Thoughts onInbox by Google

Number of drafts in, it was clear the recently posted observation article would be too long if it included everything that was needed to be said. Idea of writing a companion article came to mind. I could provide more details and cover the gaps in implied knowledge variations of one audience to another.

They range from small inconsistencies, missing few from Gmail, brand new ones, and also, sprinkle of wishful thinking, crafted out of curiosity of what Inbox can be.

I keep using the reference observations. Suggestions and recommendations doesn’t seem right as it covers what may work for me. And me might be the sample of 1; there’s no empirically backed source to confirm how many people would agree and disagree with me. I also don’t have access to any data that would shift my thinking into one direction or another.

This is published now, long after the launch, for one reason. Usually little inconsistencies and bugs are updated fairly quickly after the launch, if not in the next n week release. Those are still present. Other features go beyond the usual and they might spark some more ideas.

Know your audience(s)

Inbox launch was received with mixed feelings. It should be no surprise that it was praised by some and disapproved by others. It is intended for everyone and designing user experience that will please such diverse audiences is extremely difficult, if not, impossible.

Many offered their opinions, reviews and analysis, stating their delight, confusion, dissatisfaction and even anger to Google’s vision of the future of information management. Name of the new e-mail app and integrating google now features, as well as light integration of calendar suggests the direction Inbox will be taking. It’s not just about e-mail.

It is important to realize there is no right or wrong here. It either works for you or it doesn’t. The reason is that everyone’s idea how a particular action needs to work varies drastically. Why? Immense number of variables influences how you do something, from all the apps you used, tutorials you completed, books you have read and the style of your teacher who showed you the basics. It might be the way you think aligns with a lot of other people

It could also be that you are just a guy with an opinion.

I don’t think this is [ intended ] for me,
works better than me thinks this is wrong.

No, the number of twitter followers you have does not matter. You might have been in the industry for a very long time. You might have also tested a lot more apps than the average user. All of that actually makes you a member of a smaller audience group.

Making a decision, forming an opinion can also lead to number of cognitive biases.

It happened (or not) to me, therefor it’s true (or not).
I know (heard about) n number of people experienced this, therefor it must be true.

It helps learning to recognize them and staying alert.
Knowing all of them is a bias on it own.

Inbox 0

Inbox 0 concept was appreciated by the users who are using this approach and were able to adjust quickly. Others are not used to it and may not be willing to switch, and that’s okay. Why?

Inbox in its current iteration is not a replacement for Gmail.

Using Gmail for over 10 years also created a habit and the fact it worked so well fortified that habit even more. So much so, certain users find it hard to adjust to the new approach. Gmail is fast, it does what it needs to do, it is reliable more than any other service and it becomes second nature.

It should be clear that building around this concept is suppose to help people organize. If you are already good at it, you will be even better and if you are not, it will help you become more organized. It will automatically process the straight forward little details in the background, allowing you to focus on the important: the correspondence.

Needless to say, if Gmail works better for you, no one is forcing you to switch. Suggesting yes, but not making you use it.

Fluid MVP

Gmail feature usage data over the last 10 years was a good starting point for preparing the back-log. Additional feedback from the first couple of Inbox iterations will underline the priorities. It does need to be noted this was only accumulated by users willing to provide feedback. There are many others that are passive and that doesn’t matter.

Inbox aims to be useful to all.

Analyzing all that data could reveal, in most cases, slight variation of the Pareto principle and it could end up with, let’s say, 15% of the features that 85% of all active audiences are using.

With such variety of audiences, starting with even just 5 features, everyone would have an opinion of how those 5 features should work. Nevertheless, the M in MVP stands for minimum.

This would cover the features people are already familiar with.
What about the new features?

How do you predict whether the new feature will be successful,
without actual development and
subsequent a/b, multivariate, other types of testing?

Features embraced by the users in other apps should also be taken into consideration. Supporting them would be a win win. The crowd has spoken and they want those features. Many of them, however insincere it may sound, could also be the next step, a product of convergent evolution.

They were heading there inevitably so and developing them makes perfect sense.

It doesn’t matter who introduced the feature 1st.
It does matters how much more quality can be infused into it.
It does matter how much innovation the team can develop.
It does matter to which level the team can take it.

Even if feature are matched, one by one, would that be enough for the user to choose Inbox over other apps?

Google has an outstanding lineup of highest quality public and in-house product, services and algorithms, which, if integrated more deeply, could put the Inbox several levels higher than any other app.

Cross service integration

We have already seen the glimpse of this. To a degree, Now, Calendar, Keep, and Answers are already integrated. Many other algorithms are finding their way as well, search and maps, to name a few. Deeper integration, for example, would prevent snoozing the e-mail to a time/place that is already booked. Other examples have been explored in the feature article.

Aesthetics and User Interfaces

In these couple of iterations we’ve seen so far, material design has proven to be able to provide solutions to questions the Inbox wanted to answer. Beyond the obvious aesthetics, user experience is designed so well, the number of details under the hood might be invisible to many.

The discovery of what Inbox can do and is doing for you, in the words of one of my design friends, feels like an awesome adventure.

The focus on the substance with subtleties in style, enforces the user experience even more. Timed perfectly, auxiliary animations are not distracting. They would be, especially on slow devices if the duration was longer. Keeping them under half a second works great

The next steps are obvious.

People will try, use, observe and notice.
People will show you the bugs, tell you about the issues.
People will provide feedback on current and will imagine new features.

Hopeful we may be handful of those would end up on the road map.
In the meantime feedback will be provided enthusiastically.

If you like this article please click the recommend button below and share.
Thank you.

If you haven’t already, also check the features article.