SIDEBAR
»
S
I
D
E
B
A
R
«
VCD 2014-2015 team O
March 26th, 2015 by admin

  • VCD team O (A/H/v-com – webshop: crashrecord.co.uk)
  • Commenting on their Tumblr presentation is not made possible. Please comment your peer reviews for this team here.


    2 Responses  
    • Roos Durieux writes:
      March 31st, 20152:05 pmat

      Hello!

      Hereby I sent you the peerreview based on the information shown in the blog last week.
      We have comments as well as questions. Both are meant as some kind of gideline which information we think should be added to enrich the blog and make the whole story more convenient.

      Hopefully you can use it.

      Good luck, happy socks!
      Group aSock

      Interesting how they tried to give an overview. This however does not work as good as it could since the original website is missing. Thus it is difficult to find where they got their information from and to look into that critically, now it is just a matter of believing what they did is right.

      There is no clear overview of what they see as different elements and how they grade it since there is no clear connection given to the website, where can i find the examples in the original website and where in their framework pages? What do they see as elements and how are they differing in importance and place on the website?
      e.g. User is not provided with sufficient information regarding on which feature of the webshop he/she is currently on (Tickets Best Sellers, Tickets A-Z, Tickets by Venue, etc.).
      Lack of hierarchy – what information is the most important or most searched by its users?
      what do they see as important information? Could they give an example?

      Very awesome how they did the prototyping, it would have been actually more informative when there was some discription – what did they do and why did they do that?
      Same for the visual search, what are they changing and why those elements?

      Blindtest is done very clear and interesting, nice way to visualize the outcomes, inspiring for our project.

      Same for the eyetracking, very interesting how they visualized the outcome. The only concern I have that when dividing the page in 3 parts (which they seemed to have done), don’t you miss interesting details? could it give more insights making it more detailed? And it does not feel convincing that 5 persons is enough to base your redesign on.

    • Group H writes:
      April 3rd, 20156:06 pmat

      Hey Group O,

      This is a review from Group H for each post you’ve updated on the blog now:

      First, the visual structure is clear. A small tip that you can give each page a title, so that the audience know which page it is. What is the difference between the 3rd page and 4th one? Are they both product detail page? However, you didn’t grade all the elements so you’d better make up for it.

      Next, under the requirements for improved design, you list the main problems you found in the current pages. But some of them are not, like “the header location is currently on the left side” why this is a problem?

      Then, prototyping website elements. It is a great idea to print all the elements and then rearrange them. But how you rearrange all the elements, the reasons are missing.

      Next, the graphs for visual search show the data clearly. But what result you get from it? The grading? How do you come to this result? Besides, I don’t totally agree that the search bar is unimportant.

      You made a nice visualization for the blindness and eyetracking test, and followed a clear structure to report.

      After the 3 tests, hope you have started the redesign both for function and aesthetics.

      Good luck with finalising your design!


    Leave a Reply

    XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

    »  Substance:WordPress   »  Style:Ahren Ahimsa