Free WiFi is everywhere these days (especially WiFi in Portland). Yet, there are still some times when I need to pay for access. This weekend I had no network nor printer and needed both. So, I zipped off to my local Fedex Kinkos.

The setup appeared very easy. It had been a couple years since I had plugged in at Kinkos and they’ve improved their system. All it takes is a network cable and a USB port. Just about every laptop, Windows and Mac, can plug-in right out of the box. This doesn’t require any software, drivers, or anything else to get going.

Unfortunately, when I plugged everything in, I received this awful window:

It looked like this when it first opened and it would have looked like this if I waited all day. It has five checkboxes, none of which are checked or checkable. The labels next to each checkbox say things like “Checking network card,” as if it is actively working on a solution. The only clickable option on this screen is the Quit button.

Since I’m a little more informed technically than the average Kinkos customer, I did some tests to tell I couldn’t see the Internet. I took a deep breath and inserted my credit card into the slot on the table. Nothing changed, but a minute or so later I was able to do most of what I wanted.

My point here is that being simple is not the only thing needed to make technology easy to use. Kinkos had two cables, which was all it took to connect me to their network. That’s great. But the instructions were sparse and misleading. Their software was technically complete, but it basically just needs better copy.

In April Paul Kedrosky wrote against the simplicity cult. When I named my biz-tech writings Simplicity Rules, I didn’t intend to join a cult. I thought I was being original, even. Now I realize there is an unmistakable collective consciousness pushing toward, among other things, white backgrounds and large fonts.

A friend of mine has an email signature with this Einstein quote: “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.”

That’s the definition of simplicity that we members of the cult should follow. Kedrosky was really warning against being too simple.

Adaptive Path is a user experience firm whose work I admire, but I’ve never really agreed with one of their common examples. They citeUSDA’s Hay Net as “the best website I’ve ever seen.” The home page has two links: “Have hay” and “Need hay.”

Even if we assume this approach works for Hay Net, it certainly won’t work for most sites. In most cases, this is too simple.

This week I attended a panel discussion about building online communities. Among my many great “take-aways” was this gem:

Traffic does not equal community.

On one hand, obvious. Yet, it still gave me an “aha” moment.

When you’re around the Web every day, and all the talk is getting more traffic, it’s easy to lose track of what you’re actually achieving.

Take a site like YouTube, the video sharing service that has more traffic than God. It has comments, user profiles, and voting, staples of many communities. But it’s not what I’d call a community. (Perhaps it follows my social network rules too closely?).

Granted, you can get traffic (even do good stuff) and make plenty of money without having any visitor interaction. There are thousands of people who start forums and buy posts in bulk from people who make fake accounts. This is actually accepted practice. They game the system, get into search results, and get lots of traffic.

For now, on the Web traffic may still equal dollars, but it sure doesn’t make it a community.

Elliot has something to say about “Real SEO” (search engine optimization). His advice is similar to what I said about doing good stuff, only he approaches it from Google’s standpoint:

“Google’s main goal is to get people using their search engine, and the best way to do that is to get the best content at the top of the results. So regardless of what numbers their algorithms use, we still know what their algorithms do. Find good content and put it at the top.”

You could take another step back there and get at what this is really about: the user. Live by the page paradigm, do good stuff, and the traffic / search rankings / fame / TV deal on the network of your choice will follow.

You know that one Seinfeld episode where George does the opposite and has all sorts of success? Well, I’m sure it doesn’t always work, but here are a couple business examples:

• Fred Franzia, maker of Two Buck Chuck and other “value wines:” he took an industry that gets by on mystique and high margins, and went cheap.
• Sharelle Klaus started an upscale soda company. Rather than fight out margins-in-cents with Coke and Pepsi, Klaus focused on nice restaurants and specialty grocers. She’s making non-alcoholic chic.

Got any others? Even better, how about opposites that didn’t make it?