At 11:15 AM 3/2/99 -0800, Brigitte Eaton wrote:
>At 05:27 PM 3/1/99 , Charlie Nichols wrote:
>> I offer: If a site is large enough, (meaning users can spend a
>>significant amount of time in it, using the replacement heuristic) then a
>>clear, consistent, understandable replacement is worth considering.
>but why would you want the user to have to learn a new method? you have one
>that they already know, and you're forcing them to take the time (granted it
>may only be a few seconds) to learn a new method.
>it seems to me, that it would be simpler for them to use the one they
>already know, the one that was implemented on the site they came from and on
>the site they're going to next.
Imagine if each time we got into a different automobile, the ignition
switch were in a different location. This may be especially relevant for
those who travel frequently and are often in a hurry. Even assuming that
each new location is an improvement over the last from a human factors
perspective, users will still become frustrated.
Even the slightest negative may influence users' perceptions of your
product, services or company. One or two seconds later they're browsing
your competitor's site! Is it worth it?
Challis D. Hodge, Principal
H A N N A H O D G E
u s e r e x p e r i e n c e a r c h i t e c t s
312.397.9020 fax 312.397.9019
[[log in to unmask] | www.hannahodge.com]