Usability is not Accessibility (all the time)

I have had many discussions, seen many talks, read many blog posts about Usability...that all somehow devolve to issues of Accessibilty. While the two are intertwined in some ways, they are two very different sets of problems, and it bothers me that so many people seem to confuse them.

Case In Point: "AJAX Usability". You hear a lot about how AJAX is unusable. Sure, in the wrong hands, such a powerful tool can yield unusable results. But AJAX came about as a usability SOLUTION. Eliminating screen refreshes, intuitive drag and drop interfaces, natural-movement animation, subtle highlight effects, editing in place, live validation, sorting and filtering ... They were all created to give smoother, better cues and more responsive interfaces to the user. The most usable sites on the web today use AJAX heavily (hello, 37Signals!).

On the other hand, AJAX Accessibility issues are a different can of worms: The fact that a lot of the visual cues are useless if you can't see them, that JavaScript support is essential, that navigating AJAX interfaces with a keyboard can be a nightmare. The biggest cross-over issue I can think of is back button breakage, which is becoming less and less of an issue as usability techniques are developed to prevent its necessity, while simulatenously AJAX libraries are improving to cope with the back button. (And wasn't it just a few years ago that usability gurus admonished that no one knew about the back button? Funny how things change!)

Why does the difference matter? Because you have to understand the problem before you can solve it. It's possible for someone to be a usability expert, but not know much at all about accessibility. And vice versa - I have seen some really accessible sites with terrible usability. Perhaps the need for accessibility trumps any argument for usability, but not always. That's where progressive enhancement comes in to play. (Screen readers also need to step up to the plate and deal with RIAs, because that's where the web is going.)

So maybe in dealing with one you often have to deal with the other, but hey, I'm a web developer, it's my job to obsess over semantics :)

Is your software less usable because it's "for developers"?

In looking at some usability differences between two different products from the same company (one far more user friendly than the other), it struck me how one seemed to be held to a much higher standard of usability and stability than the other. Now I know this could be due to different product teams, different budgets, product maturity, etc, but I also found it interesting that the less usable one was for developers, and the more usable one was for designers. And I wondered why the company would be willing put their brand on two products of such disparate quality. I know that if any designer encountered the issues that were prominent in the developer tool, without the software savvy of a developer (and that innate desire developers have to understand how things work), they would be far less tolerant of these issues.

And then I started thinking of other examples of websites and applications and other software that illustrates how so often, tools targeted at more savvy users are less usable. But developers (or experts of any nature) need usability too! Of course, advanced tools are often more complex and require more learning curve, but there is a difference between usability (efficient and streamlined user experience) and learnability (low learning curve). Advanced users don't need the learnability: the wizards, the step by step walkthroughs. But they most certainly still need and value the usability; and often demand efficiency, for which a streamlined user experience is imperative. They may understand the cryptic errors, but that doesn't make them like them any more!

I know I have been guilty of shortcutting usability on an application because I know the users can "figure it out". But that's WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. Your advanced users are as likely as anyone to appreciate, and even expect the attention to usability.