Talk about constant, subtle refinement! Google modifies the Gmail homepage. And, to quote Christian Linsey (Catalyst Designer extraordinaire): “You don’t even really notice. But you sort of do.”

Given how most users react to redesigns, I think this is a standard we could all aspire to.

This just in from Catalyst mobile design expert Chris Calabrese:

Got my new iPad stand last night…..sooooo awesome.

This gorgeous iPad stand was hand crafted without the aid of electric tools in the Provence of Baldwin, Long Island. Scraps of wood found in a cellar were assembled with six nails and then roughly sanded to give this fixture an industrial appeal. This gem provides an old world charm which ironically complements the sleek, modern sophistication of the iPad.

(Courtesy of Christian Linsey, Catalyst Senior Designer)

Christian says they sound best if you read them aloud in a Samuel L. Jackson Voice.

Broadway Bank:
“we’re here for good”

CB&S Bank
“Banking the way it should be.”

Central Pacific Bank
“Works. For You.”

First National Bank of Texas
“Real Hours for Real People.”

Bank Plus
“it’s more than a name. It’s a promise.”

And the winner is…

Redneck Bank
“where bankin’s funner!”

This article by Don Norman and Jakob Nielsen makes a lot of valid points about the many ways in which gestural interfaces on the iPhone and iPad (and other touchscreen devices) completely disregard a host of established usability principles. Jeffrey Zeldman made similar points in his recent “iPad as the new Flash” post. Nielsen and Norman provide several really compelling examples of frustrating or inconsistent navigation elements in the underlying IOS (to say nothing about the thousands of apps that are designed with no regard for usability standards at all). One of my favorites is the “nonexistent signifier:”

“To delete an unread message in Mail on the iPhone, swipe right across the unopened mail and a dialog appears, allowing you to delete the item. Open the email and the same operation has no result. In the Calendar, the operation does not work. How is anyone to know, first, that this magical gesture exists, and second, in which settings it operates?”

Many of these examples will be familiar to any iPhone user. Several of them frustrated and mystified me during my initial iPhone use. That said, it didn’t take me too long to overcome these obstacles, and once I did I joined the legions of people who find the touch interface adequately usable and basically pretty delightful.

I’m obviously a huge believer in the importance of usability – and the gadget appeal of new platforms and interaction styles doesn’t eliminate this need. At the same time, have ordinary (i.e. non-designer) users noticed these problems? Have they been particularly stymied by them? Even if they have, it’s hard to argue that this has impacted the success of touch devices. People are learning how they work – including, I assume, that there is some discovery / serendipity involved in the learning process. The sheer appeal and usefulness of the total device experience seems to far outweigh a few usability hiccups.

So, what role does usability play in the conception and design of gestural interfaces? Many of our clients are asking us to help them insure that their phone and tablet apps can be used and enjoyed with minimal learning – so it’s not the case that usability is completely out the window. But it does seem clear that the role that “traditional” usability plays in this new realm of user experience is still being worked out. And some of the old guard are not amused.

I, and thousands of others, have been having a jolly old time for the last couple of days (mostly on Twitter) snarking all over the new Gap logo. For those of you who have had better things to do than follow this scandal, here’s the brief:

1. Gap launches awful new logo (see it here)
2. The Twitterverse collectively retches
3. An unauthorized @GapLogo Twitter feed starts tweeting in defense of the logo (very funny stuff), and “the logo” is even interviewed on a FastCompany blog.
4. Gap, stunned, announces plans to crowdsource a new logo
5. More collective retching from the design community on Twitter – see especially.
6. Some speculate that this is all a genius PR ploy.
7. Oops, no it isn’t.

By tomorrow, this will all be yesterdays news. We’ve had our fun, now onto the next holier-than-thou time waster… But before we leave this debacle behind, it seemed worthwhile to ponder what impact this example of “the power of social media” might have on creativity, branding, and design in general. I’m thinking it’s not good. Specifically, how can we, as designers, bloggers, UXers, product developers, and business people, take risks and push boundaries when a world of haters lurks outside the door with their knives out? Sure, it was always thus, but stuff happens a lot faster these days. It would be a shame if the Gap – or the next victim – mistakes an instant, reflexive flash of disdain from a vocal minority for an actual predictor of failure. Even if they know better, it’ll be very tough for the owners of this project to stand up to the onslaught and stand behind their work.

Here are two possible outcomes – 1) Clients (companies, people) will think more about public reaction than about the substantive arguments for making potentially disruptive changes and, as a result, will take the safer paths out of fear; 2) People will dismiss “the crowd” as a bunch of cranky lunatics and ignore their feedback completely. As a design professional, I dislike both of those scenarios – but I think I need to be ready for them and prepare good arguments against them.