alone and will make a big difference.

If any folks at freetheslaves.net are reading and find this useful, I’m happy to do more work for you. Just let me know.