The SpoolCast with Jared Spool

The SpoolCast has been bringing UX learning to designers’ ears around the world since 2005. Dozens and dozens of hours of Jared Spool interviewing some of the greatest minds in design are available for you to explore.

Episode #165 Luke Wroblewski - Examining Mobile User Input

March 9, 2012  ·  32 minutes

Listen Now

Download the MP3

Touch screen devices are commonplace. It's now expected that your mobile experience work as well as, if not better than, your desktop experience. With faster connection speeds, cameras, GPS, gyroscopes, and accelerometers, we can deliver information to users in new ways. But we can also receive information from them as well.

Show Notes

Touchscreen devices are commonplace. It's now expected that your mobile experience work as well as, if not better than, your desktop experience. With faster connection speeds, cameras, GPS, gyroscopes, and accelerometers, we can deliver information to users in new ways. But we can also receive information from them as well.

Luke Wroblewski, author of Web Form Design and Mobile First, believes we have yet to harness the full capability of input on mobile devices. As mobile becomes a viable access point to the web, users are less likely to complete time consuming tasks, like filling out forms. Simply porting over your sign up or checkout flow isn't a solution. As Luke puts it, "If it's an issue on your website, it's going to be 2X or sometimes even 10X the issue for your mobile experience."

Instead of requiring users to enter information with their keyboards, we can take advantage of types of input that the desktop doesn’t afford us. As evidenced by the inclusion of Siri on the iPhone 4S, input is not limited to thumbs and fingers. Many apps are utilizing built-in cameras and GPS to provide immediate information, such as Yelp’s augmented reality feature, Monocle. Luke believes we can go even further. Pressure sensitivity, fingerprint recognition, and radio frequency ID chips are just some of the things Luke mentions as future possibilities.

Check out Luke’s full-day workshop from UX Immersion 2012, now in our All You Can Learn Library.

Full Transcript

Jared Spool: Hello, everyone. I want to welcome you all to yet another episode of the SpoolCast. And if you've been listening to the SpoolCast for any amount of time, you have definitely heard the wonderful and fabulous Luke Wroblewski.

He is joining us today, this time from the city of Quebec. Luke is going to be speaking at our upcoming UX Immersion Conference, which is going to be in Portland on April 23 through 25. He's going to be doing a workshop on designing user inputs on the mobile devices. Luke, welcome.
Luke Wroblewski: Thank you, thank you. Pleasure to be here.
Jared: And so we have talked so many times that I thought it just would be cool to find out what the hell is keeping you still interested in all this stuff?
Luke: Well, it changes faster than I can keep up with it, is the fascinating thing. Even if you just look at some of the recent announcements, so this Google X project with these HUD glasses that's supposedly coming out.
Jared: Yeah! Yes, that sounds so cool. Everybody's been talking about "Minority Report" being the interface of the future, but I think it's likely to be "Top Gun." [laughs]
Luke: Yes, or "Dog the Bounty Hunter," if you will.
Jared: Yes. Right! [laughs] Oh, that's weird.
Luke: So take your pick. I mean the reports from "The New York Times" said these glasses look like the Oakley Thumps, which are his trademark eyewear there.
Jared: Wow, OK, OK. But I still want a helmet with a nickname on it.
Luke: What would your nickname be?
Jared: Smeagol? No. [laughs]
Luke: Smeagol. Not tough enough.
Jared: No, probably not. Hotdog's already taken. So, these glasses, I've only heard little bits about them. I haven't heard much about them. What's the big deal about this, what's got you excited about it?
Luke: Well, it's nothing that's gotten me excited about it. This is one of those concepts that I think has been around for many, many years. You go out to MIT and you see a lot of guys that kind of look like cyborg, with the glasses on, some sort of wearable computing that's overly bulky. They just look really strange.

So people have been working in this space for a long time, and they've even gotten pretty high resolution displays on some of these glasses. At some point, somebody's going to come out with it. Why not Google? It feels aligned with the Android vibe.

But I'm not 100% convinced that that is the future. I'm trying to be very open-minded and optimistic about it, but I have a hard time really picturing how it would work.
Jared: It feels to me a little bit like a solution in search of a problem.
Luke: Yeah, it could be. And you know there's a guy who used to work at Apple on the iPad, Bret Victor. He wrote this really interesting post out there, just going on a rant about objects on glass. I don't know if you saw this, I can dig up the URL.

He just took all these future vision pieces where everybody's describing icons and interfaces on various screens, on various pieces of glass throughout our life. You see these videos from Microsoft, from Dow-Corning, who makes glass. You see them from Nokia, you see them from RIM. You see them from everybody.

He just took a very different slant at it and said, "Well, why are we so focused on this glass? Why don't we focus on all of the properties that we have in our hands? We're just barely scratching the surface of what we can do with the amount of dexterity we have in our hands. From pressure, from touch sensitivity, and all this."

I sort of like that mode of thinking. Ultimately, there's only going to be so many screens we can slather in our lives, right? We may have to think about different ways of gathering input that take advantage of what the human body can do very well.
Jared: This is interesting, because Bill Buxton talked about this 15, 20 years ago. I remember him giving a speech in 1989. I remember it like it was yesterday. In his speech, he said -- think back, this is the Macintosh days and stuff.

He says, "If aliens were to land on this planet 20,000 years from now and they were to dig up today's civilization and they were to find one of our computers, they would assume that we didn't have very good eyes. And we only had one finger because our mouse only had one button. And we couldn't exert much pressure because the buttons that we use on the computers don't do anything other than do on and off. And we didn't use our feet for anything, we didn't use the rest of our bodies for anything."

He was talking about that same sort of thing. He expressed that when you play piano, you're using all ten fingers and the amount of pressure that you press, and you also use your feet at the same time. You're taking much fuller advantage of your body. And that gets us back to the "Minority Report" thing.
Luke: Yeah. I think Bill's been saying the same thing for the past 15 years, because I caught him at Microsoft's MIX conference. He was saying the same stuff, just basically outlining that natural user interfaces should use the stuff that we've learned to do through a lifetime of living.

They actually had a nice example on stage that I thought did that. It was a four by four foot, again, screen, but the software they had running on it was this software called Rembrandt by Microsoft. And it was painting software, and the painting software did respond to ten fingers of touch, it responded to touch sensitivity, to sort of pressure a bit.

So you could, if you were an oil painter, if you will, could go up to the screen and use the techniques, the physical techniques that you use to paint in oil, to paint on this screen. You didn't have to go through and learn the interface. You just start doing what you did naturally with your fingers, both of your hands.
Jared: Yeah. I think that's interesting, and I can see that for things where traditionally there is this physical medium. But when you talk about the types of stuff that we mostly do on computers, like look things up or spreadsheets or stuff like that, we've not used our whole body for that. In fact, some people don't even use their brains for that.
Luke: [laughs] Especially the spreadsheet part.
Jared: [laughs] Yeah. So I wonder how you move gestures and those types of things into spaces where they haven't existed before.
Luke: Yeah, and kind of how you bring people up to speed on that. Because it takes a long time to learn to play the piano. It takes a very long time to learn to paint. How much time are people going to invest in all the things computers allow them to do?
Jared: That's a really good point. The piano thing starts with a lot of scales, and painting starts with a lot of very basic brush technique. You practice and you practice and you practice and you practice. We haven't really had in technology a culture of practice.
Luke: No. Outside of touch typing, right?
Jared: Or gaming.
Luke: Yeah. Gaming gets a lot of practice.
Jared: Well I mean, and seriously, gaming does get a lot of practice, right? Because the way you master a game is by running through those early levels over and over and over again until you've mastered those basic maneuvers. That is an essence of a lot of games.
Luke: Yeah, absolutely. And on this very related topic, Josh Clark, who talks a lot about how we get people to discover gestures, he's lately been giving a presentation titled "Buttons Are a Hack." And in there, he lays out all these principles from games as ways to get people to learn and use gestures.

He talks about things like leveling up, coaching, so on and so forth, taking these patterns of education that remain fun. Because a game can't make you feel like it's work to learn it, right?
Jared: Right.
Luke: It's a game, it's got to be fun.
Jared: He gave that presentation for one of our virtual seminars about a month and a half ago. It was awesome.
Luke: It's interesting to see that same theme come up.
Jared: For sure.
Luke: Ironically, today, or yesterday I think, Apple's new CEO Tim Cook was talking at I think the shareholder's meeting, and he made this announcement that said, "Apple's going to release products today that are going to blow your mind."

So I said, "Wow, what's going to blow my mind from Apple?" I went back to my blog, which I've been writing for a couple years now, and I went back to 2007 to a post I have it written about a couple patents Apple had put together. This was 2007, you know like, pre-iPhone release.

If you looked through the patents you saw in there "multi-touch gesture surface." You saw a patent for the thing that became the Magic Mouse, the multi-touch mouse. You saw a patent for the radial wheel as a virtual interface. You saw this list of things that now, almost five years later from 2007, they've released a lot of them.

I was thinking to myself, well, what are they going to do to blow your mind? I looked at a couple patents from 2009, 2010, and there was really interesting things with haptic feedback, so adding more physical tactile responses to interactions with devices.

There was a bunch of stuff around recognizing fingerprints within a touch interface, so you don't just know that you have a finger down, you know which finger, you know whose finger, which starts to get even more interesting. There were a couple things around interactions with radio frequency ID tags.

And the fascinating thing to me about looking through that was, these are all forms of input that they have these patents around. Right? So input is really this big driver of the next wave of computing, if you will. This was reinforced for me very recently by a post from this organization called Asymco.

There's a guy, Horace Dediu, who does market analysis, and he makes these fascinating graphs about what's happening in computers and technology, and in particular mobile. He did one analysis where he showed when there's a major change in user interface input, the market players just absolutely change dramatically.

The most recent example of this was with the iPhone with the change of the UI going to a whole touch based UI. That completely disrupted the market. Apple and Android came in and took over, and Blackberry and Nokia and all these other incumbents completely fell off.

The power of this different form of input, whether you buy into that analysis or not, could be quite dramatic.
Jared: Oh, I think that's really interesting. Let me think about that for a second. When the mouse came out, that changed a lot of things. For example, pre-mouse, Word Perfect was the big word processor, and post-mouse it was Word. And the mouse played a huge role in that, because it changed the way you interacted with the screen and this idea of what we would call WYSIWIG, what you see is what you get word processing became key. Whereas pre-mouse you had to have all these special codes to do simple things, because you couldn't do select and then bold and then render it in a bold space. So I think there's something to that. I think that in fact there are shifts, if you look at this stuff that I hadn't thought about in that way.
Luke: Yes, I mean, I've been fascinated with input for years, as you know. I wrote a book about web forms. Who does that? [laughs]
Jared: Yes, only crazy people.
Luke: [laughs] At the UX Immersion event, I'm going to be doing a whole workshop kind of around input on mobile devices. And in all cases, it's often shocking to me how little attention people pay to this stuff. Everybody's so focused on layout and making the page look good that they just bypass the most crucial element of stuff, which is letting people contribute, letting people provide their input into these systems, making it a two-way conversation.
Jared: I wonder if some of it's because of the lack of portfolioable stuff, right? You know, you can't put an input field in your portfolio like you can put a really nice layout.
Luke: Yeah, I mean that could be. But the role of interaction design is definitely gaining a lot more traction, right? And people are out there hiring interaction designers. So I don't expect these interaction designers to be showing wireframes as their portfolio. If they are, these are going to be really boring sessions [laughs], with all boxes and arrows all day long. You'd think they'd show some innovation in areas like input. You know, here's how I kind of rethought a common flow, or here's how we solved this input scenario to be quicker and faster.
Jared: I think that as we become really smart about input...And you know, one of the things that you've done a fabulous job on is helping us create a sort of language around input and the different ways of thinking about it, and the subtleties and nuances that go on. I mean, that's really the key to any sort of advanced design endeavor is to have a way of talking about it to the developers, to the other people you work with, in such a way that you can say, OK, this works this way versus this other way, and I can see the difference.

And so, because you've done such a good job of putting together this visual language, as it were, of how different input gets different results, I think that it'll become easier for people to start to promote what sort of innovation and advancement they put on their own applications. And that'll go into their portfolio and give them some real sort of street cred and value.
Luke: Yes, I sure hope so. But the statistics sort of tell a bit of a different story. You know, if you look at something like ecommerce checkout, right? In 2011, 75 percent of all ecommerce carts were abandoned. That sounds really bad, but the worse news is, in 2010 it was 71 percent, because somehow we got worse. And we've been doing this for 20 years or so now, right, on the Internet.

And not only that we've been doing this for 20 years, ecommerce as a business, people thrive off of that transaction, off of the checkout form. So I've been doing a lot of analysis, and this has sort of led me to my interest in the topic we're going to have at the event. I've been doing all this analysis, and all these companies that now are moving into mobile commerce, if you will, they're just taking their checkout forms and making sure the layout works on mobile devices. And so they're basically bringing over all the problems they had before to a smaller screen where there's a bigger magnifying lens, if you will, on usability problems. Because, you know, the screen's smaller, you're using your fingers, bandwidth is an issue. You may be in any kind of environment possible instead of usually at a desk or a table with some level of privacy.

And so, these problems get magnified. And companies that literally make their living off of checkout, the only thinking they're doing is relaying it out, as you point out. There's so many things that you can do to kind of optimize this stuff, and in particular on mobile there's new opportunities, new limitations. And once again, you can really take a very critical look at these things that are a core to your business and make them run a hell of a lot smoother. I'm just shocked sometimes that I don't see that effort, right?
Jared: Do you think some of it is because it's so hard to watch someone use your app in a mobile world that you don't really see how much frustration you're creating when you create some of these wacky mobile input forms? There was an example I saw you show recently where one of the forms was asking for you to put in three different types of phone numbers, with extensions!
Luke: Yeah, yeah. Your mobile number has an extension, right?
Jared: And your fax number had an extension.
Luke: [laughs] Yeah, "daytime fax" as extension. Yes, some of this is just ludicrous, is my point. And that example you're citing, that's one of the largest computer companies in the world doing that. You'd think they have the talent or the thinking to, you know, cover small issues like that. So it's either they don't know that it's an issue... Although at this point there's tons of data out there that shows even optional fields inside of key flows like that can trip people up pretty strongly.

I often cite that Expedia example where they had one optional field. They removed it, they got $12 million more in revenue overnight, and they found like 50 to 60 of these things in their checkout form.
Jared: That's incredible.
Luke: Just the sheer fact that they found 50 to 60 things, right? That shows you how much opportunity there is out there. I'm guessing not all of them were $12 million ones, but hey...
Jared: No, but you know, it all adds up, right? A million here, a million there, pretty soon it's real money.
Luke: Yeah, yeah, absolutely. And if you do it right, double-digit increases are not uncommon. I mean, there is data that got sent out around Tiffany's, who just, all they did was make their website mobile-friendly. They sort of optimized the layout. And they saw transactions jump 30 percent. I doubt they even did anything with making checkout or making any of these core processes better. They just dealt with the layout issue. So even baby steps like that can help. Just imagine how much a real focus on these things can help.
Jared: You know, my interest always is in, how do people get a chance to watch their users go through this so that they have a real understanding as to where those pain points are, and what could come out that could be causing issues? Have you looked at that at all, sort of the way to spend time watching users use your mobile apps?
Luke: Yeah, well, in terms of the rigors around the usability aspect of those things, no. But my general approach to kind of gaining insight on this is twofold. One, I really like to trust actual behavior. And so for example, when we had out last startup we built this real-time system which would log every page view, every keystroke almost, all this stuff, so we could see in real time how people were actually using it. And that was our window into our applications universe, if you will, at any point in time. Because it was, look through the looking glass and see in real time what people were doing, where they were tripping up and how they were having problems.

And though that data stream was immensely valuable at seeing actual behavior, every now and then you hit a point where you couldn't interpret what was going on, and then you had to go and talk to somebody. And that's the second piece to me is, when you see something you don't understand, or when you have an area that you have general questions around, then going and talking to a few people can really open up insights that you might not have had otherwise.

I personally am not a very big formal usability testing person. Maybe I'm just really strongly biased, because I've seen, you know, six to seven years of it at big Internet companies, which consisted of bringing people in a room in a very scripted regimen, publishing a report that then sits on people's desks and doesn't do anything.
Jared: Yes, that's not the way to do it though, right?
Luke: No, I've been really burned by that, right? So I'm a lot more of a fan of, let's see actual behavior, and let's go and talk to people when we have questions. And some of the formality around the testing, at least me personally, I'm not very...
Jared: Yeah, but when you were working on Bagcheck, right, before Twitter marched into your life and gobbled you up...
Luke: Yes.
Jared: When you were working on Bagcheck, you spent time talking to folks and getting feedback and...
Luke: Oh yeah, absolutely. Just not in a kind of like formal usability test.
Jared: Yeah, but the formal usability testing is overrated, for sure. But to me, what's interesting is this idea of, as someone who's developing a website, being able to actually see what's happening, and particularly around mobile input, right? How do I learn what's hanging people up? What's getting in the way? I mean, the Expedia thing is a great example, right? How do you figure out that it's the optional fields that are hanging you up?
Luke: Right, so one part of that is the quantitative analytic stuff, right? You see those real-time logs and you see a bunch of drop-off happening in one place. And the other part of it is actually talking to people.
Jared: The drop-off doesn't tell you why, though.
Luke: Right, that gives you the what, and then if you don't know the what yourself...because sometimes the what is relatively easy. You see there's a bug, right? And you see somebody, they keep clicking on this button. You look at that button, oh crap, the code's wrong. So sometimes you can figure it out yourself. If you can't, then you're actually going to have to talk to people.

And in the mobile space, sometimes that talking is a lot more workflow...not workflow, but the real world use case-based. As an example, when the eBay team was developing their iPhone app -- which was hugely successful for them, they did like $2 billion in sales off of it in just a single year, and in 2011 their mobile sales where $5 billion -- I think the iPhone app was responsible for at least 70 percent of that.

So when they were developing that app, which that's a lot of money [laughs] off a single mobile experience...
Jared: Really? I hope they paid that developer at least a billion.
Luke: [laughs] I really doubt it.
Luke: But that's not how much they made. That's how much they sold off of it, right? Global merchant...
Jared: Oh, I see. OK.
Luke:'s called. GMV.
Jared: That's true. Knowing eBay, they probably actually didn't make very much at all.
Luke: I'm sure they're doing OK.
Luke: Anyhow, when they were building it, one of the things that they did was they actually went into stores with this application. Very early on they tried to do price comparisons in the back of a Fry's or the back of a Best Buy if you will. They really quickly saw how network connections can break down back there.

Then they took that back to the office where they're in their sterile high network connectivity environment and made a bunch of changes to address that real-world use case.
Jared: Yeah, so OK. So that makes a lot of sense that going focused that way and seeing what's going on, trying it out. You know, it's interesting. I was having a conversation the other day with someone about the analytics you can use for figuring out user experience stuff. I don't know. Maybe you can tell me if this is the way you feel.

I've come to the conclusion that the generic packages that are out there that are put together by the big analytics companies may work great for campaign monitoring. But it's really hard to get any detail, and you really have to instrument your applications specifically for what you're trying to do and not use Omniture or Webtrends or any of these things because they don't really provide much value in that UX space. I don't know if you found that.
Luke: With our startup, we built all our own, right? We sort of did that on purpose because we had very specials interests in what we tracked and how we tracked it. I recently had this aha moment when I was working on building out my own server [laughs] over the past few weeks or so. It dawned on me that this is the back stage part of the show, right? You design the back stage as much as you design the front stage.

In order for you to really have a sense of how the front stage, how the performance can work really, really well, you've got to adapt that back stage. And it's custom for everybody, right? There's no generic back stage package you can just set up and it'll work for everything. I think this is a very similar situation on websites, right? Because ultimately, if all you're doing is measuring page views, then you start to get into, I think, really negative behaviors around optimizing for page views.

So what you really want to do, rather than tracking these standard analytics things, is actually have your own personal metrics. What are the things that matter to the type of experience you're trying to create? Most off-the-shelf packages won't give you that.

Like eBay, for example, tracks how many people buy things on their mobile apps, which turns out it was about three a second. How many people buy cars using their mobile products? Which is about 2,600 a week. How many people sell things using their mobile products? Which is around 700,000.
Jared: They sell 2,600 cars on their mobile app?
Luke: A week.
Jared: A week?
Luke: Yeah.
Jared: That's crazy.
Luke: Yeah, and this is this bigger thing. I keep hearing from people. I go and talk to people about mobile, like "Oh, yeah. Well, we didn't include that because we don't think people are going to do that on mobile." I say, "Guess how many cars eBay sells a week on mobile devices?" "Well, I don't know. Like 10?" "No, not frickin' 10. [laughs] 2,600."
Jared: 2,600 cars on mobile devices. That's nuts!
Luke: That is nuts. The bigger story there though, and this is the one that has been gotten really lost is they may close the deal on the mobile device, but maybe they started the research on a desktop. Maybe they looked at pictures on their iPad. Maybe they went into a dealership and looked at a comparable car. This is the world people live in now, that they have access to the network and to digital information in all parts of their lives.

The way they go through workflows is a much more complicated cross-device sort of a structure than what we used to do before, right? It used to be that your digital strategy before was make a website. Then for a little while it would be like, "Oh, let's make a mobile app."

Even now when people think about mobile, the big strategic decision for them is native app versus mobile website. Lost in that, if that's how narrow your focus is, is really the experience people have between your desktop website, between your mobile website, between the app, between going to your physical store, right? Between going to some other location that's related to whatever service or content you have.
Jared: Yeah. You know, just the other day I was sitting in a Starbucks having a conversation with an old friend, and he just out of nowhere he starts talking about this book he read that changed his life. So while he's sitting here, I'm looking it up on Amazon. And I press the one-click button, and boom! The next day I have that book in my office.
Luke: Yeah, absolutely.
Jared: It didn't change my life though.
Luke: That's a shame.
Jared: But you know, we live in the future, right?
Luke: Yeah. No, totally.
Jared: This whole being able to, in a coffee shop, without moving my ass out of the seat, buy a book that someone mentioned 45 seconds earlier.
Luke: Yeah, and that brings us back full circle to what we were talking about. People just copying over checkout to the mobile device. If you want to take advantage of opportunities for input like that, if you are a book seller who's not Amazon for example and you have a checkout flow, wouldn't you want somebody to be able to instantly within that minute purchase it?

There's techniques that can get you down, if you're buying a digital item, to like three input fields to buy something on a mobile website from three pages of 10 or 20 fields each. I personally think those [laughs] techniques are worth the effort because you can do things like you just described, right? That shouldn't just be the domain of one company, Amazon. Otherwise Amazon's going to crush everybody even more than they're crushing them now.
Jared: Yeah. Yeah, I think that's absolutely right. There's lots of interesting things that are happening that way. Intuit has this cool app where you take a picture of your W-2 form, your tax form that you get from your employer. And it automatically scans it in, parses it, and starts your tax return. If you have a simple tax return where in fact you only work for the one dude and that's all your income, you're 99 percent done with your taxes by just taking a picture of the form.
Luke: And that is so sweet. That's input, right? That's a totally different way to think about input. Just to say, it's just all these fancy high tech take-a-picture-scan-it sort of solutions, right? The basics as well still matter and, in fact, the basics probably matter even more. I hope more people come around to that. [laughs]
Jared: We have this idea that we've been working on here at UIE, which we call tool time. Tool time is the opposite of goal time. Goal time is thinking about the things in life and working on the things in life that make you happy and really energize you. Tool time are the time you have to spend to just make the tool get you to the point where you can do the goal time stuff.

So filling out your shipping address and your billing address doesn't make the purchasing any sweeter, right? If you spent twice as much time putting in your phone number and your credit card number, you're not any happier with the product that you just got. So that's all tool time. And I think a lot of what mobile does is it really amplifies the pain and the agony of tool time in a way that we haven't seen before.
Luke: Yup, that's what I call the giant magnifying lens on your issues, right? If it's an issue on your website, it's going to be like a 2X or sometimes even a 10X issue on your mobile experience.
Jared: Oh, that's really smart. I like that. I'm going to steal that.
Luke: Yeah, steal away.
Jared: [laughs] That's really cool. Oh, Luke. This is awesome! So your workshop at UX Immersion is basically going to help everybody figure out how to eliminate all this tool time from their applications and do input in these innovative, clever, awesome ways.
Luke: Yeah, that's exactly right. We're going to talk about all the basic stuff that we're ranting around, and then I'm going to get into showing lots and lots of examples of the more innovative stuff, talk about some of the technologies underneath it so people know how to work with this, right? If you want to work in this medium, I think it helps to understand the structure of it a little bit and what are the opportunities so you can go and apply it to what you're doing.

For a lot of people it's a black box right now, right? Like "Phone does cool thing." But if you understand some of those capabilities, I think you can get to some really cool design ideas.
Jared: I think that's awesome. I think that's really incredible. I'm looking forward to it. I'm very excited about it. I'm glad you're going to be there. I am going to be there. We've already had a whole bunch of folks sign up, and there are still seats left but they're going fast. I'm very excited about it.
Luke: Great. Me, too.
Jared: OK, so everybody, if you have not signed up and you want to attend Luke's workshop, it's going to be at the UX Immersion Conference April 23 through 25 in Portland, Oregon. You can find out all about it at or just go to the site and hunt around aimlessly until you find the icon that says "UX Immersion" on it.

You will then find your way to all of this great stuff that's happening in Portland, and Luke will be there. Luke, thank you again for taking this time to talk to us today from beautiful Quebec.
Luke: Yes, it actually is quite beautiful here.
Jared: Yes, yes. It's rainy and miserable here in Boston.
Luke: [laughs] Sorry to hear that. [laughs]
Jared: We're having a Portland winter [laughs] in honor of the UX Immersion Conference. But no, thank you very much for spending this time today and making me a smarter dude.
Luke: My pleasure as always. Thank you.
Jared: Once again, I want to thank everyone for encouraging our behavior, and we'll talk to you later. Take care.