Posts Tagged Usability
V Smile TV Learning Plus
Posted by saif in Uncategorized on 28/09/2009
Let me start by saying that I really like the concept of an educational system that incorporates drawing, voice, and characters known to the children. This is what V Smile does. However, if it does not allow the children to play the same way they are used to on a Sony PlayStation, a PSP, a Nintendo DS/DSi, or even a computer then they end up being frustrated.
I am talking solely from personal experience and it might be that my children’s V Smile system is defective but I did see a couple of these systems, including the one in the shop.
The main reason of frustration is the controls; they are not precise enough. I gave it to my daughter who is 5 years old and she got frustrated quickly. The drawing pen is way off and ends up not drawing the same character required. I she was frustrated because she could not finished the level so I tried to help her but found out that the controls was not enjoyable. I saw the same thing happen with my two boys (6 & 7).
I see that they have a similar device called V.Flash which is for 6+ years. I am wondering if it has a better experience.
British Airways In-Flight Entertainment (IFE) Video on Demand (VOD)
Posted by saif in Uncategorized on 10/08/2009
I am a frequent flyer of British Airways. I like the service and the timing of their flight so I make sure I travel with them.
Many airlines offer In-flight entertainment (IFE) with video-on-demand (VOD). It seems most of which run Linux (look here and here for examples). those IFEs are usually based on touch-screens that allow direct interaction.
The system on BA allows the variety of choice of what to watch: new releases, comedy, action, shows, kids .. etc. After several attempts to “complete a task” I noticed a problem with the interface design, unfortunately I was too lazy to stand up, grab my bag, take out the camera, and snap a photo, so I suppose an illustration will suffice.
British Airways VOD Interface Design
As can be noticed from my high-tech illustration, even though the listing has enough spacing between them to be able to click on each easily without much concentration, there is a problem when trying to click the “next” button located on the bottom of the screen. Clicking on the “next” button requires a high level of concentration and because of various issues such as the turbulence and the condition of the touch-screen (being used by so many different people) the accuracy is low. I actually tried clicking on it several times before I go it right. A simple solution might be to move the bottom row buttons a bit lower; if I remember correctly there is enough space for that. However, the reason of not moving them lower might have to do with the quality of the touch-screen; not being that responsive on the edges.
An alternative solution would be to redesign the listing to better utilize the area and allow for easy clicking. One way of doing it would be like this second illustration. This allows for a larger clickable area without decreasing the amount of information displayed.
Video-on-Demand Redesign Alternative
A third and final alternative could be like the following illustration. This second alternative layout places the movie titles the same as the current design, however, it moves the context buttons (back, next, main menu) buttons to the right of the screen which allows greater space for the movie titles and separates context buttons.
Video-on-Demand Redesign Alternative 2
Now I really wish I did take that photo so that I can have some more insight for a redesign. Maybe next time.
Usablity = Good Design?
Posted by saif in Uncategorized on 26/07/2009
Usability and the relation between usability and good design really interests me. By usability I mean “extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use” ISO 9241-11. It interests me so much I’m doing a PhD in it.
In the title of this post, I am not saying that making a website usable will actually make that website better designed. Usability is important but not the ultimate goal, the ultimate goal is to allow users to achieve what they are there to do. I visit many websites that are “fun” to interact with, but when you set a goal the interactivity changes from “fun” to “frustrating”. Many of all-flash websites fall into this category. To complicate things further, some users find the websites pleasant and others do not even though they take the same amount of time to achieve their goal.
An additional factor that relates to achieving one’s goal is utility. Utility is “The quality or condition of being useful; usefulness”. So we have utility and usability. However, when I was looking up usability, one of the thesaurus I found was utilizable: “capable of being utilized”. In that sense, I do not think that something can be utilized if it is not usable. However, sometimes people are forced to use a software/system or another and there, even if that software usability is not great, that software/system will be utilized. Maybe it would not be utilized to the extent required but it will be utilized nonetheless. Now what really suffers here is the satisfaction, because this is the only factor the user can control, or modify. Usability in this case comes in to increase the satisfaction by increasing, or trying to increase, the efficiency and effectiveness of the software/system.
An example of that which is universal is a trip to the Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV), known in the UK as Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency DVLA. People always hate that trip: it is usually slow and bureaucratic, similar to getting your tooth pulled out, which is another good example here. Now how can we fix that with one thing to change? Say making it faster but you will still have to go through the same process, or by making it less bureaucratic but takes the same time. I understand that one should effect the other positively, making it less bureaucratic should make it faster, but let us assume that only one could one be changed that wouldn’t have an effect on the other. Would that increase the satisfaction of users?
I am just thinking through words here. Any input?
Home vs Home
Posted by saif in Uncategorized on 29/06/2009
I use several phones and devices all the time. However, when I change from one to another I feel a bit slow until I have “retrained” myself with the interactivity aspect of the device; where to press, how to call .. etc. I have not really paid much attention to this until recently. I was switching between my Nokia E71 and T-Mobile G1 and noticed a major difference between the two. The important difference I saw was the “Home” button. On the G1 and many other new phones, i.e. iPhone, the home button usually takes the user to the home screen, the place where your clock, calender, and to-dos are located. However, on the E71 the Home button actually takes you to the menu. The Blackberry Curve uses a button with small dots (the Blackberry logo) on it to do the same thing the home button on the Nokia E71 does, which is better than using a home icon to get you to the menu. I believe that Nokia’s use of the home button in this instance is less usable than that of the Blackberry approach and others.
Thinking of it further, the buttons on the different devices are meant for different purposes. The home button on the G1 (and similarly the iPhone) is there to get the user to the home screen from anywhere inside the phone’s menu, regardless of how deep the user is. The menu button, on the other hand, is to take the user from the home screen, or anywhere else, to the menu. Buttons on the G1 and Blackberry do what they should without any vagueness. The E71′s home button, however, is a bit more vague. It would allow the user to get to the home screen when within the sub-screens, but when on the home screen it takes the user to the menu screen, which is confusing.
I am attaching photos of the phones mentioned so that you can compare it yourselves.
-
- Nokia E71
-
- T-Mobile G1
-
- Blackberry Curve