A couple of years ago, right around the time Google’s Gmail team
decided to start working on a standalone email app — the recently
announced Inbox — a major redesign of Gmail was launched.
As is the case with all Google products it was first released internally as “dogfood” to let Googlers themselves digest all the new features, or as was the case with this particular redesign, the removal of most of the advanced features.
As is the case with all Google products it was first released internally as “dogfood” to let Googlers themselves digest all the new features, or as was the case with this particular redesign, the removal of most of the advanced features.
The Gmail team did not have to wait for the reaction for long. And it
wasn’t very “googly.” It caused an uproar teeming with disgust for just
about every decision the Gmail product/design team made. Phrases like,
“You guys just completely destroyed Gmail!” and “What are these
crazy designers doing over there?!” were everywhere. From being spoken
at many of Google’s cafes to every internal online forum.
Google engineers, in typical OCD engineer fashion, wrote long
internal Google+ and forum posts detailing every single use case that
was no longer supported, no matter how obscure. Hell hath no fury like a
product team removing a feature an engineer had been using on a daily
basis. Add to that the decision to turn words into icons and add white
space between rows and Google engineers were ready to storm the Gmail
product/design team office with torches, swords and in full knight armor
(you’d be surprised how many Google engineers own that stuff).
In response, the head of the Gmail design team made a presentation
entitled “You Are Not the User.” If you were not lucky enough to witness
the carnage in person you could view its archived version on the
internal Google+.
The presentation detailed the reasons behind every decision the
design/product team made showing gobs of usability data supporting the
decisions to remove advanced features that the overwhelming majority of
Gmail users were never using. These features, it was argued, were
unnecessarily complicating the user interface when most people just
wanted a simple email client.
All of the decisions revolved around the central fact that a typical
Gmail user was receiving only about five emails per day, most of which
were of promotional nature, and as such, required no response. This was
in contrast to a typical Googler who received an average of about 450
emails per day, many of which were important to at least read, with a
good chunk of them requiring a reply.
Despite supplying a large amount of concrete data supporting the
Gmail design/product team’s decisions the presentation did not quell the
criticism, but rather stoked the fire even more. Even its title was
called “purposefully inflammatory” and further upset Googlers who, like
many techies, were using every possible advanced feature to deal with
the daily onslaught of email.
Finally, a compromise was reached. Gmail would stay streamlined and
optimized for its gigantic user base (hundreds of millions of
monthly active users) while still keeping some of the more advanced
features (now well hidden) for those who really needed them.
In parallel, the Gmail team would begin working on a standalone
product specifically designed from the ground up for advanced users who
have to handle a firehose of incoming emails every day. And that’s how
Inbox was born.
No comments:
Post a Comment