USABILITY - Well it certainly isn't simple. All the links aren't in certain place like the top of the page or the Left hand as a column. Instead their all scattered in a random formation like a load of shells fired from an artillery strike. The text is written as if it is a report copied on with no thought of making it simple but to the point.
LANGUAGE AND TERMINOLOGY - Well thankfully its English but that all Ive got in its defense. Theirs a lot of cheek in this website and not enough "we here for you" Theirs also a lot of long words and not necessary the right words. For example peruse which means to look at (Yes I had to ask someone what it meant which makes comment more heavy) A better word in the interest of the public is View or Watch.
DESIGN (Colour, Images, Constituency, Typography) - Well for colour THERE IS NO COLOUR just black and white with images and links, As for images their all scattered and not the best use of semantics used. I.e. Design section has a pin which is irrelevant to Design. A pencil and ruler is but a pin isn't. The page on a whole has the same consistency which is bad in this case because who ever is on this will realise that their still on the same rubbish website. The typography on this is very simple with no interest with even titling it or underlining it. Generally this website is very boring and is one of the those websites with no creativity or interest to the public.
EFFECTIVE USE OF LAYOUTS - Afraid not. its all in a clusters ted state and is quite random. It also fails to have a section for links and so its therefore all over the place. It also isn't very interesting to the public. You will forget it when you leave it. Something that businesses don't want to see.
IDENTIFICATION WITH THE USERS. - Absolutely not, theirs no indication that theirs a message that's trying to be brought across. Its just all random.
USE OF NAVIGATION Theirs no use of primary, secondary or territory navigation. Its just random. Theirs no sign that the links will lead you to the same look a like page.
The second one is http://www.havenworks.com/
USABILITY - How can you use it? where to start? Where to finish? how much of it is relevant? How much is confusion? how much of it is random? All these questions are what the public will be thinking so therefore the idea of it being useful is something this website is seriously failing on. Why? There's no clear organisation. No place for the links, pictures, text and videos. Their should be a deliberate thoughtful place for this. Without this how can it be useful.
LANGUAGE AND TERMINOLOGY - Well its basically a news website so you can't complain about that because that the target audience. However the fact theirs a lot of long words used, theirs hardly any short simple snappy words. Plus I've read it and theirs a lot of rant.
DESIGN (Colour, Images, Constituency, Typography) - As Simon Carroll would say "Worse Design layout ever" He couldn't be more right. The design is random, badly contrasted and it makes you feel sick with the fact that theirs too much text, not enough pictures, theirs no good place for the links. It all in a random mess.
EFFECTIVE USE OF LAYOUTS - Well I've mentioned it before, but its basically a terrible mess. No clear place for the links, their are loads of titles when their should be a one big one and a few subheadings. The text is boring, no desire for creativity in this.
IDENTIFICATION WITH THE USERS. - Well is trying to communicate the news but honestly I think people will just leave and treat it as nonsense. So no identification with the users.
USE OF NAVIGATION - Definitely not no primary, secondary and tertiary navigation. And when you go an link it takes you to a page that was randomly done and doesn't seem to have any relevance to it. So that makes the navigation even worse in this case.
Comparing BBC news with the latter site.
USABILITY - Well the BBC website has a clear heading, clear logos, it has a search engine, its obvious which are links and which aren't. It has short descriptions and has a nice of balance of logos.
LANGUAGE AND TERMINOLOGY - Well a lot of it is snappy headlines used in it. It's words which are simple but accurate as well. It also likes to keep it short so you stay interested.
DESIGN (Colour, Images, Consistency, Typography) - It has a white background but with different coloured links and pictures. So therefore its well contrasted and well thought out.
EFFECTIVE USE OF LAYOUTS - Brilliant use due to the fact that theirs columns used which stay in the same place so theirs primary, secondary and tertiary used, they have the most important news at the top with big pictures and bold headlines with some description, it has the less interesting details at the bottom. At the top it has the logo and the main title at the top as well as a search engine. So it's organised in a brilliant way.
IDENTIFICATION WITH THE USERS - Yes definitely, it keeps it short and snappy with the synopsis. It has a search engine which can be helpful to the users and it prioritises the important news at the top.
USE OF NAVIGATION - It does have primary, secondary and tertiary links. The links are organised in a clear way. The pages that lead from it are relevant as in the colours used. And it really simple but effective.
No comments:
Post a Comment