Transcript: Ask the UXperts: Designing Better Conversations — with Justin Davis

A month or so ago I was sifting around the internet and I stumbled across Justin Davis. He was on YouTube.

I don’t usually like watching videos online, but this autoplayed in the background and I was captivated.

Justin doesn’t talk at a philosophical level, which can often feel out of reach. He talks about applying real life to design situations, and that is something that I can relate to.

So I did what any self respecting Community Manager would do – I cold emailed and roped him into chatting to us in our Slack channel. And he did!

Justin summarises the session well in his own words:

We can learn a lot from how we talk to people in real life, and the dynamics of those conversations, that can help us think about how we design those moments into our products.

If you didn’t make the session because you didn’t know about it, make sure you join our community to get updates of upcoming sessions.

If you’re interested in seeing what we discussed, or you want to revisit your own questions, here is a full transcript of the chat.

Transcript

hawk

2017-04-11 22:02

First on the agenda is a HUGE thanks to @justindavis for his time today

hawk

2017-04-11 22:02

I literally solicited him by cold emailing and he was a legend. Took about 2 emails to lock this down. Quickest ever.

hawk

2017-04-11 22:03

So thanks Justin, for being such a star

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:03

:boom:

hawk

2017-04-11 22:03

Here’s the formal introduction:
Justin Davis is a senior user experience designer, and co-founder of First Chair Partners, a design and research collective working to help companies solve some of their most difficult design problems.

He is based in Tampa, FL, and has worked with companies like Google, Coca-Cola and Metlife to help deliver interesting and engaging experiences to their customers. With nearly 20 years experience in technology and design, Justin brings a wealth of experience from both the design and technical sides. He also loves boats and bourbon.

Read his blog at http://justindavis.co.

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:03

@justindavis What are your thoughts on conversational UI?

hawk

2017-04-11 22:03

Yay, bourbon!

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:03

Woohoo! Thanks Hawk, appreciate the intro!

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:04

let me start with a little context, and we’ll dive into some questions here shortly

hawk

2017-04-11 22:04

I found Justin when I stumbled on this talk he did: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pn6ezjkEuWk

hawk

2017-04-11 22:04

And now I’ll let him give you an intro to the topic

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:04

Impressive! Look forward to picking your brain Justin

duffdaddy

2017-04-11 22:04

:+1:

hawk

2017-04-11 22:04

The floor is yours Justin!

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:04

thanks!

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:04

So, we’re going to have a conversation about…conversations. I’ll get that kicked off with a little context.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:04

As web folks, you’re all probably somewhat familiar with the request/response model. A user makes a request to a server, the server responds. Pretty straightforward interaction.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:05

The other place where that happens is when we talk to people in real life – when we have a conversation, it’s the same model. We say something, someone responds, then we respond, and so on.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:05

The great thing about conversations in real life is that they’re usually super engaging, we can often get lost in conversation and time flies by. That’s a state called “flow” that ‎Mihaly Csikszentmihályi wrote about in a book by the same name.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:05

Getting in a flow state is desirable, because it means we’re super focused on the task at hand, engrossed, and enjoyment of the activity tends to increase with that state.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:06

Well, if that’s the case with person-to-person conversations, and we think that interactions online follow the same kind of model, then it stands that there are things we can learn from real life conversation that we can apply to how we design those moments in our products.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:06

So, what are the things we can learn?

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:06

First, we know that good conversations have a great beginning. This beginning is the “engagement” piece, where we first start chatting with someone. First impressions count when chatting with people in real life (you know quickly if you don’t want to talk with someone long term), and they similarly count in our product experiences.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:07

When you chat with someone in real life, they don’t ask you for your name, email address, password and agreement to the terms and conditions, do they? No!! You just jump into conversation.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:07

If that’s true, then it stands that our online interactions should follow suit. Instead of the first moment of interaction being a formal authentication into the conversation, how about just starting to talk?

If you have a product where someone writes blog posts, why not just let them get started writing, then once they’re finished, ask them to provide a name and email address so you can notify them of replies? By doing something like that, you’ve let them start “talking” to you immediately, instead of forcing them through some arcane setup, just to see if they want to chat with you.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:07

Also, other ways of helping people get into the conversation easier are by paying close attention to the “zero state”. When you start chatting with some friends, and you walk in mid-conversation, there’s often someone who’ll say “Hey, we’re chatting about X”. That gets you “onboarded” into the conversation so you can participate.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:08

Similarly, we can acknowledge that when people come into our products for the first time, we need to get them up to speed on what we’ll be talking about. We usually have terminology and wayfinding that we need to establish, and building that into a zero state or initial walkthrough is a great way to get people up to speed.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:08

One we’re chatting in real life, there’s a period of time where we’re engaged in the conversation. We’re engaged because the people chatting (usually) follow a set of social rules that keeps the conversation on track. They don’t interrupt (well, most people don’t), they pay attention, and they’re polite.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:08

We can do the same thing as our products are talking to our users.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:09

Remember, when people are using your product, they’re not interacting with an app or a site. They’re interacting with YOU, mediated by an app or a site. If you keep that in mind, you’ll think more carefully about how to handle certain interactions. A few examples:

jakkii

2017-04-11 22:09

But what if he’s a Nigerian prince?? :wink:

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:09

– Ensure you’re providing really quick and clear feedback. When someone performs an action, make sure you’re telling them what to expect next, or that you’re working on a response. In a real conversation, we don’t just stare blankly as we think about how to respond, we fill that space with “loading indicators” like ums, uhs and other verbal flotsam.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:09

– Use natural language! If you asked someone for a password to a secret club in real life, and they said “Oreo”, you wouldn’t say “Sorry, passwords need to be 6 or more characters with two special characters, but not comma, asterisk or dollar sign. Try again”. You’d say “Oh, that’s a bit short and easy to guess. Try something harder perhaps”. Natural language is a huge step toward better conversations with your users.

nikonslack

2017-04-11 22:09

has joined #ask-the-uxperts

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:09

– Keep on topic. When you’re in a real conversation, you don’t skip around topics recklessly. The same should go for online interactions. Remember where someone left off last time they were using your product, and start back there. Acknowledge the time that’s passed between then and now (“Great to see you again! There’s some stuff to catch up on!”). Remember that in a user’s mind, it’s a single narrative over a period of time. Do what you can to help preserve that from session to session.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:10

Finally – and I’ll stop yammering on so we can get to questions – remember that conversations eventually end, and that’s a good thing. We can’t talk to a group of people forever, and people can’t spend all day on your product. Think carefully about how people reengage – what conversation starters can you deliver to them later, that gets them back in the conversation? These need to relevant and personalized, so that like talking to an old friend, it feels like picking up where you left off.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:10

In short, we can learn a lot from how we talk to people in real life, and the dynamics of those conversations, that can help us think about how we design those moments into our products. For many people, talking to real life people is a far more enjoyable experience than using some dumb product. The closer we can make the conversations between our products and our users like those in real life, the closer we’ll get to bridging that gap.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:11

nowwwwww, questions and …wait for it….conversation :slightly_smiling_face:

hawk

2017-04-11 22:11

Haha – questions are GO!

jakkii

2017-04-11 22:11

I’m interested in what happens to trust where you put initial sign-up/auth at the back of an action, e.g. blogging. Do people exhibit trust issues with this kind of interaction IYE?

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:12

so, @alex.lee, re: conversational UI, I’m a big fan. Can you tell me more specifically what you’re curious about?

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:13

@justindavis I’ve been working on chatbots lately and trying to integrate it into user engagement flow in new visitors to a website to answer FAQs

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:13

i think they’re a great tool, but obviously they have to be executed on very well to work. It’s a fine line between a real conversation, and conversation-esque, right? :slightly_smiling_face:

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:14

I think you have to work carefully on how to handle responses and the conversation flow, to ensure things feel as natural as possible

jakkii

2017-04-11 22:14

If you’re shite at small talk, can you still be good at conversational interaction design? Asking for a friend. :grin:

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:14

Yes, I’m interested in UX at the intersection of AI and natural conversations, without coming across fake and insincere

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:14

interacting with bots is still a bit of the wild west, but I think it’s something that’s going to be a key part of product interactions moving forward

alaa

2017-04-11 22:14

@alaa pinned a message to this channel.

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:15

I worry about setting false expectations and eroding trust

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:16

@jakkii on the issue of putting signup at the back of a process, in my experience, I haven’t seen many trust issues. I think the key there is setting expectations – if it comes across as a bait and switch (“Start now, no accounts needed”), and you hit them up randomly, it can definitely lead to that

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:16

but, I think that if you set up expectations correctly (“Get started, we’ll worry about accounts later”, etc) it works quite well

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:16

@alex.lee, yeah, I think like @jakkii’s question, it’s some about setting expectations

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:17

“I’m <name of bot>, I can help you with some basic questions, and if I don’t know the answer, I’ll get back with you”

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:17

dumping out those things to manual support queues

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:17

and @jakkii, the good news is, even introverts can do this well :slightly_smiling_face:

duffdaddy

2017-04-11 22:17

I was thinking about forms and surveys – most don’t follow a conversation format but there’s no reason why they can’t

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:18

forms are a PERFECT example where this goes wrong

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:18

we just jam a bunch of fields in front of a user, because the database is structured that way, and we don’t think about the bridge between human and computer

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:18

unfolding forms or surveys over time, with smart branching logic, can make arduous tasks feel much more conversational

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:19

Turbotax proved this really well

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:19

by getting people to go through hours of tax prep, without absolutely hating themselves

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:19

a small miracle, to say the least :stuck_out_tongue:

amirasallam

2017-04-11 22:19

@justindavis are there any good / bad examples to show for conversational UI?

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:20

there are definitely a bunch of examples @amirasallam. I wish I had some screenshots here handy, I’ll try to dig some up. Turbotax is an example of it done well, and there are some support interfaces that are doing it pretty well. TBH, some phone trees with voice recognition also do it well.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:20

Tho, some also do it terribly :stuck_out_tongue:

zekegeek

2017-04-11 22:21

Any form services or tools you recommend for creating conversational forms?

duffdaddy

2017-04-11 22:21

I like typeform.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:21

forms are a basic example – errors messages like “Invalid email format” are bad conversational devices, right? But saying something like “Oh, that doesn’t quite look like an email address” is a much better way of speaking

duffdaddy

2017-04-11 22:21

And outgrow’s survey tool

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:21

so much of this is in the microinteractions like that

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:22

typeform is certainly well done

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:22

i’m a big fan of it

duffdaddy

2017-04-11 22:22

It just feels like a conversation

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:22

ding ding ding!

duffdaddy

2017-04-11 22:22

Ha!

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:23

How do you strike a good balance between natural conversation (which obviously takes a lot of room and adds load) and CTAs

isha

2017-04-11 22:23

have you worked with global apps where “conversational” can vary?

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:23

Sometimes you just want to ‘get through the process’ rather than be walked through a process with a friend

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:24

@alex.lee, good question. I think you can have a succinct conversation, and keep away from too much chit chat. Good conversation isn’t always long – sometimes it’s short, friendly bursts

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:24

and it can be as simple as simply changing the existing copy to be more conversational, friendly

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:24

So be human. Don’t ramble

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:24

bingo, nailed it

duffdaddy

2017-04-11 22:24

That’s where I think Chatbots fail.

duffdaddy

2017-04-11 22:25

To chatty

lmacneil

2017-04-11 22:25

hey now humans are great at being chatty too

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:25

@isha, also a good question. I haven’t had a chance to work on many things in cultures where social norms for conversation are very different, but like anything multicultural, it definitely bears paying attention to

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:25

that said

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:25

at our core, everyone is human

duffdaddy

2017-04-11 22:25

Cultural differences are hard

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:26

and speaking to people, and interacting with them like people – not machines – is a universally attractive thing

isha

2017-04-11 22:26

true…translation makes it a little harder to be conversational but I get what you are saying…

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:26

indeed, there are certainly some low-level challenges to deal with there

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:27

Yes, I’d imagine if you put too much colloquialism in front of someone for whom English is not their native language, it may be more challenging

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:27

one technique we use a lot is to sketch out “wireflows” of interactions, which lay out how the conversation will go, before we get into UI details

isha

2017-04-11 22:27

Do you have examples of apps that are conversational that aren’t very wizardy (like turbo tax AND typeform are super wizardy)

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:27

seeing the back and forth from a high level really helps to map that out

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:28

so, I actually think of Medium as quite conversational. It’s a different way of thinking about it – Medium is great at conversation, because when you go to write, it gets out of the way

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:28

So in the email password prompt, you might say “Hey, that password seems short. Can you think of something longer?” and have a tip box at the bottom with suggestions on uppercase, lowercase etc?

amirasallam

2017-04-11 22:28

@justindavis have you had a time when product owners were resistant to using conversational UI? How do we get product owners to approve that :) ?

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:28

like a great conversationalist who listens, more than talks, Medium does the same thing

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:28

that’s another part of being good at conversation – is knowing when to let the other person speak

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:29

@alex.lee, you’ve got the right idea!

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:29

@amirasallam getting stakeholder buy-in can definitely be tough at times, ESPECIALLY in enterprise scenarios

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:29

because often, speaking more conversationally – at least in terms of tone and style – can come across as glib or overly informal

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:30

that said, good conversation can even happen with formal tone

jakkii

2017-04-11 22:30

Or of not getting past ‘legal’…

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:30

if you go to the hospital, they’ll still put you through a formal process to cover what they need, but they’ll do it in such a way (hopefully) that feels kind

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:31

so, you can strike that balance between being formal in language, but conversational in process

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:31

again, when you go to the hospital, instead of jamming a form in your face immediately, they’ll say “Hey Mr. Davis, we’re sorry you don’t feel well, we’ll take care of you. Please fill this out so we can get you on your way to a doctor”

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:32

so, formal – to a point – covering the legal issues that need to be covered, but still human

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:33

there are definitely “levels” to designing things with a more conversational interface. The low level, copy, and the higher level narrative that unfolds

hawk

2017-04-11 22:33

We’re at the end of the queued questions, so if you’ve been sitting on one, now is the time!

RELATED:  Transcript: Ask the UXperts — Information Architecture with Donna Spencer

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:33

When and how often might you go about iterating conversational flows for your UX when you’re designing such conversations?

isha

2017-04-11 22:33

Curious about your thoughts on text on buttons…

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:34

@alex.lee, do you mean in the design process itself?

amirasallam

2017-04-11 22:34

@justindavis do you recommend books for this topic?

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:34

Yes

danielle

2017-04-11 22:35

Me too!

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:35

so, in our design process, before we get to screen level details, we try to write out the narrative of the user, including the back and forth with the system

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:35

that’s in the initial design work

uxcourt

2017-04-11 22:35

@justindavis, I get your point about being conversational, and heartily agree, and I think there needs to be a balance. We don’t want conversants guessing what the other one knows. In the case of the password rejection, isn’t it in the end more civil to state complexity requirements instead of saying the proposed password was simply and easily guessed?

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:36

@justindavis that’s a great suggestion. Like a storyboard but for conversational narratives only

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:36

only once we get those high level flows on paper feeling good, do we start to fill in the lower level details. So we work out the high level conversation details, and move into the lower level details

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:36

@alex.lee yup! It’s exactly a storyboard

isha

2017-04-11 22:36

Very interested in learning more and would appreciate it you elaborated on the initial design process where you write out the narrative of the user…and how you do it, and what you call it and who all are involved.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:36

@isha, text on buttons – what are you curious about specifically?

uxcourt

2017-04-11 22:37

As far as suggestions on conversational interactions that aren’t wizards, you can give Alexa a spin at https://echosim.io/. It’s entirely transactional; it seems hardly any context is maintained from question to question. Their API is here: https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/alexa/alexa-skills-kit/docs/alexa-skills-kit-voice-design-best-practices

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:37

@amirasallam re: books, I really like Designing the Obvious by Robert Hoekman, Jr for helping with this kind of thinking

isha

2017-04-11 22:37

@justindavis the PMs in my company tend to focus on “save” vs “ok” vs “apply”….but then we are also a very global company and these translate differently…

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:37

http://amzn.to/2prmF9K

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:38

@uxcourt certainly. Having good conversations is about being clear too :slightly_smiling_face:

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:38

of course, it brings up another question as to whether those strict requirements are a good idea to begin with, but that’s a whole other conversation… :stuck_out_tongue:

alaa

2017-04-11 22:39

Would like some tips.. conversational UI seems great! I am thinking to use this narrative to design an app for patients with low literacy.. the app will help them fill out some health forms.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:39

@isha, we use a combination of a few things. One, we write out actual narratives – paragraphs that describe how a user completes a task. We then take that and make storyboards of the interaction, iterating on it until it feels as conversational as possible

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:40

SHAMELESS plug, I wrote a blog post today talking a bit about that: http://justindavis.co/2017/04/11/how-to-onboard-a-product-designer/

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:40

@alaa low literacy is a FANTASTIC place to use this technique

uxcourt

2017-04-11 22:40

shameless :slightly_smiling_face:

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:40

for a couple reasons

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:41

1. you can unfold an interaction over time, instead of all at once, which is easier for folks to digest who might have a harder time with density

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:41

2. you can use language that blurs the interface, so to speak, so it doesn’t require that they have prerequisite knowledge about technology to interact with the product

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:42

it’s amazing how easy it is for us to assume people know what we mean when we use certain terms

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:42

like “special characters”

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:42

which ones are special?

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:42

the “J” because my name starts with it?

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:42

:stuck_out_tongue:

uxcourt

2017-04-11 22:42

J is certainly special

lmacneil

2017-04-11 22:42

How would you evaluate programmatically translated copy when your team and available testers are only english speakers?

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:42

and, as always, in UX, it’s about knowing your audience

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:44

@lmacneil the bad news is, if you’re evaluating copy in a language other than your own (or one you have deep experience in), you probably have to find that resource somehow. I’ve had success in reaching out to folks – friends, other colleagues, etc. – to have them look at things for me to gut check how it sounds

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:44

so, you might have to get creative on that, but no way to really substitute someone who really groks that culture

lmacneil

2017-04-11 22:45

:slightly_smiling_face:

uxcourt

2017-04-11 22:45

@lmacneil can you outsource to a localization company and develop a relationship with one of their native speakers? Can you go to a local community college and lurk in the ESL classes and maybe entice an instructor to help? Also know that dialects are important; a Portuguese speaker will sound kind of foreign in Brazil, and a person from Barcelona might have no idea what a person from Merida MX is saying.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:46

yup, those are great ideas @uxcourt

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:46

guerrilla techniques for translation :stuck_out_tongue:

lmacneil

2017-04-11 22:47

@uxcourt awesome :smile: & @justindavis TY both for the advice

hawk

2017-04-11 22:47

We have about 10 mins left… last chance to get your questions in :slightly_smiling_face:

danielle

2017-04-11 22:48

We’ve tried doing this in a form for reporting cyber security incidents. Many people will be stressed or won’t know what the thing is called that has happened so we made a narrative component to it (second screen). There’s still lots to tweak / improve but it’s a great start. https://www.cert.govt.nz/businesses-and-individuals/report-an-issue/

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:48

ah, excellent, I love that example!

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:49

there are so many places – like government services – where this kind of approach is sorely needed

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:49

and TBH, so many mistakes can be prevented by this level of clarity

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:50

and mistakes cost money, so clarity, and approaching things from a more conversational stance, isn’t just a branding move, it’s an actual cost-savings move as well

uxcourt

2017-04-11 22:50

in general, what if we’re supremely successful designing conversational interfaces? There’s an episode of Black Mirror (Be Right Back, Season 2), or the film Her that comes to mind as a potential negative outcome. I guess there’s Star Trek as a potential positive outcome. What can we as designers do to ensure our tools build towards that positive outcome instead of the dystopic one? Feel free to pass, because this is really a philosophy question.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:51

@uxcourt ha! Thanks for the tough one. I haven’t seen Black Mirror or Her, but I’d say that dystopian outcomes are borne from dystopian intent

isha

2017-04-11 22:51

haha! intent vs impact

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:51

I think designers have an ethical responsibility to guide the process and not just be tools of the trade

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:51

at the end of the day, we still control the machines (so far, let’s talk again in a decade), so we can guide those interactions towards positive means

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:52

Black Mirror the whole show is a bit jarring, but gets me all fired up to do better work

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:52

gonna put that on my list to watch!

uxcourt

2017-04-11 22:53

in both of those scripts, the humans developed emotional bonds with the machines, and the machines were incapable of fulfilling the expectations, leading to greater depression and isolation.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:53

@danielle loving the form on this site you shared, btw. Really clever work.

uxcourt

2017-04-11 22:53

but that’s still fiction and we’re a long way off from anything that believable.

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:54

@uxcourt wow, yeah, it’s probably coming at _some_ point, but hopefully we’re a bit far off :stuck_out_tongue:

hawk

2017-04-11 22:55

This session has been amazing!! Any last questions before I cut Justin free to enjoy his evening?

uxcourt

2017-04-11 22:55

thank you!

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:55

Any conversational tips for different platforms?

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:55

Also, feel free to connect on Twitter (@jwd2a) and we can keep chatting there!

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:55

Yes, this has been super helpful!

isha

2017-04-11 22:56

Thank you!

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:56

@alex.lee I think at a high level, platform differences come down to technical execution issues. If you start with a high-level narrative, and work that out, the platform differences end up being technical accommodations more than anything else

jakkii

2017-04-11 22:56

Thanks so much everyone

jakkii

2017-04-11 22:56

Big thanks to @justindavis for some really interesting insights

jakkii

2017-04-11 22:56

And thanks to @hawk once again

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:56

really appreciate y’all for coming out, this has been a blast!

hawk

2017-04-11 22:57

Thanks SO much for your time, your energy and your wisdom today @justindavis

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:57

absolutely, honored to be a part of it!

hawk

2017-04-11 22:57

You totally nailed it!

gfigueroa

2017-04-11 22:57

has joined #ask-the-uxperts

hawk

2017-04-11 22:57

Now go – enjoy a gin and tonic with your wife.

duffdaddy

2017-04-11 22:57

Thank you!

alex.lee

2017-04-11 22:57

Thanks @justindavis

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:58

Ha! You read my blog :stuck_out_tongue:

hawk

2017-04-11 22:58

I did. :slightly_smiling_face:

hawk

2017-04-11 22:58

I shared that one too because I love it

justindavis

2017-04-11 22:58

thanks y’all, hope to see y’all around again real soon! I’ll try to bang around this Slack team more often as well!