[hosh]

I generally like where this going, though I disagree with the assertion that "it will be easier to browse".

The potential for browsing will be increased. However, the actual user experience of browsing for books on the internet still pretty much sucks. Most places take the low-hanging fruit and have pretty good searching capability. However, searching and browsing are not the same experience. Recommendations (like from Amazon) is not browsing -- it's prompting based on intentional searching.

To do online browsing well, you have to come back to what the UX for browsing in a library or a bookstore feels like. You wander around spaces, and pick out books that catch your attention. Illustrations on book covers means a lot more. And for people like me that process information kinesthetically, the spatial relationships of the books (where it is on the shelf, which shelf it is on, how many steps it takes to go down one aisle, how wide are the aisles in relation to how far I can stretch my arms, etc.) matters a lot more.

I've toyed with the notion of creating a dedicated Android app to prototype this idea. That is, creating an online browsing experience to replace my bookshelf so that I can show it off for guests. Some of the lessons that can be extracted from creating that would apply to an online browsing experience -- or a physical retail experience that includes an online component.

Looking at how Scribd redid their site to support this, I think they understand some of the issues. But in the end, it looks more like they are copying Netflix rather than really rethinking at a more fundamental level of what "browsing" means as an experience.

[TillE]

I completely agree about the terrible state of browsing in online bookstores.

In terms of non-fiction, I've discovered tons of books at a university library by searching the catalog for a few books on a given topic, then going to the shelf and looking at all the books around it, which I would not have otherwise found.

I'd love some kind of Dewey Decimal browser with a bunch of extra filters. I don't know if that's feasible.

[hosh]

"I'd love some kind of Dewey Decimal browser with a bunch of extra filters. I don't know if that's feasible."

See, that's what I mean. When you're creating a space to show off or show case books, you're not really using any structured form of organization. The experience is more a form of an art. It's more like creating an art gallery or a museum than it is replicating a category system. The category system is easy; crafting a museum experience, that's harder.

[weeksie]

Honestly, I reckon that using _much_ larger thumbnails would be a big step forward in the experience. Most people pick books by their covers, then check out the blurb on the back. Amazon's thumbs are tiny, hell even the product page has a tiny image. I think that experimenting with size alone would get you quite a long way.

Perhaps take a cue from fashion brands like Gilt who have had to recreate the retail experience for shoppers.

(someone please do this . . . please)

[hosh]

Sure, and I think that is just the first step. I'm with you on the "retail experience" though maybe not necessarily a recreation.

I'm thinking more along the lines of an art gallery, or a museum, or an amusement park. You have paths with one or two limited choices, and allow you to wander from exhibit to exhibit, collection to collection. You have maps or indices to take you directly to a particular area if you are busy. The point is to have an experience, the way you can wander around a mall looking at things. It is not efficient, and that's the point.

The word "browsing" comes from the way browsers behave in the wild. These are grazing animals that wander along with the herd, eating things as they come. What Scribd and Netflix does is technically not browsing.

[weeksie]

That's certainly part of it as well. If you look at fashion sites you definitely have a limited, curated selection of items to choose from. Still, I reckon a basic UI change alone would do wonders before even bothering with the harder stuff like curation.

[hayksaakian]

To respond to your note about browsing.

Typically books are arranged alphabetically and thematically. Some times, shelf placement is a variable in marketing.

When you take shelf placement as marketing to it's logical extreme, you end up with something like Amazon -- where you've optimized for conversions rather than overall user experience. As any Sales / Marketing person can tell you, best experience != most conversions.

People are indecisive when confronted with many choices.

I could see browsing as a great ideal for subscription services though. Amazon and most e-commerce is a bad comparison though, as browsing is generally bad for transactional businesses (due to reasons above). This is yet another reason why traditional book stores are at a disadvantage.

[hosh]

Sure, and granted, the personal device I was thinking of is to arrange it thematically on how I want to present the books to guests. Not necessarily as product categories (genre). However, to say that Amazon takes this to the extreme misses the point. Amazon is optimized for conversion only because there has not been better browsing experiences. You go to Amazon when you are looking for something specific and maybe buy a book off of the recommendation. You don't go to Amazon when you are bored and looking for something new to read.

I think though, the rest of your argument is sketchy. "Amazon and most e-commerce is a bad comparison though, as browsing is generally bad for transactional businesses" That's great, except that Amazon is not optimized for browsing, it is optimized for searching, as I've mentioned in my comment.