The other night, we had my father over for dinner, and he started relaying horror stories about various web sites. This happens to me a lot. Occupational hazard.

He told me about the first time he tried to order supplies from FedEx.com. He had recently bought a small shipping store and needed to stock up. Apparently, it’s very difficult for a first-time user to order supplies. The homepage, which contains 40+ text links, also contains several navigation menus, one of which is labeled “Ship”, another of which is labeled “Manage My Account”.

Neither of these two things really screams, “Order supplies here!”, but that’s where the links to the order form live nonetheless. My father had a very hard time finding them.

When relaying this story, he told me, “It would be easier to travel horseback to Pakistan than to order supplies from FedEx.com”.

The site is clearly designed for repeat customers, which is probably in their best interest, but it doesn’t do a good job of getting users up to speed in the first place. FedEx will get plenty of repeat customers regardless of their user experience, but in an industry where it’s just as easy to choose UPS or DHL, because no one really cares who ships the damn package, you’d be wise to pay close attention to how you handle your customers.

Making them happy may not make them stay, but pissing them off will certainly make them leave.

To counter this, he also told me a story about ordering a new mailbox. He found a site, chose a mailbox style, chose a size, chose a color, etc, and was on his way in under five minutes. He was thrilled with how easy it all was. He remembers the experience fondly, and he’s extremely likely to use the same site next time he needs a mailbox. (You know, ’cause that happens often.)

This happened three years ago. He still remembers it.

Yes, people really do care.

Out there on the crazy InterWeb:

• Some interaction design veterans finally started to pick up on Activity-Centered Design, which means we now have another way to solve problems besides all that touchy-feely user research.
• Yahoo! did the web a great service by putting out a public design pattern library, apparently aimed at standardizing some of those crazy new Web 2.0 interactions.
• Ross Howard showed us a wonderful and very untapped design approach with his article, “Ambient Signifiers“.
• Seth Godin made a nice attempt to show clients and managers how to live happily with a great designer.
• The psychological principle of “Flow” - the fully immersed state where we lose all sense of space and time - gained some popularity this year, despite that the premier book on the subject has been out since 1991.
• Simplicity earned top billing this year as John Maeda’s new book hit the streets and earned wide appeal. The book itself is just one piece in a wide array of books, magazines, and blogs talking about simplifying your life, which has become so ridiculously complex that it’s impossible to make a decision about anything.
• The notoriously serious Jakob Nielsen managed to squeak his way onto this list with a tongue-in-cheek Alertbox article about usability in the movies.

And in my world:

• The new book is doing extremely well, and is getting some very passionate, very positive reviews.
• Wrote my first Vitamin article, Communicating Web 2.0 Through Design.
• Had loads of fun speaking at FlashForward and MAX, where I met a ton of great people and got to talk about the book for hours and hours. Even had my first book signing!
• Started the new gig at GoDaddy.com as the lead of the user experience team, which I also established. (No, I had nothing to do with the Go Daddy web site. Rather, I designed several web apps, including the newly-released Metropolis.)

(There were, of course, many other memorable moments in 2006, but I’m trying to keep the list to a reasonable length.)

Happy holidays, everyone!

Do the two processes always end up with the same results? No. Are they both effective? Yes. But most results can be produced at significantly greater speed using the one on the right.

The new line of Adobe CS3 icons has arrived.

They’re … well, let’s just say they’re not pretty.

However, I think I’ll have to buy two new apps based on these icons. One is “RH”, the other is “JR”. Add a “.NET” icon and I’ll have an OS X dock that spells my domain name.

Maybe the goal was to compel people to try to spell things out with applications. Like a really expensive version of Alphabet Soup.

Respect. Loyalty. Mutual gratitude.

Lynda.com is a great company. In addition to being a big fan and advocate of their online library and series of Hands On Training books, I’ve also had the privilege of working with Lynda and the team on several occasions, and I can tell you this: They treat you well, they cut checks quickly, they put you up in gorgeous hotels, and they speak highly of you at every available opportunity. Hell, they even sent me a letter once to explain that they had mistakenly sent too little on a prior royalty check. (Of course, they sent the check, too.)

And if all this wasn’t enough, they completely susprised me today. How?

First, they sent me a handwritten holiday card they designed themselves. Second, they included a wrapped gift. And inside the wrapping paper was an engraved 1Gb iPod Shuffle. It says, “Rock on! - lynda.com”.

Is Lynda.com great because they sent something nicer than a company-branded pen? Yes, but that’s not the whole deal.

They’re great because they realize a company is only as great as its relationships. And they did something to make a real impression. They didn’t simply acknowledge our work together with some crappy trinket. They handwrote the notes on the inside of the card. They wrapped the gift. They made it personal.

That’s what makes a company great.