20% of the market sound like a lot but on other hand this number will inevitably become smaller and smaller every month. Many designers have moved to liquid design that gives resolutions-independent feeling, full screen browsing “friendly” and potentially makes it easier to accommodate higher resolutions in the future.

Still we should probably stat with 1024×768 for a little longer and here is why:

• About 76 % of users don’t browse using full screen mode. They simultaneously chat, emil, access widgets.
• Users that have 1600×1200 and higher resolution, usually don’t used full screen and instead have multiple windows / websites open, which is more productive.
• 20% is still a significant piece of the market that should not be ignored.

That being said one needs to take into account user audience demographics. Designing for b2b website for IT industry that routinely uses latest generation of computers and monitors, it would be save to go one step  up and optimize a site for 1280px. Retail sites should aim at 1024×768 to be able to support casual users that don’t upgrade their hardware unless it’s necessary. Learning target audience is always a good idea that helps delivering more usable product.

According to MSN.co.uk which conducted the survey, computer problems are “as frustrating for people as being stuck in traffic or losing a wallet” . Almost half of users say that they just want a computer that “works” and would like to avoid “flashy updates” or new features.

Probably half of the frustration can be attributed to hardware issues, drivers compatibility and overall OS stability issues. But the other half is purely in hands of UI designers. Things like UI inconsistency, badly designed workflows, confusing colour schemes and mystifying error messages – each taking valuable user time and creating a frustrating user experience.

For those who still think they don’t need to employ UX or UI designers,  just think about saving your valuable customers four days a year by simply creating a better interface.

About a year ago Balmer dismissed Google as a player on the mobile market. And in 2007 he dismissed iPhone as a threat to Windows Mobile. Now MS obviously is losing its once-dominating market position and doing it very quickly. Both iPhone and Android will likely to dominate mobile markets for the next decade.

Besides the Google business model, which is definitely more appealing to the mobile service providers than MicroSoft’s, user satisfaction is another very important factor. Both iPhone and Android have very well designed, user-centered  User Interfaces.

In many cases visual aspects of apps and UI become the very corners that are being cut in order to minimize product-to-market time and expenses. As a result, we see less-than-inspiring graphics, confusing User Interfaces and an overall lack of consistency. One of iPhones’s strong points is the well-designed default UI elements that help to assure some level of consistency across various applications. After all, apps are just tools running on a mobile device and shared layout principals help a great deal in minimizing learning curve for users.

Below is a screenshot of Apple Store’s Movies App that uses default iPhone library elements as well as a very similar app from Android Market.

Movies by Flixster (Android)

Movies (Apple App Store)

Smartphone Traffic by Manufacturer – Worldwide

• Apple – 50%
• Nokia – 24% (Mainly from India, Indonesia, Philippines and South Africa markets where Nokia has 89% of the market)
• HTC – 12%
• RIM – 7%

Smartphone Traffic by OS:

• Apple OS 50%
• Symbian OS – 25%  (Mainly from India, Indonesia, Philippines and South Africa markets where Nokia has with 89% of the market)
• Android OS – 11%
• RIM  OS – 7%

United States Data by Manufacturer

• Apple – 55%
• HTC – 22%
• RIM – 12%

Smartphone Traffic by OS:

• iPhone OS – 55%
• Android – 20%
• RIM OS – 12 %

It is interesting that Apple’s traffic comes from only 2 devices – iPhone and iPod. Android traffic comes from 9 devices currently available worldwide. RIM traffic is a result of their current 11 smartphones and probably some past models.

The full report is available here. http://metrics.admob.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/AdMob-Mobile-Metrics-Oct-09.pdf

What’s the reason? Usability I guess. Google is an adept in making usable apps. All their apps are highly intuitive and usable, albeit ugly. I save great deal of time when I have all apps in one window talking to each other. The ugliness of design elements does bother me but the usability pays me back in time saved.

I guess to justify Google’s approach to UI, they need to think about every bite going through their server with the amount of data they process. To a certain degree they comply with a basic rule of design: Take out everything that is not necessary until you can’t anymore and then you have a well designed product. (Michelangelo used to joke that his trade is very easy. Take a rock and cut off everything unnecessary).