mediajunk

Now that Internet Explorer 7 is starting to gain share of the browser market, cross browser compatibility has become more important than ever. Unfortunately, ensuring your web designs work well on many different browsers, versions and platforms can cause major headaches.

Here are some quick tips on how to test your website design in various browser/version/platform combinations:

1. To install multiple versions of Internet Explorer on a single Windows machine, download this essential multiple-IE utility (approx 10mb) from Tredsoft.

The multiple-IE tool uses some sort of DLL file workaround -- but you don't need to know that. You only need to know that it does exactly what it says on the tin: lets you run multiple standalone versions of Internet Explorer -- from IE3.0 through to IE7 -- simultaneously.

Tip: if you haven't yet upgraded to IE7, do so before running the multiple install tool.

2. For browsers you don't have, use browsershots.org. This free service lets you submit a URL and generates screenshots.

It won't give you every conceivable combination but will give you many, including Safari for Mac.

If you need to see an IE for mac screenshot, another option is http://www.danvine.com/iecapture/

Tip: It takes a while to get screenshot results, so submit your URLs before you go for lunch; they should be ready when you get back.

3. Use CSS hacks to target specific browsers. While this practice is frowned upon by CSS purists, a few hacks are usually inevitable in the trade-off between elegant code and cross-browser perfection.

Tip: Use hacks that keep your CSS valid, and use as few hacks as possible.

I participated in an Irish Internet Association debate this evening as part of the team that was cautioning against the use of credit cards online.

The debate was light-hearted and just a bit of fun. I probably wouldn't have chosen this argument but, when I researched it and thought about it, there are some pretty good reasons against using credit cards on the internet. What follows is, in essence, my speech:

*****

First of all, I must confess that I have often used my credit card online. The first time I used it -- to buy a book from Amazon, about ten years ago -- I was worried about security. But, the transaction went smoothly, there were no negative repercussions, and so I continued to use my credit card online for several years after that ... up until last year.

Last year, I attended a seminar in London on internet security, hosted by representatives of each of the major online security companies - Symantec, Kaspersky and others.

They experts explained that we are currently experience a "Cambrian Explosion" period in computer viruses, specifically in spyware and keystroke logging viruses -- or "keyloggers". These are designed to stay hidden on your computer and record any personal information you type into websites -- such as credit card, banking or name and address details.

Modern viruses take advantage of your always-on broadband connection by downloading updates that ensure they stay one step ahead of anti-virus programmes, and by secretly "phoning home", passing your personal information onto their makers.

So who are their makers? We tend to think of hackers as spotty teenager nerds, working out of their bedrooms, creating viruses just for kicks. That stereotype may have been accurate ten years ago, but not anymore.

A lot has changed since I first made my Amazon purchase online. The internet has gone from a few million users back then to over a billion users today. Inevitably this growth has attracted organised crime. Today, spware is funded by crime rings in developing countries, or former Eastern Bloc countries, who are counting on your false sense of security, relying on you to sit in front of your PC thinking, "I've done this a hundred times in the past -- it's bound to be secure."

But it's not only viruses that put you at risk. Many of my clients offer online shopping and credit card processing. Analysing their e-commerce solutions, we usually find that they have little understanding of security or best practices. And why should they? After all, they are small businesses with many other concerns.

Their online booking processes had many glaring holes that were putting both the businesses and their customers at risk. For example, one client was passing credit card details through the URLs of his website, which effectively allows them to be seen by other users. Others were taking the addresses securely, but then storing them in online databases that weren't secure.

When I discovered this I decided to try something out: I entered my own credit card details into Google. No results. Phew. Then I entered the first 12 digits, leaving out the last four. This time I found some credit card details, along with the name and address of a man in Dublin. In fact, I found hundreds of other names, address and credit card details. I was looking at a hotel booking database that was so insecure you could find it through Google. The hotel owner was putting all his customers at risk.

I found that many others were taking credit card details online but processing them manually with hand-held machines -- sometimes they were emailing them to another person for processing. Sending credit card details via email is not secure. When you send an email to someone it passes through a lot of other computers on its way to its destination, more or less randomly - that's how the internet works. Cyber-criminals monitor the traffic that passes through certain servers, looking in particular for credit card details.

So, my advice is to avoid sending your credit card details via the internet, because you don't know who is lurking behind the ones and zeros, waiting to steal your money or, worse, waiting to steal your identity!

*****

p.s. Our team won the debate!

Google has entered into a deal with media giant BSkyB, best known for its Sky Sports and Sky News channels, and associated satellite delivery system. From the Guardian:

In the first such deal for Google, the Californian firm will provide BSkyB with technology so it can offer email and internet telephony to customers of its fledgling broadband product.

I wouldn't have predicted such an alliance. Google's brand is associated with liberalist values such as freedom of information. Google is especially popular among the highly educated, and likes to flaunt its braininess, boasting about its PhD count, using maths puzzles in billboard ads, holding contests for computer developers, etc.

Sky, on the other hand, is an organisation that is innovative in a different and arguably more limited sense. The jewel in the Murdoch crown, the company has a cheap, tacky brand. Sky News is regularly sensationalist and/or dumbed down. The programming on Sky 1 is usually of the cheap and nasty "reality" fare. Sky Sports has a greedy, milk-them-for-all-they-are-worth veneer, regarded by football fans as having ruined the beautiful game by infesting it with money.

But Sky is successful and popular among the "ordinary people" of the UK, Ireland and abroad. And, in order to grow, Google's products and services must appeal to everyone, not just to geeks.

The Sky deal is another (inevitable?) deviation from Google's puritanical philosophy, a wobble that began a couple of years ago, when the company agreed to Chinese censorship of its search results. (Search for "Tiananmen Square" on Google China. You'll find little mention of any bloodshed.)

For the Murdochs, Google's innovative, easy-to-use products and services will boost uptake of Sky's recently announced broadband offering. But that's not the only reason Rupert Murdoch will have pushed for this deal.

Celebrating his 75th birthday earlier this year, the media mogul waxed lyrical about the internet revolution and the associated shift in power from the "old elite" to consumers. In July, Murdoch's News Corp acquired MySpace.com, the online community famous for breaking new music artists, for $580m.

It should therefore come as no surprise that, as part of their deal, Sky and Google say they will be exploring "future forms of web, TV and mobile advertising".

First off, let me state that I'm a fan of Ryanair. I admire Michael O'Leary. He has revolutionised air travel in Europe, making its cities and regions more accessible. Moreover, he has dramatically reduced the cost of flights, while increasing punctuality of departures and arrivals.

So how do I feel about the Ryanair website? Until recently, I have found the site to be both useful and usable. However, Ryanair has (deliberately, I suspect) introduced deceptive practices, which could be mistaken for poor usability.

Lengthy Terms and Conditions

The Ryanair site makes it easy to choose the flight dates and times I want. Next, I am shown the "Total Cost of Flight excluding handling fee (if applicable)".

I tick the "I have read the terms and conditions box" -- which very few users will ever read. Those who follow the link to Ryanair's terms and conditions will be put off by the text length: approximately 5200 words!

The Old Bait-and-Switch

The sneaky part comes on the next page, when I am presented with the following form to fill:

The first thing I notice is that I have to enter my first and last name. Next, I see that I am being asked how many bags I want to check in, and to the right of that I see that there is a price of "0.00 EUR". I've heard on the news that Ryanair is now charging passengers for checking bags into the hold, so I'm not surprised by this.

However, since I am going on a very short trip, I will not be checking any bags in. From the "How Many Bags to Check in?" drop-down, I try to select "0 bags". To my surprise, it's not that straightforward!

If you look closely at the image above, you'll see that I have chosen "0 bags - Online Checkin/Priority Boarding" (sic), the only option with a zero. To the right of that, you'll notice that the price has changed to 6.00 EUR.

Pocket-picking Disguised as Poor Usability

And here's the rub - most people won't notice. I consider myself to be an experienced internet user. Indeed, I dare to call myself a usability expert. But I failed to spot this "hidden charge" first time around. I'm sure Ryanair would argue that it's not a hidden charge but, well, pull the other one.

As it happens, I like the idea of priority boarding, but I would prefer to be offered it clearly and up front, not in this underhand manner.

I believe that Ryanair is deliberately employing "poor usability" in order to con inexperienced users into paying these extra charges. Bear in mind that 98% of Ryanair flights are booked through its website. Go on a Ryanair flight and look at the people around you: they are not the "tech-savvy" demographic. Rather, you'll see passengers of all ages and all walks of life.

Ryanair's business model is to reduce airfares while generating profits through ancillary revenues. O'Leary himself has stated that in the near future, European flights will effectively be free, with revenues coming from other means. I'm all for that - so long as those other means are fair, not foul.

How to Remove the Priority Boarding Charge

There is a way to remove the 6.00 EUR priority boarding charge, but users hurriedly filling out the form during their lunch break certainly won't notice. Towards the end of the text that has suddenly appeared below the "Confirm Country of Residence" drop-down, the word "Remove" is a link.

Clicking it produces a pop-up message that warns me: "You have chosen to remove Online Check-in/Priority Boarding. Are you sure?"

Of course, many inexperienced users will not be sure, and they will select "Cancel" at this point, leaving them with the charge. I wasn't sure what clicking "OK" would do, since the form had been so unintuitive up to this point.

As it happens, clicking "OK" finally generates the simple "0 bags" option (without the "priority boarding" tagline) that should have been available in the first place. The price alongside the drop-down changes to 0.00EUR.

Users Don't Read Instructions; They Muddle Through

Users won't read the text and try to figure it all out, because that's not how users proceed through websites. As Steve Krug puts it, we don't read figure out how things work, we muddle through.

I believe that many users won't even notice this surcharge and, among those who do, many won't be able to figure out how to remove it. "Ah well," they'll say, "it's only 13.50." But these users are being ripped off. Many of them won't even avail of the online check-in facility. I was on a Ryanair flight last weekend and was one of only five passengers who had checked in online, and thus boarded first. (The online check-in facility was free when I booked the flight; Ryanair has only introduced a charge for this facility in the last six weeks.)

How to Remove the Travel Insurance Charge

Ryanair deliberately, I believe, conflates the "Choose your Country" and "Do you require travel insurance" questions. In any case, I would never want Ryanair's insurance; I certainly don't need travel insurance for an overnight trip from Dublin to London.

In the images above, you'll notice the "Confirm Country of Residence to purchase Insurance" line and, beside that, a drop-down pre-populated with your computer's location, in this case "Ireland".

If you look carefully, you'll see the line "If you would prefer NOT to purchase travel insurance simply chose No Travel Insurance Required in the drop down menu" (sic). This text is not next to the relevant choice (where it should be); there's a sizable chunk of whitespace in between.

Anyway, a little mooching around in the country list drop-down reveals that "No Travel Insurance Required" is one of the options. Hmmm... never heard of a country by that name before. Choosing it removes the 7.50 surcharge.

Even then you're not out of the woods! When you've filled in the rest of the form (your address details etc.) and clicked "Continue", Ryanair makes one last desperate bid to squeeze that travel insurance out of you:

Enjoy Your Flight

Unfortunately, there is still no way around the outrageous 5 euro VISA card charge per person per flight- not per transaction!

Will I still fly Ryanair? Yes. I just wish they'd stop trying to con me. And hopefully I've helped a few other people avoid being ripped off. That 13.50 I've saved you should leave you with just enough to buy a coffee, Mars bar and scratch card on board.