Select a language to translate this page!
Powered by Microsoft® Translator
The first thing that comes to mind when you think of Windows Live Messenger is usually instant messaging – bouncing short text messages back and forth. But there are tons of things we've built into Messenger to make that experience more meaningful, and closer to a real face-to-face interaction. My name is Piero Sierra, and I’m the Group Program Manager for Windows Live Messenger and Windows Live Mail. Today I’m going to talk about how we've engineered Messenger to help people stay connected with each other in more meaningful ways.
Web-based social networks have had huge growth lately, and they're a great way to share and stay informed about what everyone that you know is up to. They let you reach out to large groups of people, including friends and family, but your social network usually also includes a broad group of acquaintances, co-workers, and people from your past that you may no longer be very close to. Messenger, on the other hand, is about the people that matter most to you – the ones you talk with frequently and share more personal moments with.
For several years now, this has been our North Star in building Messenger – helping people stay connected to their closest friends and express themselves in meaningful ways. I'd like to tell you a little more about how we're doing that.
First, a personal anecdote:
My first year in college I discovered the power of UNIX-based ntalk. It was a simple text-based program that allowed two users to send text messages to each other in real time. I remember loving how much faster and more conversational it felt than e-mail (go PINE!). I spent many late nights ntalking with friends and eating cold pizza. But there were downsides too. Because ntalk split the screen between the two users, it was hard to tell in what order the messages had arrived. And worse, ntalk was so “real time” that it would show recipients each character as it was typed. Needless to say, this led to some horribly embarrassing situations as I would start typing something, then change my mind and erase it – live. Plus, there was no friends list, or any way to know if a friend was online.
Instant messaging has grown up a lot since then, with major IM clients offering a rich set of features. For Windows Live Messenger, this includes a contact list with display pictures, status messages, and a presence indicator (to show when your friends are online), offline messaging, interoperability with mobile and SMS, and even the ability to chat with people on other networks.
Even though sending text remains the backbone of Messenger, over the years it has gone beyond text in ways that make communication more natural and intimate.
Our goal is to allow you to have deeper, more meaningful conversations in Messenger. So how do we measure our success? One key metric we track is conversation length – having a longer conversation means you're generally going beyond lightweight exchanges of messages like “Are you coming?”
We also look at voice and video (our closest approximation to a true conversation), and how people interact with each other through photos. Some numbers:
Following are a few examples of Messenger features that we’ve built to help people connect with their close friends in more meaningful ways. Some of these have been around for years, and some were introduced in the most recent version of Messenger.
This is a very simple feature, but is really important to keep conversations flowing naturally.
In the real world, you typically wait until your friend is done talking before you answer. It’s a very basic social contract. Without a typing indicator, IM conversations feel unnatural, and you and your conversation partner are constantly “typing over each other.” But too much real time information loses the advantages of a written conversation, where people can choose their words carefully, or start a thought and then change their minds and cancel it.
Rather than show you every character I type as I type it, Messenger tells you "Piero is writing…" so that you can wait for me to finish my thought before you jump on to the next topic. You cannot tell what I am typing until I press Enter. Through extensive user testing, we found that this strikes the right balance between privacy and keeping people engaged with the conversation.
Conveying emotions with text was challenging in the old days, especially with IM, where speed is of the essence. So users evolved a terse IM lingo with expressions like LOL, BRB, TTYL, etc. Messenger extends this concept with a set of animated emoticons, some of which have become almost iconic:
In 2005 we added “winks” – little animations you can share with your friends. Messenger users exchange about 240 million winks a month.
Finally, PCs are great for multi-tasking, which means sometimes the person you’re talking to is not staring at the chat window. But in more recent versions of Messenger, you’ve been able to get the attention of your distracted friends using the "nudge" feature. Clicking the little nudge button ( ) shakes the IM window and plays a little “wake up buddy!” sound that is sure to get attention. To protect you from overzealous nudgers, we’ve limited use of the nudge to every 15 seconds or so.
For years now, you’ve been able to exchange files while you IM. But when we looked at the data, we found that the vast majority of files that people exchanged were photos. So in 2009 we introduced simpler, more fun ways to share photos. Now you can just drag your photos into a conversation, and the chat window transforms itself into a shared slide show. You and your friend see the same photo at the same time – if you advance the slide show, it advances for your friend, and vice-versa.
When designing this, the team wrestled with whether to enable automatic acceptance of incoming photos. Sharing files in Messenger had always required you to first “accept” the transfer, and then pick a location to save the file. But this felt too cumbersome. Our goal was to mimic what people do when sitting together and looking at a photo album.
So we tested this extensively in our usability labs and with our Beta users. What we found is that there is an implicit social contract between people engaged in an IM conversation. We found that during IM the frame of the conversation window virtually disappears, as people connect emotionally with their friend on the other side. Unlike e-mail, only your actual friend can send you things, and if a friend is annoying or inappropriate, you can simply block or delete them. So we decided it was worth the risk to automatically accept incoming photos and immediately display them, like so:
Of course we provide an option for you to opt out of this behavior:
But since we launched this feature in 2009 we’ve found very few people opt out, and the feedback we have heard on this feature has been super positive. Expect more live sharing features like this in our upcoming releases.
In a similar spirit, we wanted to offer a way for you to express your real personality and your shifting moods. Internally, our team distinguishes between customization (customizing something for yourself) and personal expression (customizing how other people see you). In the past, like many other IM programs, Messenger had focused on creating “skins” – a quick way to customize the appearance of the program. But our data showed very few people took advantage of it. So in 2009 we shifted our focus towards personal expression.
We did this by making it very easy for you to pick a background scene, user tile, and status message that your friends will see when they interact with you. For example:
The key difference between this and a “skin” is that my Valentine’s Day scene, user tile, and status message are visible to others when they see me in their friends list or chat with me:
Of course, the ultimate representation of an actual conversation is to see and hear the person on the other end. Messenger users are addicted to voice and video—they use this feature 230 million times a month, for everything from socializing to staying in touch with relatives and friends abroad. Over the years, we’ve seen a switch away from a simple voice channel towards full-blown video IM. Today, 81% of the voice calls initiated in Messenger also include video.
For Messenger 2009 we decided to focus on improving video setup time and video quality.
Setting up a video call can be tricky. The two computers involved in the call need to negotiate on how to best complete the call, what quality settings to use, how to connect through firewalls and NATs, etc. But when you start a video chat with a friend, you want to see them immediately. There’s nothing worse than sitting there waiting for the call to connect. In Messenger 2009 we reduced average call setup time by 50%, from about 24 seconds to 12. We did this by reducing and consolidating unnecessary data round-trips, and switching the code to use our peer-to-peer IM channel instead of a custom channel.
To improve quality, we introduced VGA resolution support (640x480) for crisper full-screen conversations. This resolution is in line with the broader web camera ecosystem, though over time we expect this to go even higher, as more people get HD cameras. We also updated our compression algorithms to improve the image quality. We put special focus on algorithms that adapt to fluctuating network conditions. For example:
These are just a few of the ways we've been working to improve the voice and video experience so that connecting with friends and family in Messenger feels more like they're in the room with you.
Stay tuned for more posts on how we’re continuing to evolve the Messenger experience.
Very few people opt out of the photo sharing feature? I'm surprised. It's probably because they don't know they can. Most people never even go into the options area of messenger, or know it even exists.
I myself, a long time advanced user of messenger can not stand this new photo sharing feature. I want to see a photo in full size, and save the photo upon receiving it. I don't want this "preview", and then have to click it again to save it. It's just a big pain in the butt if you ask me. When I disable it, it should revert to the old way of sending the photo as a file.
The photo sharing feature idea is a nice one, but the UI is most horrible. I hex edited the EXE using the article at WithinWindows to get rid of the photo sharing feature. It seems MS pays less and less attention to UI, usability and performance compared to social networking, data driven engineering madness (DDE is given way more important than common sense and classic good UI conventions). The last thing I want Messenger 2010 to be is to be bloated and I fear it is going to end up running slow on slightly older systems.
+1 for Photo Sharing being rejigged.
On my Windows 7 computers, any time photo sharing gets invoked, my conversation window gets all the text in it masked completely, and then the photo border isn't freely resizable - I have to minimize then maximize the photo sharing panel to get a line of visible text from the other party.
Yes, while sharing photos, I can't tell what the other person is typing.
My IM windows may be too small for the optimal photo sharing size (about 2.5 in wide, and tall).
I'd much rather have the ability to switch it OFF than not-auto-accept.
And while I'm venting, why does the picture panel have to take up so much space in the IM window?
I keep a couple of conversation windows open all day - I'd dock them to the desktop border if I could - and the images now take up so much real estate relative to the size of the text column that I need to turn them off, which I don't like doing because it's a fast method of establishing the window's social context. Having the photo overlap the text, or at the top of the window (reducing vertical textbox height but minimizing horizontal layout size) would really help.
That second part was about the display picture of the person I'm talking to (and my own), just to clear that up. A minimized view (about 1cm of screen width) would be better. Or current size, but overlapping the text (perhaps the text could reflow around it?). Grr.
Hello khristopher, 7flavor & Spongbo-
Thank you for your feedback on our photo sharing feature. I’ll summarize it in three parts:
1) Some of you don’t like the feature at all and propose we go back to direct file sharing by default for all photo transfers
2) The layout of the conversation window can be awkward while in a photo sharing session. For example it’s hard to see what your friend is typing and see the photos
3) It’s annoying to have to resize panes up and down all the time to get a good layout
For (1), I can assure you that the vast majority of users actually do prefer experiencing photos together in real time rather than transferring files. Having to first download the files and then open them can be cumbersome (and hard for novice users), and the ability to look at pictures together and comment on them in real time has been very well received. We have correlated many datapoints on this and are confident it is the right behavior. Expert users can turn off the auto-accept behavior. And you can still transfer files directly without triggering a photo experience (Menus -> File -> Send a file…)
With regards to (2) and (3) we agree the experience could be improved. This is something we are looking at updating in our next release.
The picture sharing feature is a nice idea but not executed well. You guys need to hire the same kind of guys who designed XBOX and Zune interfaces. The space wasted on the chat windows. The ever increasing size of all windows. The Favorites and Groups added to messenger list are few examples of not-so-great UI. Seems like you guys build a feature and try to build a UI on top of it. Design and experience and build the product around that :)
Video Conference has improved but is not as good as Skype.
Remote Assistance does not work most of the time either. One shouldnt have to configure network routers with dmz and upnp settings to get this to work.
Just wanted to say that I am among those that love the new photo sharing.
I've been using messenger since the very begining, and before you did this I was already a user of the "photo sharing plugin". I was greatly surprised about the new integration with the main window of Live Messenger, and everyone around me loves it (mostly unexperienced users).
I disagree with those saying that previews are useless, what is useless is having to wait for the other person to see something you want to show him now, not after a couple of minutes. It's also great being able to download the full res thing easilly if you'd like to, although it would be nice to have a "default download folder" not to be asked every time if you don't want to.
To me the main problem of this module is that most people don't know about it, and most people I know have stopped sharing photos with messenger because of the slow transfers and one by one send/accept nightmare of the previous versions. Once people find about it, I don't know anyone that doesn't love it.
I do agree though that the implementation can be bothersome if you are chatting (not so much when doing video or voice though), and that's certainly something to improve. I also agree that the interface should be trimed down a bit, because there is too much empty space wasted. For the photo sharing or video it would be nice to be able to "pop-up" those parts from the main window. Unexperienced users would leave it as such, but others would have added flexibility when needed.
I also hope there are further video quality improvements in upcoming versions, but otherwise I keep on using messenger as my main communication program because I certainly like it. Keep up your hard work, I'm very much looking forward to wave4 (now, what about auto-previewing office and pdf files or even music streamings ?!; you may want those to always be "accepted", but it would be great to watch them together "live")
Don't listen to the naysayers, they'll always complain that a product wasn't built for them and them only.
The photo share feature is really cool. Yeah, it probably takes up a bit too much of the window but is it better than what we had before? Hell yeah. I'll look forward to refinements in the next version.