Usability
- Started
- Last post
- 138 Responses
- TransFatty
has it's place, but i hafta say :
whenever a conservation comes up about it, it always seems to be framed in this sort of corporate mind set that says if something is not right there in front of you, it's wrong.
i couldnt disagree more.
- mogwai0
i think it all boils down to how bad the user wants the content you are presenting.
- Mimio0
Yeah, the average 40-something doesn't have much of a visual vocabulary for that sort of thing.
- Rand0
the fine line between engaging the user's intelligence and insulting it
- jevad0
omg you went there!!
hahahah
I agree - the point of usability imho is to get a user from point A - which is where he starts, to point B - which is his objective (whether that be an online transaction or sending an email or whatever...), with teh least amount of time, fuss, and thinking.
He or she *must* be able to accomplish or meet their needs and objective easily...or the software, site, UI has failed...
- hiphoprelic0
Joshua Davis said something like:
The interface should educate the user as to how to navigate the content rather than be built to their percieved aptitude/ignorance.
- BonSeff0
everybody here is always clowning Jakob Nielsen, then a site like Timothy Saccenti's is introduced and people are all up in arms.
- jevad0
"The interface should educate the user as to how to navigate the content rather than be built to their percieved aptitude/ignorance."
word
- mrdobolina0
it all depends on the user. you wouldnt use the tim s. nav on the medicare site.
- rabattski0
not really bonseff. usability isn't a must. it depends on your target audience and it's expectations.
- BonSeff0
actually the blue hairs would appreciate tha 80pt type
- jevad0
usability is *always* a must
point in case
I gave up on the site bonn mentioned because it jsut bloody pissed me off.
stupidly big type that I could hardly read...no visible hierarchy and terrible navigation...
- JamesEngage0
bored.
- mogwai0
if we ar e not careful, the internet will end up like TV. Channel up, and channel down. (its heading in that direction already)
- rabattski0
no it's not a must jevad. some people dig hard to understand sites. it's only a must if it has a function and it's expected by it's target audience / fits with what it's telling / selling / whatever. what was this site, donnydarko or something, no it was another one, very weird site, weird jumps and effects, no usability at all and people where flipping out on it.
- blaw0
"...framed in this sort of corporate mind set..."
isn't that the truth.
rabattski hit the nail with 'target audience'.
- jevad0
it's still got to be usable mate - you still have to get a good user experience from it or you are not going to go back....
But I see what you are trying to say
- JamesEngage0
donnie darko or an experience site is different... they've taken the content and done something with it... not just displayed work...
I don't see what the big hoohaa is over the timajick site... there are a few things that could be tweaked... but you get that with every site when you have 100 comments on it...
The fact is they have made an attempt to bring something a little bit different, and you're slapping them down.
The images would be easiest to navigate if they were in a big scrolling page... so why doesn't everyone do it... because they are creative and revelations don't come unless you work bloody hard at it... look how fucking dull Jakob Nielsen is, just look at him.
- timajick0
i think "appropriateness" is whats at question here.
Were as my site is designed in specific a way(and, vise-versas NOT designed a specific way), I don't think my navigation system would be as approriate for a site whos funtion was to perform domestic tasks such as paying bills, etc.
- rabattski0
jevad: usability > user > user experience. therein lies the concept, the user, the target audience. if the user doesn't want or need usability, you don't need usability. totally different thing: ferrari manufactures totally unusable cars yet people buy it for the obvious reasons.