Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > macnn's new dress; on your machine by 1pm (EST) today!

macnn's new dress; on your machine by 1pm (EST) today! (Page 4)
Thread Tools
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2005, 09:13 AM
 
Did you test before you wrote, Nick? The new design isn't liquid, so increasing the font size doesn't increase the size of the containing elements, so Bad Things™ happen, like text being drawn on top of other text, absurdly short line lengths, etc.

tooki
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Sar Chasm
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2005, 09:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by Nick
S
Font sizes are for people who have trouble with their vision.
But one should hope that a page doesn't totally blow up on people who do have "trouble with their vision," like us old farts. 'command+' more than twice causes stuff to go everywhere, mainly in the header. Take a look.

When a true genius appears in the world you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. -- Jonathan Swift.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2005, 09:57 AM
 
Originally Posted by Nick
That's what I wanted, too. But eff is a pretty stubborn guy.

eff is a GUY
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2005, 10:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by effgee
Add to that the fact that some of the ads are being served inside of truly perverse iframe constructs, and you're ready for a Vicodin or two.
Pffft. like you'd need an excuse!
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2005, 10:19 AM
 
I haven't bothered to read the rest of this thread. So apologies if this has been said before:

None of the images save the ads actually load for me.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Detroit
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2005, 10:36 AM
 
Is there going to be a service where I can pay to remove ALL ads?
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2000
Location: studio or in the backyard
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2005, 10:52 AM
 
As I can see there have already been a lot of suggestions that seem valid enough for slight improvement, I'm only going to make one. But overall, I LOVE the new look.

We need breadcrumbs along with the drop down menus.

I hate that the portal page doesn't tell you you're on the portal page, or the headline page doesn't say you're on the headline page. There's nothing highlighted, no context for the page you're on right now, just white space. Breadcrumbs are a navigation design "must" - you can't just rely on the URL address. The forums have breadcrumbs, and the Macnn pages need them even more-so.

Even if you just make visible the drop down menu for the page you're on, and allow the current page's link to be "active", you'll solve that issue.

Screen grab of easiest breadcrumb visibility:




But ideally, you need something like "Portal > News Headline View"

My 2 cents.
When you were young and your heart was an open book, you used to say "live and let live."
But if this ever changing world, in which we live in, makes you give in and cry, say "live and let die."
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Some dust-bowl of a planet
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2005, 11:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by Nick
Some people prefer a portal and some prefer a weblog. How could you ever do both without having a view option?

Font sizes are for people who have trouble with their vision.
Where was the portal in the old site? If it was there I never noticed it, but was there a clamor for the portal format?

I'm not sure I understand the purpose of hard-coded font size options, when one can do that themselves with the browser, provided the site accomodates it properly (which the redesign doesn't very successfully; ie it should be liquid enough to widen to based on em sizes)


I agree with the above post as well; you never know where you are in the site, you need to highlight the current view somehow, either through breadcrumbs or selected tab.

And why is the portal item back?? It was removed earlier this morning, for the better. And now there is a DUPLICATE "news articles". The navigation of the new site is totally nuts.
     
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2005, 12:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy
I haven't bothered to read the rest of this thread. So apologies if this has been said before:

None of the images save the ads actually load for me.
I've addressed this in at least two posts in this thread and one other. While the new design relies on images more than the old one (thus making image failure more visible), it's in no way the designer's fault that the images are hosted on an unreliable server that starts spitting out "400" errors after a while. I have repeatedly, for years, urged MacNN management to get rid of that wonky server.

tooki
     
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2005, 12:16 PM
 
Has anyone else noticed that links within news articles (not in the portal view, but the "blog" or single-article views) are essentially invisible? They are dark blue and not underlined. At home, on my antialiased Safari, they're hard to see. At school, on their un-antialiased Windows machines, the blue is plain and simply undetectable.

I think that a simple check using grayscale mode would show that inline links are essentially invisible.

tooki
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2005, 12:44 PM
 
Again .... it would be nice if the Font/Layout Options actually worked consistently. Whenever I select one it never takes immediately. I have to navigate away from the site and then return for the effect to take. And then that doesn't even work all the time. I was able to set the Font size to "Regular" for the MacNN site but this approach is simply not working for the iPodNN site. No matter how many times I tell it to use the "Regular" font size it insists on retaining the "Small" setting. I mentioned a similar problem with the layout settings earlier in the thread.

OAW
     
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Land of the Easily Amused
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2005, 01:00 PM
 
to regain the mainpage images, do the following:
delete the bbthread_lastview cookie
clear your cache
reload page
do a little jig
profit!
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Germany, 51°51´51" N, 9°05´41" E
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2005, 02:22 PM
 
At the moment it´s pretty much f*cked up. Looks like this:

[removed HUGE inline image --tooki]
( Last edited by tooki; Dec 9, 2005 at 03:08 PM. )


Macintosh Quadra 950, Centris 610, Powermac 6100, iBook dual USB, Powerbook 667 DVI, Powerbook 867 DVI, MacBook Pro early 2011
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2005, 02:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by euphras
At the moment it´s pretty much f*cked up. Looks like this:

snip
efficient use of Grab...
     
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2005, 03:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by euphras
At the moment it´s pretty much f*cked up. Looks like this:
This problem (which is a server malfunction that's been around for years) has been addressed already. In the post above yours is the solution.

tooki
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2005, 03:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by Demonhood
to regain the mainpage images, do the following:
delete the bbthread_lastview cookie
clear your cache
reload page
do a little jig
profit!
That worked. Thanks DH.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 13, 2005, 07:20 PM
 
Just out of curiosity, did you guys conduct usability testing on the site prior to making it live? If not, next time you definitely need to. A site this large and important needs this attention - it's as simple as that. There are entire courses and studies of HCI, but most if not all agree that usability testing is completely vital to producing usual products. Don't underestimate the importance of this.


The design looks very attractive, the code looks sharp, but there are some usability issues for me:


1) I don't want to have to carefully target the section headers/buttons. I don't want to have to click, move the mouse down, and to the left or right like I currently have to. Why not use standard drop-down menus? Not only is this slower, but it's also confusing, as it isn't completely clear that the subsections are associated with the main section header.

2) Have you tested the site on a screen reader? Are these menus accessible to people with disabilities?

3) You can solve the problem of having to read text sideways by providing some sort of mouseover. I see your hrefs have title tags, but the middle two say "coming soon". This is probably something that you forgot to update before you went live? (This is also why usability testing is helpful)
     
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 13, 2005, 07:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c
1) I don't want to have to carefully target the section headers/buttons. I don't want to have to click, move the mouse down, and to the left or right like I currently have to. Why not use standard drop-down menus?
Has already been explained: because Safari refuses to play nice and let the the vertical menus overlap the ad area—and if an ad is specified in an iframe (not something MacNN has control over), hardly any browsers will.

I see your hrefs have title tags, but the middle two say "coming soon". This is probably something that you forgot to update before you went live? (This is also why usability testing is helpful)
Also been addressed and answered already: the 'coming soon' links are not supposed to have hover states yet. Whether they'll still have a 'coming soon' caption, I don't know, but they're not actual links.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 13, 2005, 08:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by Oisín
Has already been explained: because Safari refuses to play nice and let the the vertical menus overlap the ad area—and if an ad is specified in an iframe (not something MacNN has control over), hardly any browsers will.
Ahhh... so the ads are in iframes now? I have this same limitation with my site.

If they aren't in iframes, what is the problem?
     
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 13, 2005, 09:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c
Ahhh... so the ads are in iframes now?
Not by default, but some of them come with iframe codes included in the ad code, the bastards.

If they aren't in iframes, what is the problem?
Well, that's just it—you can't be sure none of them will be in iframes. Even when they're not, though... read this, this is what effgee wrote about Safari refusing to place a div on top of a Flash movie (which is what the ads are, very often):

Trust me (and I'm not trying to be a smart-ass about this) - the issue I'm referring to has nothing to do with different versions of the Flash plugin or the version of Flash used to create a movie. I researched that bastard of a problem for almost 2 weeks. There's a certain number of workarounds for this problem (in short: Flash creating its own "OS-level window", not a floating layer inside the browser window to display swfs) that work in virtually every browser. In my trials, the only one that refused to accept them was Safari. In this particular case, Safari's behavior is of course the "proper" one by not accepting workarounds/cheats but the headaches this caused us were considerable.

Add to that the fact that some of the ads are being served inside of truly perverse iframe constructs, and you're ready for a Vicodin or two.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 13, 2005, 09:24 PM
 
I can definitely vouch for these sorts of problem existing. Like I said, I've run into similar problems with my site.


Forgive me, I didn't know this was a technical shortcoming. I suppose the workaround is decent given the limitations here.
     
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 13, 2005, 09:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c
0) Just out of curiosity, did you guys conduct usability testing on the site prior to making it live? If not, next time you definitely need to. A site this large and important needs this attention - it's as simple as that. There are entire courses and studies of HCI, but most if not all agree that usability testing is completely vital to producing usual products. Don't underestimate the importance of this.


The design looks very attractive, the code looks sharp, but there are some usability issues for me:


1) I don't want to have to carefully target the section headers/buttons. I don't want to have to click, move the mouse down, and to the left or right like I currently have to. Why not use standard drop-down menus? Not only is this slower, but it's also confusing, as it isn't completely clear that the subsections are associated with the main section header.

2) Have you tested the site on a screen reader? Are these menus accessible to people with disabilities?

3) You can solve the problem of having to read text sideways by providing some sort of mouseover. I see your hrefs have title tags, but the middle two say "coming soon". This is probably something that you forgot to update before you went live? (This is also why usability testing is helpful)
0) As far as I know, no usability testing of any kind was done. The closest was the preview of mockups early on, which many people here responded to. If it had been under my control, a user-centered iterative design methodology would have been used.

1) Well, regular menus really aren't ideal for navigation. Properly-done menus in DHTML and the like are often better.

2) Unknown, so I assume no.

3) Those links are marked as "coming soon" because those sites aren't up now. Clicking those links even shows a little dialog telling you that!

tooki
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 13, 2005, 09:52 PM
 
Just for those who are interested... Google some numbers on how many people have some sort of physical impairment. You'd be surprised with how large this population is. It is completely stupid and asinine to ignore this population, since it really isn't impossibly difficult to design a site that considers the needs of the disabled.

I could share what little I know, but I'll wait to hear if anybody is interested in talking about this first so that I don't bore!
     
effgee  (op)
Caffeinated Theme Master
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: hell (says dakar)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 12:05 AM
 
Originally Posted by various people
accessibility, usability, etc. ...
Ok guys, let's not get ahead of ourselves with the "ivory tower" talk here.

As much as some of you would like macnn.com to be a "user-centered" site, it is not and (most likely) never will be. At least not in the "pure" sense of "user-centered design". (If you'd like to get into a philosophical discussion over the pros and cons of this truly retarded word construct, feel free to PM or email me)

Outside of "the tower", interactive projects involve more than a single aspect. Try "business", "brand", "user" and "technology", weigh those against each other with the emphasis appropriate for your particular project and we'll talk.

Yes, I do know the number of disabled users out there. But to state matter-of-factly that a site should (have) be(en) made universally accessible (and/or section 508 compliant, whatever you want to call it) without having even a shred of background information about the project itself is preposterous (see end of my post).

Some of you seem to be quite quick in forgetting the little detail about macnn being a business that needs to generate revenue in order to provide you with this wonderous playground we find ourselves on at the moment. Assume for just a second that you are a business owner, faced with the decision of whether or not to add a certain feature to your site/store/whatever: You sit down, do the math and then realize that:
  • you would have to invest $2 in order to generate$0.75 of revenue, and/or ...
  • you would have to close your business for a lot longer than you can afford, and/or ...
  • you would have to completely redo entire departments of your business, etc., etc. ...
What would you decide? (Please note that the aforementioned numbers are for example's sake only - we're not going to be discussing macnn business matters in here.)

Yes, usability- and user testing are fabulous tools. User scenarios, -personas, paper prototyping, card sorting, structured interviews, actual testing of functional protoypes using audio and video, etc., etc. are all splendid and extremely helpful - for 99% of all interactive projects. Believe or not, I happen to be a propnent of usability-/user testing. I also happen to have concepted, conducted and/or analyzed each and every one of the steps above over the course of various projects before.

But most importantly, not one of the people (and I mean: not a single one) who posted gems like:
  • "How could you launch this site without doing A, B and C?"
  • "Creating a site with/without X, Y and Z is idiotic"
  • "Feature Z of your site sucks because a) I say so and b) reason D, E and F"
have even an iota of relevant information about either the busness/brand/user/technology benchmarks for this project or even the most miniscule shred of information about the staffing/scheduling/budgetary confines inside of which this project was developed.

And to make this 189%-crystal-clear: By all means - do feel as free as the proverbial bird in the sky to criticize, dislike or even curse to your heart's content. As far as I am concerned, it is your birth-right right to do so.

I only suggest that people spend a second or two pondering the wisdom of "must-have-done-before-launch" suggestions. If only because throwing around dictums without possession of the proper background knowledge has the potential of making posts look, uhm ... let's leave it at "less competent"

( Last edited by effgee; Dec 14, 2005 at 12:15 AM. )
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 12:12 AM
 
What possible business confines or scenarios prevented you from utilizing the vast and FREE user testing you had available through these forums, and taking advantage of it? Most companies would kill to have access to the diverse range of users to test with that MacNN has.

What business circumstances warranting making usability a non-issue?
     
effgee  (op)
Caffeinated Theme Master
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: hell (says dakar)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 12:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c
What possible business confines or scenarios prevented you from utilizing the vast and FREE user testing you had available through these forums, and taking advantage of it? Most companies would kill to have access to the diverse range of users to test with that MacNN has.


Are you sure you are talking about "user" testing? You either seem to be talking about "design by committee" or I am not following what your definition of a meaningful user test would be. Feel free to share how you would have organized a user test among the forum members that would have provided substantial and usable results - you peeked my curiosity there.

Originally Posted by besson3c
What business circumstances warranting making usability a non-issue?
Funny, I don't remember having said anything of the kind.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 12:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by effgee

Are you sure you are talking about "user" testing? You either seem to be talking about "design by committee" or I am not following what your definition of a meaningful user test would be. Feel free to share how you would have organized a user test among the forum members that would have provided substantial and usable results - you peeked my curiosity there.

Have you ever taken any courses or done any reading in HCI? No offense, but it sounds like this is uncharted territory for you.


There are several ways these sessions could have been conducted. In person testing would be ideal, but short of that I'm sure a member could have volunteered to fire up Snapx Pro and take a video of them negotiating the site.

Things that could have been tested, just off the top of my head:

1) How can the user find a particular piece of content?

2) Can the user project what will happen when something is clicked upon?

3) What is the user experience like for the user?


Some of this could have simply been conducted with some sort of survey. Did you do this? Did you make use of the information that was provided?

I mean this in the nicest possible way, but it sounds like you are blowing all of this off with B.S. excuses and just paying HCI some lip service. I cannot see what makes MacNN unique enough that this sort of testing would be inappropriate and/or counterproductive? There is a lot of content provided on MacNN, and the design needs room to grow. Right now, in addition to the things I pointed out, there are several aspects of the new design I find confusing.

Am I just misunderstanding you?

Again.... look and aesthetics: awesome... technology/coding: awesome. I don't mean to sound like a jerk.

BTW, if anybody would like to user test my site, I'd be more than willing to hear what you think. My site URL is in my sig.
     
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 01:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by effgee


Are you sure you are talking about "user" testing? You either seem to be talking about "design by committee" or I am not following what your definition of a meaningful user test would be. Feel free to share how you would have organized a user test among the forum members that would have provided substantial and usable results - you peeked my curiosity there.
I am speechless. Have you never even heard of usability testing? It's absolute fact that expert opinion ("heuristic evaluation") can catch some problems, but will not find them all. Usability testing with real users (there are many ways to do this, such as observation) is essential, without exceptions. This doesn't make it "design by committee". But it does let you easily find key flaws.

Branding is irrelevant if the site has usability flaws that either prevent users from achieving their goals, or annoy them. Either one of those things will drive them away, to a competitor. That's certainly bad for the "brand".

tooki
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 01:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by Oisín
Has already been explained: because Safari refuses to play nice and let the the vertical menus overlap the ad area.
Then hide the add before showing the drop-down menu.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 02:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL
Then hide the add before showing the drop-down menu.

If the ad is inside a frame, you can't do this dynamically.

I guess the only way around this would be to come up with a new design.

Why not move the section buttons above the top MacNN banner? This would be a way around this problem.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 02:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c
If the ad is inside a frame, you can't do this dynamically.
There are no frames on the MacNN site. Afaik you should be able to hide the add-div whenever you show the menu (this might require JavaScript).
     
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: california
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 02:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL
There are no frames on the MacNN site. Afaik you should be able to hide the add-div whenever you show the menu (this might require JavaScript).
Some ads are in iframes. I think the Google text ads are an example of this.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 04:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by Tesseract
Some ads are in iframes.
You can hide iFrames within a div with JavaScript.
     
effgee  (op)
Caffeinated Theme Master
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: hell (says dakar)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 12:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c
Have you ever taken any courses or done any reading in HCI? ...
Originally Posted by tooki
... Have you never even heard of usability testing? ...
No, I haven't - I made the whole thing up, of course.

I am not entirely certain what kind of response either of you are attempting to elicit, but I am happy to report that in case you were looking for a "left-right-left motion of the head in combination with a noticeable upward movement of both corners of the mouth", you may pat yourself on the shoulder now. User goal 1 - "check".

     
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 12:41 PM
 
Care to say that in an understandable fashion?

Anyway, the real question is "What usability methodology was used?" So far, we've had no indication that any methodology was used other than "what the designer figured was right".

tooki
     
effgee  (op)
Caffeinated Theme Master
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: hell (says dakar)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 01:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by tooki
Care to say that in an understandable fashion? ...
No, not really.

     
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 01:16 PM
 
Instead of clamming up when pressured, why don't you actually respond to people's concerns, explain the reasons behind specific decisions, etc? People might be less critical if they understood the rationale behind your decisions.

And again: what was the usability methodology used behind the redesign?

tooki
     
effgee  (op)
Caffeinated Theme Master
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: hell (says dakar)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 02:10 PM
 
I'm getting the strangest sensation of déjà vu here ... weird.
     
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 02:16 PM
 
I think the readers that took the time to post concerns deserve to have them addressed.

tooki
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 02:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by effgee
Ok guys, let's not get ahead of ourselves with the "ivory tower" talk here.

As much as some of you would like macnn.com to be a "user-centered" site, it is not and (most likely) never will be. At least not in the "pure" sense of "user-centered design". (If you'd like to get into a philosophical discussion over the pros and cons of this truly retarded word construct, feel free to PM or email me)

Outside of "the tower", interactive projects involve more than a single aspect. Try "business", "brand", "user" and "technology", weigh those against each other with the emphasis appropriate for your particular project and we'll talk.

Yes, I do know the number of disabled users out there. But to state matter-of-factly that a site should (have) be(en) made universally accessible (and/or section 508 compliant, whatever you want to call it) without having even a shred of background information about the project itself is preposterous (see end of my post).

Some of you seem to be quite quick in forgetting the little detail about macnn being a business that needs to generate revenue in order to provide you with this wonderous playground we find ourselves on at the moment. Assume for just a second that you are a business owner, faced with the decision of whether or not to add a certain feature to your site/store/whatever: You sit down, do the math and then realize that:
  • you would have to invest $2 in order to generate$0.75 of revenue, and/or ...
  • you would have to close your business for a lot longer than you can afford, and/or ...
  • you would have to completely redo entire departments of your business, etc., etc. ...
What would you decide? (Please note that the aforementioned numbers are for example's sake only - we're not going to be discussing macnn business matters in here.)

Yes, usability- and user testing are fabulous tools. User scenarios, -personas, paper prototyping, card sorting, structured interviews, actual testing of functional protoypes using audio and video, etc., etc. are all splendid and extremely helpful - for 99% of all interactive projects. Believe or not, I happen to be a propnent of usability-/user testing. I also happen to have concepted, conducted and/or analyzed each and every one of the steps above over the course of various projects before.

But most importantly, not one of the people (and I mean: not a single one) who posted gems like:
  • "How could you launch this site without doing A, B and C?"
  • "Creating a site with/without X, Y and Z is idiotic"
  • "Feature Z of your site sucks because a) I say so and b) reason D, E and F"
have even an iota of relevant information about either the busness/brand/user/technology benchmarks for this project or even the most miniscule shred of information about the staffing/scheduling/budgetary confines inside of which this project was developed.

And to make this 189%-crystal-clear: By all means - do feel as free as the proverbial bird in the sky to criticize, dislike or even curse to your heart's content. As far as I am concerned, it is your birth-right right to do so.

I only suggest that people spend a second or two pondering the wisdom of "must-have-done-before-launch" suggestions. If only because throwing around dictums without possession of the proper background knowledge has the potential of making posts look, uhm ... let's leave it at "less competent"

businesses need clients to make money. We are the clients. Our happiness is fundamental for the success of the business. I visit MacNN about 1 tenth as I used to. To put it in a different context, take a clothing store, its been doing well for years, then it decides only to cater to woman's cloth. Its just alienated all its males customers. Will it do well
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 02:19 PM
 
I think effgee responded with excellent professional arrogance and deserves a thumbs up for it.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 02:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by effgee


Are you sure you are talking about "user" testing? You either seem to be talking about "design by committee" or I am not following what your definition of a meaningful user test would be. Feel free to share how you would have organized a user test among the forum members that would have provided substantial and usable results - you peeked my curiosity there.

Funny, I don't remember having said anything of the kind.
Make a sign up page, announce it on the forums and let users sign up with there forum user names. Screen out cash and any other dinks and let them view a working demo model. Include a feed back form and read the issues. Group together all the similar ones to get a idea what are the biggest concerns so you have a priority of which ones need to be addressed first
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 02:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL
I think effgee responded with excellent professional arrogance and deserves a thumbs up for it.
Should that be a ban-able offense
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Some dust-bowl of a planet
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 02:36 PM
 
I think effgee's long post can be distilled thus:

"We designed the site to maximize ad revenue and didn't do usability testing because users are too dumb to understand how Big Business works, so any suggestions would be irrelevant."
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 02:45 PM
 
Don't worry effgee, I'm behind you .

I don't really see the problems. The site looks great and works good enough sure it may have a few technical problems and minor issues. But it isn't "unusable" as some seem to be claiming. And I'm pretty sure you weren't paid a million dollars to do it either.

iMac 20" C2D 2.16 | Acer Aspire One | Flickr
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cooperstown '09
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 03:15 PM
 
Wow, it's getting deep in here and I forgot my boots.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: LV-426
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 04:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by tooki
I think the readers that took the time to post concerns deserve to have them addressed.

tooki
Really, that is interesting. I have posted concerns to you and/or sent you PMs on my concerns, but you rarely respond to them. Usually stating that you don't have the time or inclination to respond because you're doing a volunteer job, when pressed for answers.



cheers

W-Y

“Building Better Worlds”
     
effgee  (op)
Caffeinated Theme Master
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: hell (says dakar)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 05:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Silky Voice of The Gorn
I think effgee's long post can be distilled thus: "We designed the site to maximize ad revenue and didn't do usability testing because users are too dumb to understand how Big Business works, so any suggestions would be irrelevant."
Well, aren't you the only one who saw right through me?

Here, I'll spell it out for you ... in order for us to have an even remotely meaningful discussion on topics like "design elements", "usability", "accessibility", etc., I would have to provide you with a lot of background information on this project - a whole lot.

Large portions of this "background information" are of a nature that I either consider to be confidential (e.g. "who decided that A, B or C will/will not be done"), and/or simply none of your business (e.g., "the overall budget of this project"). I have answered questions where I was able to, and have not done so wherever I would have had to give any such information in order for my answers to make sense.

I am having a hard time believing that the four of you (besson3c, tooki, TETENAL and you) walk around in whatever capacity it is you earn a living in, divulging internal information about your employer/clients to anyone who happens to ask. If that works for you, then that is your prerogative and perfectly fine by me - just don't expect everyone else to conduct themselves in a certain manner simply because you think it is the right thing to do.

Alas, this is my final "contribution" to this particular bitch-fest, so feel free to provide the folks here with any additional irrefutable conclusions of yours whenever they happen to pop in your head.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Some dust-bowl of a planet
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 05:34 PM
 
Nice strawman there, effgee. I am literally shocked at your level of arrogance. This community deserves better.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2005, 05:52 PM
 
I'm not seeing any major "usability" issues on the new site either. Someone made the suggestion that we need "bread crumbs" to know our place on the site and that is a good idea. Perhaps when the secondary menu is displayed the current page could be underlined or highlighted or something along that line. As I've mentioned before, it would be nice if the Font/Layout settings would take effect immediately and not after you navigate away from the site and then return. But this just seems like a bug and not a design flaw. The purpose of the default Layout settings is not exactly intuitive but once you realize it only affects how the page is displayed when you click the the primary navigation menu then things fall into place. Besides, once it is set most people will probably never fiddle with it again. But other than those little things I don't see any major problems with the site.

Now having said that, I will reiterate that the site needs a favicon. This is by far the most glaring problem we are facing! I mean come on ... where are the priorities of designers and developers of the new Macnn?

OAW
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:17 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2