User Stats for Age Groups
- Started
- Last post
- 22 Responses
- mbr
I am making a site targeted at 50+ year olds. Any ideas?
Are there any stats anywhere about what size monitors this group is using. I am guessing that it should be less than 800x600.
It will be a flash 6 site (I need the video capability and the client would rather have them down load 1 player, and not an additional quicktime player, plus I think this way will be better).If anyone has built things for this group, I'd appreciate any thoughts.
Thanks.
- unknown0
well, my mom uses the internet, and i had to explain her a lot of things about it.
first, readability. don't even try to play with those hip lil letters we ue here.
second, resolution. real, 800x600. at first because of readability, and then because FINAL USERS DON'T EVER CHANGE THE DEFAULT (it's not only for old users, but for ANY final user).
third, sinalization. explain the what and why and how much steps and how. dunno if it's because of a generation gap or they're older and wiser, but old people read the manuals, and mean it.
when my mother started using yahoo services, she stopped asking me so much questions. and then i realized how well sinalized the site is. and how much power it gives to users. question every technical word, and consider to translate it to another culture, or explain it in depth. (faq? form? self? blank? hm?)
fourth, respect. they just don't know about new technology, they're not stupids. tutorials and explanations scattered along the site are cool, a "know more" feature even better (what the heck is a "faq"?), and maybe hire a guy to answer the questions by mail (explaining how many time it takes to get a reply, etc).
if u treat well those ppl, u will get the most reliable demografics ever. good luck.
- mbr0
Thanks. Good tips about the 'faqs' and tutorial/explanation stuff. It's going to be a site to market some realestate/subdivisions, and there will be animations, etc. Should be fairly straight forward because most of it is visual stuff, so as long as it's clear (and BIG!).
I'll have to tell my folks about Yahoo Services. They are just learning to surf and have yet to discover email! Wow. I can't make it a day without a connection to info (of course, that's sad).
- unknown0
ask them to use yahoo services. it's self-explanatory (you will have more time to yourself), it gives enough power to then on a single account (mail, spam filter, photos, address, etc), and it's free.
i know it seems like an ad. but they are really good at what they do.
- unknown0
i mean, no evil ˆ..ˆ corporation as microsoft or aol...
- mbr0
Ok, so we are just talking about Yahoo Mail like stuff? I've got a few accounts there, too, for the potentially hazardous sign up lists.
I don't think my folks have ever gotten an email actually addressed to them, they have them sent to my younger sister.
I hope that's not really the norm or it will be more difficult to make an intuitive site (with navigation for animations, etc.).
- jox0
I would do some serious re-thinking about the flash. It's most likely they don't have the flash player installed, and when an installation request pops up, things get messy and out of control for them.
Of course, not everyone look at it this way, but most of the 50+ users I've met freak out whenever something new happens with their machine.
Good luck!
- jox0
Actually, this is one of these moments where Nielsen can be very helpful.
- unknown0
what u mean about the mail? didn't get it.
i was using yahoo as a case study, AND maybe a good choice to use if your clients are so newbies.
but don't try to tie your site to yahoo mail. is it?
what i mean is: rethink every tep, and translate it very well to your visitors. we tech-savvy take so ma ny things for granted and it gives a huge gap between the producers (us) and the users (those who pay the bills).
we have to narrow it.
- mbr0
Well, it's either do it in html and Quicktime, or all Flash. I like Flash and I hate html (personal thing, although you'll see my site is all html - never again).
There will be interactive animations (floor plan nav), so there has to be some flash, so why not all flash? No real updating, this is a one time, sell them then it's gone, deal.
Plus, flash will work with any browser, so you eliminate having to worry about older browsers. 90% already have flash installed (although not 6), so they at least know what it is. How many are comfortable with QT? Not many, I'd guess. Plus there is the control of preloaders, speed, etc.
Somebody please step in and correct me if I am mistaken, but that's how I see it.
- mbr0
I see. I misunderstood, although I got the gist of it. I thought you were saying that it's easy to use, as a general thing, but you meant as a case study like? Got it.
The site will be very simple, but I need to get the feedback along the way, I think, to ensure that it is accessible to the computer challenged.
It's upper middle class units, so they should at least have decent computers (although that's a broad assumption).
Any thoughts on whether it would be better to make 2 sites, one for 56k and one for broadband, or just to have options for the animations (they would still be identical, just that the use would choose at different times)?
Thanks.
- unknown0
you are mistaking old users with old computer. this is not necessarily true.
and u have the opposite feelings of mine about flash and html! i did a site all in flash, and it was such a pain! never again! :)
for sure, you have to use the tool you are most suited!
about having or not flash player, you have to see the stats, dunno where. listen to jakob nielsen, as said.
BUT, flash instalation is fairly easy... true... a snap... the shockwave ones are really annoying (i mean, ppl NOT USED to the tool - and THATS the case if they don't have the plugin - usually get lost).
the good i see about using flash in this case is using icons on pulldowns, waiting signs more friendly, making the experience smoother (the wait sign is a hassle for final users. they never know if they did it wrong).
why don't you just WATCH an older person surf the web? it's such an experience (some IAs tape the experience and then discuss the motivations behind the chosings).
- mbr0
Good ideas. I am assuming that many of the users will have semi current computers, simply due to their monetary position (could be wrong, again).
I liked the idea of using flash because you can control everything. The preloaders will have text, bringing the user along, whereas html/QT would have those horrible gray bars.
My client insisted on the presentation being as seamless as possible. I've seen some pretty nice flash/video sites that integrate the experience so there are no pauses. That's what I hate about html so much, you cannot control everything visually (although I tried on my site, but it's a pain to update, negating the damn reason I made it in html in the first place |-: !). But I did start with flash, before using any html.
I hope to keep it all in one, easy to see, comprehensive presentation, where there is no large separation between the video and the rest, just a 'click'.
- CyBrainX0
My suggestions are similar to what's been said before.
Get some old people to be your informal focus group. Tell them to use the site at different points of development and record their mistakes, questions, doubts, even hesitations.
Jakob Nielson is an ass, but some of his criticisms of most Flash sites are to be taken as a challenge. Make use of different button images for visited links, use back buttons, don't have many levels of architecture, make your animation work, and if you have music/audio, for God's sake put an Off button there, probably a volume control also.
Make Flash work for the user too. Have things stream and give them things to do or read as your video loads. This way, you make one version of your site and not two.
Go with the MX site and forget html/Quicktime. Many more people have the newest Flash plug-in than Quicktime. That way, you are taking advantage of the best tool the web has to offer.
Make your type nice and big and consider having an enlarge button when possible.
- mbr0
Thanks. Good points.
I'll use my folks as a focus group ;-), they are about as computer illiterate as they come!I'll be keeping it as simple as possible. Navigation clear and always accessible. Not sure about the 'back' buttons, as most of it will be a one click deal. It's a pretty basic site, with the exception of having the video. I'll be sure to keep the text large, but I think an 'enlarge here' button would through most things off too far. Maybe I'll have an option to open a larger, simpler, html file in another window with big, fat text.
Anyone know of good resources to learn about streaming (without the use of a streaming web service)? Obviously not something I know too much about.
I'll be using Sorensen Spark to compress the video, and the rest will be in flash. I'll make sure to have some text that accompanies the preloaders.
Any other thoughts?
- CyBrainX0
If you can get your hands on the Sorenson Squeeze for your video, you'll get much better compression than the basic Spark version.
I didn't mean enlarge the text in the same way a browser does it. Just a large image of a paragraph of text or anything on the small size that would appear in your Flash movie. I wouldn't go to another window for that. It sounds like you should be containing everything in one window with strategically placed preloading things with plenty to read or watch.
- mbr0
Yeah, Squeeze is what I meant (I think). It's about $100 for the MX version, I think, maybe a little more.
I am hoping I can just get it to be legible enough without having to make any extra-large areas. Should be fine, as long as I stay away from 8 px fonts ;-)!
- unknown0
we do loads of stuff for the government, that has to be compltely compliant.
We did all the pension work for the UK (which was obviously for 50+er's). If you want to look at accessibility... this is a good starting point.... http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONT…
but as a general rule plug-ins are ok, but you should always create another alternative. Text is a massive issue with flash, you should be able to resize it really...
- mbr0
Thanks for the link, I'll look over it closely.
I hear you about the text, but this is primarily a visual presentation (images of the condo units and floor plans), with not much that I would consider really essential to read. Just stuff like: amenities 1-20, price, square feet, construction schedule, and that's about it. The rest will be the images and animations.
I'll have to do some testing for the legibility of the text before making any decisions. I recently found some pixel fonts that look decent pretty large.
The plugin is a must, as you will not be able to see the animations without it. I was thinking of making a downloadable PDF that people could print, but maybe a simple HTML page would be better?
- unknown0
Im not against flash per say... but after doing loads of work for big corporates and the government, I have learnt to look around it... Often most Flash functionality can be replecated by dhtml.
Think you need to question what the added value of using flash would be. If it is to do with the designers esthetic taste and not the end use or end user then maybe its not the right solution.
It sounds like your looking for an excuse to use flash as opposed looking for the best way to do the job...
but its an argument that will rage eternal, but pixel fonts for older users? big no,no.
- mbr0
Well, I do have a bias towards flash. I find that it is consistant, much more so than anything html, it loads quickly, you can control everything in one file (no lnks to jpegs that can be lost), etc. I also like to be able to move buttons around without consequence.
I don't want to get into a debate about the merits of either, because they both have their strengths, but for small sites like this, that will be visually driven, flash is the best choice (for me, anyway).
The real deciding factors are:
1. Video - there will be 3 interactive animations that are controlled by a floor plan. Click on a room, and it will play that video. It would simply be a mess to do with html.
2. My client only wants one plugin, so that eliminates QT, which I am in favor of. I like the possibilities of flash video, and feel it will be a large part of my future (3D/architectural visualization).This won't be a site that is trying to attract every single person over 50, just ones that are looking to buy a 2200 sq ft condo in that specific location.
Oh, and my knowledge of dthml is so limited to make it a non issue (I've taken classes, but from what I see the compatibility issues make it useless, unless you have a huuuge site and want better navigation, or something). Everything flash will work or it won't, there aren't every any weird things that happen.