|
|
Post by areigle on Jan 11, 2013 12:06:50 GMT -5
Hall of Fame Web site: The Art Institute of Chicago (http://www.artic.edu/) I approached the site as a prospective museum visitor... Part of my job is to pull contact and exhibit information from art museum websites in order to exchange publications with them, so I viewed this site as if I was doing that task. I agree and can say, comparatively, the speed with which I was able to find the information I needed was much faster than many art museum websites I have been to. As you mentioned, the simplicity makes it much easier to navigate, though, not every website that is simple like this can be. That being said, they have a several different modes of searching the collection that, may seem like it would be messy, but is in fact fairly simple to navigate and provide quicker avenues of finding specific information you may need. This may take some points away from learnability but makes it up in speed and memorability. Also, it's aesthetically pleasing and well labelled, which, in combination with the other positive points, increase user preference. |
|
|
|
Post by areigle on Jan 11, 2013 12:32:08 GMT -5
I think that this is a simple page, which makes it easy to do your most essential task (searching about a health topic). However, I don't really like the content found on the front page. They are things that are interesting to people who are visiting the site but are organized in no real particular way. Why have a section that has two tabs, one for NIHSenior Health and the other for Clinical Trials? Maybe they could add the "featured site" as another tab and include a title such as, "other helpful links" much like how they have the title "about your health" above the other tabs. This would add much needed consistency on the page. Then there are links that are floating around on the bottom of the page, including the purple buttons on the bottom. These could all be helpful thing that I think should not be separated from the main content at the top of the page. For instance, the "easy-to-read) option should be closer to the top so that users know that they have other options besides just using the search option. |
|
|
|
Post by jian12 on Jan 11, 2013 15:20:01 GMT -5
I used to be a Chinese language and culture teacher in a public school. I had to look up for usages of both of Chinese and English very often. I found this website www.nciku.com/ SUPER useful as an online Chinese-English dictionary. It’s absolutely a Hall of Fame although it has some defects. 1. Speed. I have to say that speed is the only thing that I’m not satisfied with. It sometimes takes seconds to load everything on the page. It depends on what you’re searching, how much need to be loaded, and probably how many people are using the website (I’m not sure of the last one, just a guess). 2. Efficiency. This website has very high efficiency. There is a searching box in front of you when you open it. Just go ahead and type in whatever you need to search for, either Chinese or English, and press enter. Then you’ll see the results from Chinese-English Dictionary, English-Chinese Dictionary, Macmillan Dictionary, and some example usages of the words you are looking for. There is also a “handwrite characters” tab for you to handwrite Chinese characters just in case the users don’t have Chinese input software in their computers. App downloading icons are easy to find on the up right corner. The navigation bars clearly identifies other functions the users could possibly need. It’s hard to make any mistake while using this website. 3. Learnability. Again, everything is very clearly laid out on this website. The users will know what to do with each link or button at once. Besides that, there is always a default word in grey letters in the search box once you open it. This function absolutely motivates you to learn something new. You can simply ignore it, however you cannot for many times because the default words are usually very simple/popular/or interesting words that make you interested in knowing how to say it in the other language. The Learning Chinese Character box on the lower right automatically plays the flash of how to write a character. The Chinese learners could learn it simply by glancing at the box. 4. Memorability. It’s easy to remember how to use the dictionaries. If you sign in, the website will keep the records of what you have searched before. It helps you memorize stuff! 5. User preference. I love using it except for sometimes the loading speed is low. The green color makes me feel comfortable. |
|
|
|
Post by jian12 on Jan 11, 2013 15:41:57 GMT -5
I couldn't help laughing when I was reading your post. I know that I should feel sorry for what you've experienced using this email service... The awkward design is just funny. The efficiency of the website is so poor that customers could easily make mistakes by accidentally clicking on one of the ads since they are everywhere and take so much space! The learnability to me is also poor because I may keep making mistakes until enough to learn which buttons exactly are the ones I need. At last, I have to say that the designs for the ads are very clear and effective... Thank you for sharing! My hall of shame link is actually my old e-mail service's webmail site: www.juno.com. This might be a bit of a weird choice, since you can only see the main page if you don’t have an account, but I have taken a screenshot just so you can get a better picture (but honestly, the homepage should be enough). |
|
|
|
Post by jian12 on Jan 11, 2013 16:31:50 GMT -5
Website: duckduckgo.comDuckDuckGo is in the "Hall of Fame" I guess. It's the best option for searching the internet and not being tracked by Google/Yahoo/Microsoft any of the other major corporations that employ extensive surveillance to violate your privacy online to sell you targeted ads. The site mimics Google's design with a very minimal appearance, hiding annoying options about the type of search in the drop-down menu. There are links explaining who DDG is and why they value user privacy down at the bottom, well out of the main visual field of the site, unlike Google's proclamation of their all-important business side under their search bar. I never used duckduckgo before. It is a great website. Thank you for recommending. I don't know about the no tracking part. But the efficiency, learnability, and memorability are all very high. The thing I like most about it is the "search suggestions" column on the right of the page you searched. You could learn the word you're searching by simply looking at the key words suggested. For example, when I search "caftan", the search suggestions are floral print dictionary items sleeves vintage clothing cotton So I know that caftan is a kind of clothes. When I searched "weibo", the first two key words are "china" and "microblogging platform" so you can tell what weibo is without opening any website and read in details. I did many searches on duckduckgo and compared the results with the ones I got on google. It is difficult to sum up the differences but it's interesting to see these differences. |
|
|
|
Post by jian12 on Jan 11, 2013 16:50:55 GMT -5
www.earthsave.org/index.htmlThis EarthSave website belongs in the Hall of Fame. I discovered it after doing a Google search for John Robbins. Not knowing anything about this nonprofit, my intent upon opening the main page of this website was to figure out what the purpose of this organization. I think this could be a common task of users. Other users, with knowledge of the organization, may have other primary tasks such as giving a donation or finding a way to get involved with EarthSave. 1. Speed. All of these tasks can be accomplished with speed using the blue toolbar at the top of the page. Before going to the toolbar and finding the succinct mission statement, I scrolled to the videos. I likely would not have scrolled to them if part of one of the video had not been partially visible without scrolling. Thus, I think the designer placed the first video well. The first video appealed to my emotions and gave me a favorable impression of EarthSave. If the designer had placed text in lieu of the video, I probably would not have read the text. If I did read it, I would not have read it carefully and I would not have had my heartstrings pulled. 2. Efficiency. I was able to view efficiently the video and read the Mission Statement from the drop down menu of the toolbar; I did not mistakenly click irrelevant links. 3. Learnability. Using this interface was easy for me to learn. Toolbars are common on websites. The dropdown menus of this toolbar compacted information leaving an uncluttered homepage. 4. Memorability. The interface has high memorability. I returned to the website for the purpose of this assignment months after discovering it and recalled how to pull up the Mission Statement. 5. User preference. I have a user preference for cool colors. I like the colors of the banner, especially against a white background. The effect is calming . . . a nice contrast to the (top) emotionally-charged video involving participants in the Meals for Health Program. Another plus to this website: the Search Box in the upper right hand corner. I also tested earthsave.org. The speed is very good. I played the one video for one minute. Then I paused it and started to play another one for a while and paused that one as well. I notice that once you pause the video, it stops loading. That is probably one of the reasons why the speed is fast. The efficiency, learnability, and memorability are also very good. The navigation bar is very clearly designed. You can easily find what you want. They are considerate to put a subscription form on the homepage. It looks so easy that even myself wanted to become a member. As for user preferences, I love the logo and the heading design. However, the boxes with the thick borders don't look very good. I think it will look better if they get rid of the borders and make the titles of each box more noticeable. |
|
|
|
Post by ewrenn on Jan 11, 2013 18:04:49 GMT -5
Website: duckduckgo.comDuckDuckGo is in the "Hall of Fame" I guess. It's the best option for searching the internet and not being tracked by Google/Yahoo/Microsoft any of the other major corporations that employ extensive surveillance to violate your privacy online to sell you targeted ads. The site mimics Google's design with a very minimal appearance, hiding annoying options about the type of search in the drop-down menu. There are links explaining who DDG is and why they value user privacy down at the bottom, well out of the main visual field of the site, unlike Google's proclamation of their all-important business side under their search bar. 1) Speed - minimal design means very fast loading 2) Efficiency - high. No extraneous anything on the main page. 3) Learnability - Only one button, overall page design mimics Google which makes it extremely simple to learn 4) Memorability - again, only one button, very easy to remember 5) User Preference - Anyone looking for a basic search without the clutter (or privacy violations) of Google would prefer DDG since it doesn't cloud the options with a bunch of different categories. People who have Google accounts and don't mind Google following their every move on the internet may prefer to have those options (or as I do sequestering Google into it's own browser to keep it from tracking anything but my Gmail activity). Using DDG is about balancing Google's proprietary services and accepting their intense monitoring versus being able to search without any tracking, while accepting the lower level of services as a price. I remember reading about duckduckgo a few months ago. The title is clever and the concept sounded great. I concur that it belongs in the Hall of Fame. The search bar is straight out of google. It scores high on all five usability factors. The "zero click" feature adds to speed and efficiency. However, I would prefer being able to access advanced features initially. It looks like the user has to perform the search first and then only after the search can the user access customized stuff. I was a little confused by the Goodies bar--seemed a little arbitrary what appeared. For instance, lyrics to "Brass Monkey" appeared when I selected the Music tab. The "Try Search On" feature is clever. I also tried using a few Google search features and they appeared to work too. So that's great that we don't have to relearn another set of search features (aside from the !a, !gi, etc. features). In sum though, the site is intuitive and doesn't require users to learn too many new things. |
|
|
|
Post by kwhite18 on Jan 11, 2013 18:09:07 GMT -5
I reviewed USA.gov's "Voting and Elections" site. www.usa.gov/Citizen/Topics/Voting.shtmlOverall, I think the Voting and Elections (V&E) site is highly usable. It's subject matter is obvious, and users looking for information on voting and elections will find it here and the interface definitely promotes additional information discovery. Speed: The home page of the V&E offers links in the middle of the page to direct user focus. Having evaluated this site previously for another class before the election, it's nice to see that they've updated the page to highlight what may be most popular with users- in this case it displays a link to information about President Obama and the inauguration. Other topical links include "Where to Vote", "Register to Vote", and "Learn About Elections and Voting". Efficiency: The links on the homepage are accompanied by a short one to two sentence explanation of where the link leads, making it very efficient for users to click the right link to take them to the right place to find the information they need. Once they click the link, the sections of information are cleanly broken down with headings to make further learning easier. Learnability: There are no advanced features on this particular website that make learnability an issue. Everything is link based and intuitive for users with basic computer/Internet skills. As I previously mentioned above, the layout of the text makes it simple and clear for users to find the information they're looking for. Memorability: Again, because of the simplicity of the website, I don't see memorability being an issue; however, as I stated before, the website has changed since the last time I viewed it, and the order of links and design of the home page is different. This could be a concern for some users if they return to the website knowing they once found some information in one place, only to find that everything has been shifted around. User Preference: I think it's most difficult to evaluate V&E in this area. It's hard to tell how everyday users feel about the site. I find it very navigable and straight to the point, but other users may not. The only customizable features are changing the text size and language (Spanish). I think the lack of graphics may be a downside to some users as the site is text-based. Two things I really liked about the site: You can sign up for email updates about the topic, and there's a contact box with phone, email, and chat options available. |
|
|
|
Post by ewrenn on Jan 11, 2013 18:18:18 GMT -5
This website should be shamed! www.mva.maryland.govI'm sure most of us have had some interaction with the Maryland Motor Vehicles Administration. Recently, I moved house and needed to update the address on my license. The good news: I could do this online. The bad news: it was not easy to find exactly where on the MVA website. First impressions: there are a lot of words and categories to pick from! It takes a long time to find the right general category (compare to the California DMV website ( dmv.ca.gov/portal/home/dmv.htm), where there are only five major sections at the top). The layout is too full and confusing to search through. The headings on the left are difficult to read because of the font/color choices. Assessed from the point of view of speed, one can see how it would take a while to find something. For example, when I clicked on "Driver Licenses/ID Cards" to change my address, I was presented with a dense bullet list of options which I had to read through. Not very speedy at all. The website is terribly inefficient as well. Links do not always adequately explain the resource to which they lead - when I was trying to complete the task of changing my license address, I made so many mistakes that I ended up just doing a Google search (and I still didn't directly get to the right page - I was again faced with dense text pages). Having been on the site a few times now, I can safely say I still don't really know how to find things. I haven't learned how things are structured and would still need to resort to a search. Since this is a website a lot of us might visit, but would only visit rarely, it needs to be very simple to learn since users do not spend a lot of time committing the website's complexities to memory. Furthermore, I do not see any option on the site for translating it into other languages, to have the site read out loud, or to increase the font size. The only positive thing I can say about this website is that it does not try to be too "clever" - for example by using pop-ups or unintelligible/unintuitive buttons. I agree that the MVA site belongs in the Hall of Shame. I work with international students on campus who regularly are entirely confused when applying for IDs, licenses, etc. The positive side is that the MVA is trying to empower users by providing a large amount of information that users can check before spending way too much time at the MVA. (For example, MD MVA provides the user with significantly more information online than the DC DMV, though their regulations are relatively similar.) The problem is how the information is presented. Links often don't work, information is duplicated on multiple pages, and there is way too much text on each page. It is overwhelming and, most important, leaves a negative impression on the user. Nothing is fast or easy, contrary to the claim that registration is fast, easy, and safe. In all seriousness, the links do not load quickly and the front page is way too busy to be efficient. Because the MVA has so much information to offer I would like to see the search platform featured more prominently. In sum: great effort, but poor execution. |
|
|
|
Post by kwhite18 on Jan 11, 2013 18:20:09 GMT -5
Ugh. The MVA website is the worst. I had to renew my license (an Ohio license) in September and chose to replace it with a Maryland one. Like you, I was instantly frustrated with the website, and completely agree with your assessment.
Upon revisiting the site, the first thing I notice is the "Information for Law Enforcement Agencies" headline in the middle of the page. I would think that that may be confusing for some people, especially since the boxes below look like they are subheadings, but are actually unrelated. The color transitions on the title bars make some of the subjects difficult to read as well. I also clicked on the header (where the MVA photo was displayed) thinking it would take me back to the homepage, but was redirected to the State of Maryland website- not where I wanted to go.
The only thing I can really say I appreciate it the in-texts links that direct you to another place on the page. You mentioned it was a very text-heavy, blocky site, and it is, but at least on the section I looked at I could click and be automatically scrolled down to the portion I wanted to view.
|
|
|
|
Post by kwhite18 on Jan 11, 2013 18:30:50 GMT -5
Having never visited the Medline website before, I thought this post would be a good one to comment on.
First impressions- I don't like it. I don't really have a good reason, so I'm guessing it's just user preference, but something about the aesthetics of the website is off to me. That being said, in terms of interface design and information access, I think it is well organized and agree with your assessment.
I like how they offer different access points. For example, in the Health Topics section you can find information by A-Z, Body Location/Systems, Disorders and Conditions, etc. It makes it really easy for the user to take the information they already have and turn it into something more. I also like the "Popular Searches" graphic and the medical dictionary search bar.
When evaluated by the five markers Medline is definitely an example of great usability. My pesky user preference is the only thing standing in the way!
|
|
|
|
Post by hillgren on Jan 11, 2013 19:42:41 GMT -5
Living in Baltimore, it's easy to find things to complain about. But our city website is not one of them! www.baltimorecity.gov1. Speed: Not the fastest to load, because there are some visual bells and whistles. However, these add to the overall professional look of the site, so it's difficult for me to find fault with them. 2. Efficiency: Excellent. There is a menu bar at the top with the most needed tasks that the site performs: payments, services, permits, etc. The menu bar also scrolls to show less requested tasks, and some interesting resources like the city charter. Not all of the sub-sites, however, are as easy to use. But I'm always confident that the main site will put me in the vicinity of what I'm looking for. In addition, the site also accomplishes the task of promoting Baltimore in general. Social media is easy to find and the featured news is always something positive. 3. Learnability: A very easy site to learn. While visually appealing, the interface is definitely usable for people less fluent with technology. For example, the search box is big, bold, includes the ubiquitous magnifying glass graphic, and also suggests popular searches as a prompt. 4. Memorability: Great! It doesn't really require much memorability, because the visual cues are so obvious. Again, I can't vouch for the sub-sites. Trying to get a new residential parking permit, for example, will lead you down the rabbit hole of tiny text and way too much wording. 5. User Preference: I'm not sure this factor is entirely applicable. If you want to pay a parking ticket, you don't have a choice. You MUST use this website. Maybe you think your hometown's site is better or more efficient, but it's kind of a moot point if you don't want to get booted by the City of Baltimore. |
|
|
|
Post by hillgren on Jan 11, 2013 20:23:38 GMT -5
I agree that this website is highly usable! I especially like the brief descriptions that accompany the links. A lot of folks in the States are still on dial-up or, in the case of my rural friends, using satellite internet which is sometimes even slower than dial-up. It's nice to know what's going to be at the other end of the link without having to spend five minutes trying to open the page. In that sense, I approve of the lack of graphics. For Americans without access to the internet in their homes or who have limited time to use it, like at a computer terminal in a public library, I appreciate that speed is of the essence in displaying this information. It's a stark contrast to the Baltimore city site, which I reviewed, which has a little more panache but is definitely slower to load. I reviewed USA.gov's "Voting and Elections" site. www.usa.gov/Citizen/Topics/Voting.shtmlOverall, I think the Voting and Elections (V&E) site is highly usable. It's subject matter is obvious, and users looking for information on voting and elections will find it here and the interface definitely promotes additional information discovery. Speed: The home page of the V&E offers links in the middle of the page to direct user focus. Having evaluated this site previously for another class before the election, it's nice to see that they've updated the page to highlight what may be most popular with users- in this case it displays a link to information about President Obama and the inauguration. Other topical links include "Where to Vote", "Register to Vote", and "Learn About Elections and Voting". Efficiency: The links on the homepage are accompanied by a short one to two sentence explanation of where the link leads, making it very efficient for users to click the right link to take them to the right place to find the information they need. Once they click the link, the sections of information are cleanly broken down with headings to make further learning easier. Learnability: There are no advanced features on this particular website that make learnability an issue. Everything is link based and intuitive for users with basic computer/Internet skills. As I previously mentioned above, the layout of the text makes it simple and clear for users to find the information they're looking for. Memorability: Again, because of the simplicity of the website, I don't see memorability being an issue; however, as I stated before, the website has changed since the last time I viewed it, and the order of links and design of the home page is different. This could be a concern for some users if they return to the website knowing they once found some information in one place, only to find that everything has been shifted around. User Preference: I think it's most difficult to evaluate V&E in this area. It's hard to tell how everyday users feel about the site. I find it very navigable and straight to the point, but other users may not. The only customizable features are changing the text size and language (Spanish). I think the lack of graphics may be a downside to some users as the site is text-based. Two things I really liked about the site: You can sign up for email updates about the topic, and there's a contact box with phone, email, and chat options available. |
|
|
|
Post by hillgren on Jan 11, 2013 20:30:23 GMT -5
This website definitely took a little longer to load than I expected. You're very right about the speed. I think the hand-drawn character feature is amazing! I remember when PC's first took off worldwide and many of the problems that were reported in countries that don't use the western alphabet. If I remember correctly, China had an especially difficult time because of the intricacies of the characters and meanings. Microsoft Word in China was infamous for unfortunate word substitutions. I also think the feature that remembers the words you have looked up is brilliant. I wish it had been around on the sites that I was using when I was in college! The tagline "more than a dictionary" is very apt. This is more of a comprehensive learning tool. I'm so glad you shared it! I used to be a Chinese language and culture teacher in a public school. I had to look up for usages of both of Chinese and English very often. I found this website www.nciku.com/ SUPER useful as an online Chinese-English dictionary. It’s absolutely a Hall of Fame although it has some defects. 1. Speed. I have to say that speed is the only thing that I’m not satisfied with. It sometimes takes seconds to load everything on the page. It depends on what you’re searching, how much need to be loaded, and probably how many people are using the website (I’m not sure of the last one, just a guess). 2. Efficiency. This website has very high efficiency. There is a searching box in front of you when you open it. Just go ahead and type in whatever you need to search for, either Chinese or English, and press enter. Then you’ll see the results from Chinese-English Dictionary, English-Chinese Dictionary, Macmillan Dictionary, and some example usages of the words you are looking for. There is also a “handwrite characters” tab for you to handwrite Chinese characters just in case the users don’t have Chinese input software in their computers. App downloading icons are easy to find on the up right corner. The navigation bars clearly identifies other functions the users could possibly need. It’s hard to make any mistake while using this website. 3. Learnability. Again, everything is very clearly laid out on this website. The users will know what to do with each link or button at once. Besides that, there is always a default word in grey letters in the search box once you open it. This function absolutely motivates you to learn something new. You can simply ignore it, however you cannot for many times because the default words are usually very simple/popular/or interesting words that make you interested in knowing how to say it in the other language. The Learning Chinese Character box on the lower right automatically plays the flash of how to write a character. The Chinese learners could learn it simply by glancing at the box. 4. Memorability. It’s easy to remember how to use the dictionaries. If you sign in, the website will keep the records of what you have searched before. It helps you memorize stuff! 5. User preference. I love using it except for sometimes the loading speed is low. The green color makes me feel comfortable. |
|
|
|
Post by mgarnett on Jan 11, 2013 20:38:19 GMT -5
I nominate www.bookfinder.com for the Hall of Fame. I don't think this website has changed significantly since I began using it a over a decade ago. It does look a bit dated, and why on earth did they choose those odd shades of periwinkle? Aesthetics aside, it works beautifully. That very dated design means that, with no extraneous graphics, logos, or ads, it always loads quickly - I've even used it successfully from a very slow dial-up connection. There are, technically, multiple search boxes, but then you're looking for a book with multiple characteristics, and the boxes are clearly labeled. The site defaults to the simplest set of search characteristics; a single click on 'Show more options' brings up searches by ISBN, edition, etc., again with clearly labeled search bars. Because it is simple and obvious, it takes no time to learn to use the site - you type in the information where it tells you to, and click on the links that come up. Having used it once, there is no problem remembering how to navigate it again. If you do need help, there are straightforward instructions at the 'Help' link. There are a few minor hiccups: for instance, the drop-down box for languages. If you forget to change the set language when searching for a foreign-language books, you may not get any hits. And if you want a bilingual book, or a language not on the list, you have to know to click the 'classic view' option - which, I notice, is now also labeled 'all languages'. In essence, this site demonstrates why the newest, best, and flashiest is not always the way to go: 'boring' design can be excellent for speed and clarity. |
|
