The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.
In addition to Pete, a blunder that many sites make:
When I put a design into the cart and pay, what do I get? Five Furious Finns redecorating my home? The non-exclusive, limited, non-transferable alienable right to use it as desktop background? A ferret?
Your "This site is running Team Viewer" announcement is kinda truncated/lost (I could only see that it's a team Viewer statement by looking at the page source -- but I don't care if sites run Team Viewer, anyway).
You've obviously spent a lot of time on the technical aspects of the site, but not enough on the content. It's easy to get lost like that, but you've really got to look at the site with the eyes of a user.
Questions the user will ask:
- What is this site for?
- What is is showing me on this page?
- What is on other pages, and why should I go there?
- What should I click?
- Why should I click it?
The first and last sentences of the answer to the first question in your FAQ should not be hidden away in an FAQ that is itself hidden away at the very bottom of the page; it should be at the top of every page.
The same goes for many of the FAQ answers. They should not be questions that people have to ask; you should provide the information to them.
And, a point of order, here, which really annoys me -- you can't have an FAQ if no-one has asked any questions!
The point of an FAQ is to answer questions that have been frequently asked by users; what you have is an unfriendly, hard to use dump for information that you can't be bothered to provide in a user-friendly way.
If a question has not actually been asked by a user, it should not be in an FAQ, because it has not been asked at all, let alone "Frequently".
An FAQ answer is a hotfix, which should be used temporarily, until the site can be amended to include the information properly.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
My two cents:
* if you choose the menu buttons (home, color, motif, ...) the "ribbon" jumps up and down. I would make the ribbon fixed size so the screen doesn't jump.
* the rainbow on top is terrible.
* the screenshots of the selections you make are very, very small and I have the feeling that that is your product, but I'm not sure because it is so small. (Should be almost full screen)
* links at the bottom don't tell me anything
* if you click on a link at the bottom you get a page which says: "Hover on the design to view the illustration" why the extra work to make it dissapear ? And what is it illustrating?
* At this point I see three icons that want to point me to facebook. Spam?
It is not all negative,
* you have a three in there (Home >> Assorted I >> Assorted 08A where I'm looking now) which shows where you are.
* You have the standard stuff in the correct (standard) location. I'm talking about the shopping cart top right, legal stuff at the bottom. I would just move contact and FAQ to the shopping cart location.
* Except for the rainbow header the coloring is not disturbing
* site loads fast and is responsive, it is lined out nicely, even if I resize.
As others mentioned, the product is completely lost. It is more or less explained in the FAQ, but I'm not reading the FAQ unless you made it interesting for me to stay om the site. The interest is determined in the first 2 seconds or so...
- first look: this looks interesting (if not cross on the top right)
- second look: Am I going to do something, did I already figure out how? (if not cross on the top right)
- third look: It is worth my time to perform more then 3 clicks (browsing or purchasing) (if not cross on the top right)
[I don't mean to be overly harsh, but you asked for feedback and these are my honest thoughts.]
After 5 minutes of clicking around:
- I still have no idea what you're selling. (Fabric? Rugs? Wrapping paper?)
- I have no idea how to add something to the cart (or how to select an item).
- Everything must be free, because I see no prices.
- I click on the sliding tiles and I get an "illustration", but no product details.
You have 5 different classes of "Assorted" - that makes no sense. If there is a difference between them, give them a name that distinguishes them. If not, bin them together. What's the point of having a category called "Assorted 17A"?
And if you have that many selections, why limit each screen to six samples? Can you imagine browsing through Google images 6 at a time? I'd never see them all.
And I don't mean to offend you, but the name of the website sounds like an international speaker with poor command of the English language. Reminds me of a Chinese restaurant I saw called "Eat Food Good!"
My personal preference is towards speed and functionality. However I am seeing a lot of tablets with the "eye-candy". I suspect that the majority of users prefer this type of GUI. My thoughts on the matter are to build something that works perfectly, first, and then add as much of the other stuff as needed to make someone want to use it.
An example of a functional program is Abbyy Finereader 9.0 (I haven't seen the more current versions). It does what it is supposed to and is intuitive enough that you don't have to wade through the manual which was a waste of time. The eye candy that I think is a waste of time is any of these apps where you "slide" things all over with finger gestures. I am sure I am outvoted on that one based on the number of people sliding things across their tablets
The folk in my shop always laugh at how most users love and are most impressed with "shiny objects". But then, so do we; we just like a different kind of shine.
I'm intrigued by your dismissal of the "sliding things around" paradigm, after saying you are most impressed by intuitive interfaces. On a mouseless device like a mobile phone or tablet, what could be more natural and intuitive than moving things around that way? Is it not just the mouseless version of dragging an object around your desktop screen with your mouse; a skeuomorphic action that simulates real life. Why do you think that's eye candy and a waste of time?
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
Well to start with I haven't done much of the "sliding around" tablet work. I went through three 7" tablets before that was in fashion and stopped using them because they were too small to see (I get annoyed at having to pull out the glasses to read something because my arm isn't long enough to hold it where I can see it )But what I've seen has mostly been done already in simpler formats.
I haven't done any testing but I can't imagine that those graphics are generated without slowing the response time of the program/apps they are running. And that is the only reason I consider them eye-candy. I absolutely agree that the gestures are intuitive!
Not only that, I have not yet talked myself out of getting the new Surface coming out next month and if I don't park it in a drawer because I can't see it, I may learn to like those features but if I don't, I'll look for somewhere in the control panel (if it has one!) to tone them down.
Thanks, you may have just saved me from wasting money on the 7" tablet I've been eyeing, as my reading glasses are never where I need them.
Surely, with two or four cores found on most (every?) tablet out there, that response time is negligible to non-existant, and probably handled by the GPU anyway, only interfering with other graphical events.
I have an HTC Trophy, a light-weight phone with a single core and 512M of memory that runs WinPhone7 and Metro. That's not quite the same as a tablet, but there is never any lag on anything graphical, and for me the finger gestures to navigate the device and move objects around are a lot more intuitive than tapping a series of icons, like on the iPhone and Android. I'm eyeing the Surface, too, but my inner penny-pincher can't get over the sticker shock enough to let me pull out my wallet.
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
One nice thing to say for the 7" tablets is they will fit in a jacket pocket but before I completely talk you out of it I was trying to read PDF's on them. One of them had some internal magic that could adjust the font size but put pictures in the wrong place. This made it very hard to read code books when the figure being referred to was 5 pages later after I had given up on it. I have had a few VERY slow computers which made me sour on anything to do with slow processes but if it truly is a negligible amount then it doesn't bother me at all. And finally, the sticker shock on the surface is why I said "have not yet talked myself out of it". It looks like the answer to small screen/reading glasses, a full OS and can run the programs I use, etc. Maybe I can talk a friend into getting one first!
Not sure about examples, but for me a good application has following features:
- speed an reliability: It shouldn't take long and it should be correct.
If it is not correct, it will say so in a user friendly manner.
- What the user sees is what the user needs: This is very important, don't show buttons or controls that are for the manager if the receptionist is using the manager and vice versa.
- Only show what is immediately necessary: all the rest you can hide in menu's or somewhere else.
- Only enable what the user is allowed to use
- Keep it standard: eg. in microsoft products, the ok and cancel buttons are always on the bottom - right, save buttons top left, etc...
- If you use buttons with icons, stay consistant and clear.
- It should look slick and nice and fluffy and beautiful (including when resizing!), but don't overdo it. It's like a powerpoint presentation, animations are nice, but if you use the wrong ones and too much, the presentation starts to look unprofessional.
one can whip up a nice looking UI in a matter of minutes, but a professional UI takes a lot more time! 20/80 rule. You need 20% of the time to make 80% of the UI and 80% of the time to take the final 20% to the finish.
Battleshit grey I tell should be the basis of your GUI design, no more than a few colours and stick to battleshit grey. I bring you this advice as a UI designer of more than 20 years designing battleshit grey screens. If you, like me, have absolutely no design skills and no colour matching talent and very limited imagination use BS grey.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity