HCI Assignment Report 2 CO2702
Guy Baxter
Daniel Dunn
Darren Bircher
William Man
Date – 21/01/2007
This report
is to focus upon the strengths and weaknesses of each design forwarded by our
group, Team Tantastic. Each design has key elements which we felt would be appropriate
to include to make the design as user friendly as possible. As a group we
decided up a design which we deemed most suitable to meet the requirements of
the users.
This design
shows different phases of what the user can view when using the device. Part 1
shows the initial screen that the user will encounter: this is the main menu
and will allow the user to select which option they desire. The additional
design screen represent various functions that the device will include, for
example, setting up an exercise program for the user to follow.
Strengths
Weaknesses
As
stated earlier, the group decided that the first screen that the user should
view is the main menu. Our justifications for this is that “users look straight at the content and ignore the navigation areas”
(Jakob, 2000). If we had created a device that displayed content as soon as it
was activated then in may not be information that the user requires, so we
decided to give the user the choice of what they want. We also had to consider
other implications that may cause the user to use the device much more
efficiently, such as display too much information and too many functions on the
screen. “A common mistake made by designers is to provide the system user with
too many options, text boxes, animations and so forth.” (Jakob, 1995). As a
group we decided to only include one system function per page to decrease
confusion and allow the user to ensure that they complete each function
properly without straying into other areas.
Designing a
device is not always about include many features and functions, but to also
keep it simple and minimalistic. This is what we have tried to achieve with
this design. In this design we opted for colour schemes to create ideas on what
may be best to use. The design shows a very bright interface, which after
careful consideration we decided against. Instead we chose to go with a very
popular colour scheme, often used for Apple Mac devices which is a light grey,
with blue LED’s to identify buttons and a backlight for the display screen that
the user has the option of turning on or off.
Strengths
Weaknesses
Jakob
Neilson suggests that user interaction with the design allows them to feel much
more in control. There are several areas that are focused upon, these are; easy
to learn, efficient to use, easy to remember, few errors and so on. “Pleasant to use: Users are subjectively satisfied by using the system; they like
it.” (Jakob, 1993). We felt that this design didn’t cover enough of these
factors to be able to be considered for the final design. However, after we
identified these design errors we were able to see what we didn’t want our
device to have and were able to start focusing on the aspects that we did want.
One feature that we
decided was beneficial for the user is that the device could possibly display
the users statistics throughout the time that they are logged onto their
account. This would enable them to keep track of their progress and be able to
make changes if they weren’t achieving their goals.
This was a
popular design with our group as it was simple yet effective as it included
every function that would be required by the users. It also contains many
features that are not part of the actual display. Features such as: indicating
the battery level, ability to adjust volume etc. These are small luxuries that
the user would want in order to be able to get the most out of the device.
Strengths
Weaknesses
The main
feature about this design is how simple it is. It doesn’t include a fancy
navigation like the other designs. It actually contains a search function to
allow the user to access what they want, when they want it . Jakob Neilson
suggests “Search
lets users control
their own destiny and assert independence from websites'
attempt to direct how they use the Web. Testing situations routinely validate
this. A typical comment is: "I don't want to have to navigate this site
the way they want me to. I just want to find the thing I'm looking for."
This is why many users go straight to the home page search
function.” As well as “Search is also users' escape hatch when they are stuck
in navigation. When they can't find a reasonable place to go next, they often
turn to the site's search function. This is why you should make search available
from every page on the site; you cannot predict where users
will be when they decide they are lost.” (Jakob,
2001). After asking the majority of the students within the HCI lab room what
they would prefer and why, we found that it’s pretty much 50/50 between
navigation and search as they both have their strong and weak features, listed
below.
Navigation
-
Strong: Only showed the user what they needed to see, relevant
information.
-
Weak: Didn’t give the user enough freedom to move around the device.
Search
-
Strong: Allowed the user to view what they want when they want it.
-
Weak: Could display too many answers for the user, whereas navigation
would take the user straight to the desired location.
Our
conclusion was that we should include both features. This is to ensure that the
user can access the search function to find vast amounts of information if they
want different exercises and diet programs for example. And also to allow the
user to access the navigation so that they can view the essential information
that would be included in the main area of the device.
This design
tried to incorporate the strengths from all of the other devices whilst keeping
the weaknesses to a minimum. As you can see from the design, the top of the
display screen shows different images that are the different areas of the
device (e.g. programs, diets, exercises etc). This can also be adjusted to
display text rather than images so that if a user has problem identifying images
then text would be much more suitable for them.
Strengths
Weaknesses
After
reading Jakob Nielsons article regarding low literacy users we came across one
valuable piece of information that we felt necessary to incorporate into the
design. The following statement “Simplify navigation
by placing the main choices in a linear menu. This helps users clearly
understand the next place to go, without requiring them to scan the page for
options.” (Jakob Nielson, 2005). The navigation at the top of the screen as the
typical English speaking user reads from the top left of the screen. The device
has met the simple colour scheme that was mentioned within the justifications
of prototype 2 and has the option of turning on the backlight to make the
screen much easier to view if the user is in a dark location.
This device also
comes with a small add-on, which is a protective layer of film that can be
placed over the screen. This reduces the amount of glare caused by the sun (if
the device is used outside).
The group
has decided to use Prototype 4 as the underlying design for the project. This
is because the design is a standard layout, which provides a range of feedback
for the user; audible, visual and kinaesthetic (physical) feedback. However,
our group feels that some of the other designs we have created also contain key
features so we will incorporate these into the final project. This will mean
that the complete design of the physical device contains many features in
previous devices, while keeping the weaknesses to an overall minimum.
Jakob Neilson, (2000). “Is Navigation
Useful?”
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20000109.html
Jakob Neilson, (1995). “Coping with
Information Overload” http://www.useit.com/papers/information_overload/
Jakob Neilson, (1993). “Iterative User
Interface Design”
http://www.useit.com/papers/iterative_design/
Jakob Neilson, (2001). “Search: Visible and
Simple”
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010513.html
Jakob Neilson,
(2005). “Lower-Literacy Users”
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20050314.html