Entry 9
When it
comes to help systems online, I feel fairly strongly about them. It is my firm
belief that no matter how hard you may study excel, or access, or any program
in general, youre bound to come across something that you just can seem to
figure out how to do. However, I think there are better ways of help systems. I
think that systems should start using links through youtube, Lynda, and other
online tutorials that can actually explain things via video rather than just
tell you how to do it through text.(especially Microsoft programs like
publisher) It would really help the CRM department. I would suggest that they
hire people to be available 24 hours a day but I think using youtube and Lynda would
be much more cost efficient, and way less time consuming. But ultimately, no
one is perfet and weve all had trouble with something at some point with a
program and have had to reference the internet or had to have received help. No
matter how obvious or good a design is, there always going to be people that
will need help. No design, and no human is perfect.
I believe when it comes to
developing personas in terms of action figures and super heros, you really need
to look into the current kid generation 5-8, 7-12, and you also need to look at
the older adult fanatics such as the 33-45 year olds. I think you can attract
the most consumer response through these three age ranges and will receive the
best results from development in reference to these personas.
Entry 8
I thought I knew it all when it came to
playing the whole game of HCI. I had taken multiple web design classes
throughout highschool and really thought I knew a lot. This class in general as
taught me so much more about the design game. It’s not joke that forsure.
However I really think that the biggest advancement I can personally make from
what ive been taught is 1. Team protocols, and 2. Receiving feedback. I never
would have thought that the team protocols would have worked but they really
did for all the teams I was on. Additionally, I never really knew how to take criticism
or feedback and the idea of writing down what others have to say, looking it
over, reassessing your design, and then getting back to the critic is an
incredible idea and I think it will help me a lot in future design work.
Entry 6
The users mental model would most definitely have to adapt to
the previous layout. However all we would really be changing would be the
ability to search for other movies on the same app, rather than having to go
into another window. Also the user would quickly be able to identify how to
pull up comments to the side of the video as well as searching for other videos
and related videos while the video was still playing. Finally the user would be
able to learn to start dragging and adding videos to the que so they don’t have
to have multiple windows open. I think the layout to the side will be very easy
for the users to comprehend. Additionally I don’t really think the mental model
and implementation model contrast all that much. I think I would be a fairly
easy task to put a menu bar (with related videos, comments, and search icon) at
the top and the relating information to the selected tab under the tabs, or
mini menu bar. The implementation model really shouldn’t be much of a struggle
at all!
Entry 5
For this I used the 60 second test. I looked at what all we were
adjusting on our application, or youtube in general. After writing down for 60
seconds I found out what I needed to trim of and what was essential. As was
stated it was definitely difficult to let go of some of the “Nice to Have”
features. However I didn’t want to get rid of all of my new additions to the
design. So what I came down with was that it was essential to have the search
bar, the comments, and extremely crucial to be able to search for other videos
while the current videos were playing( everyone loves to do this, at least the
people in college and highschool while trying to find the next song to play).
However in my nice to have column I found myself looking at the extras like the
icons which could be shared to sources like youtube facebook, etc. That was
just clulttery and I didn’t find it necessary to be there. If you want to
share, copy and paste, and the social network will pull up a thumbnail of the
link. Was it nice to have? Sure! Was it necessary to have in comparison to
everything else? No. So that’s how I decided what to keep and what to get rid
of.
Entry 4
It is in my very firm belief that the user is not always
right whatsoever. While we are taught to value the opinion of the user, it is
not true that the user is always right . There are a plethora of situations in
which the user could be wrong. However there are also a numerous amount of
situations which the user could be right as well. It all about balancing out
when it would benefit, or when it would be a neusance to listen to the user!
Secondly, the designer should never provide a new feature if only one person
asks and if a lot more than one ask, you should still see where the requests
fits in your persona/ target audience. When a designer is asking oneself
whether or not to provide a feature I believe they should be looking at the
popular personas in relation to the requested or preferred new design feature.
If this feature fits the persona your designing for, then go for it, but if it
doesn’t fit within the persona, or if it doesn’t fit the target audience, then
stray away. In reference to user-centered focus, as explored by Hoekman, I
think there is a much larger user centered focus than he would admit. While
this is my opinion you all may disagree. However the main point I have which
really underlines how user centered the design process is, is the fact that we
are taught specifically to not think about ourselves, but the user and
consumers who will be purchasing our goods. We must not let our own opinions or
feelings affect our design but rather get inside the head of the target
audience (users) in order to properly design.
Situation centric in terms of Hoekman ad in a scope of
project 2 can be seen in a variety of ways. It was in Hoekmans opinion that
rather than design for groups of users, to design for situations of users
because the persona would put too minimal of a scope if you will. What we could
have done for our project 2 instead is we could have is based our project based
off how people think when they sit down to use a machine. We could have based
it off a situation or scenario where someone wanted to sit down and just get
started and gone from there. Typically most individuals enjoy just starting
instead of tampering with all the nonsense buttons unless theyre on a strict
schedule. From there we could have performed some use cases based of the
prototype, or sketches created!
No comments:
Post a Comment