As discussed in my earlier post - Latency - No. 1 - latency times in today‘s computerized products are a true pain to user experience.
There are different ways of handling it, if it can not be shortened down enough by design.
The most common one is the spinning icon.
However, there is also the traditional solution through good documentation and user guidance.
The good old SOP - standard operating procedure.
Do‘s and dont‘s ...
See to the right - recently found at the breakfast buffet in a tourist hotel in Ticino, Switzerland.
If it truly solves the problem - I doubt it!
At least for me it didn‘t work out. It took me longer to find my language to read - I can read and understand them all - and act on it, than to make everything wrong already in parallel while not waiting for the slow machine to take its time.
Yes, it‘s well documented. And yes, I was the one, impatiently not following the SOP. And, yes, if you would follow it - just slow down - the user experience would be pretty seamless and clear.
As user experience, UX experts usually generate evidence by observing and testing a statistically relevant sample of users. Here, the job obviously has been done. Otherwise nobody would have solved the problem with such a nice SOP in four languages and four colors.
And, from a user end it is always hard to get product design changed in a true user centric way. Once a product is launched, in most cases, there is no room for user centricity and agility to adapt to it any longer. Quality in UX is then only measured in terms of units sold or generated revenue.
In the example given above, a very nice SOP, written by a very pragmatic and customer focusing person, will prevent the manufacturer of the coffee machine from going out of business due to poor UX. What a success!
There are different ways of handling it, if it can not be shortened down enough by design.
The most common one is the spinning icon.
However, there is also the traditional solution through good documentation and user guidance.
The good old SOP - standard operating procedure.
Do‘s and dont‘s ...
See to the right - recently found at the breakfast buffet in a tourist hotel in Ticino, Switzerland.
If it truly solves the problem - I doubt it!
At least for me it didn‘t work out. It took me longer to find my language to read - I can read and understand them all - and act on it, than to make everything wrong already in parallel while not waiting for the slow machine to take its time.
Yes, it‘s well documented. And yes, I was the one, impatiently not following the SOP. And, yes, if you would follow it - just slow down - the user experience would be pretty seamless and clear.
As user experience, UX experts usually generate evidence by observing and testing a statistically relevant sample of users. Here, the job obviously has been done. Otherwise nobody would have solved the problem with such a nice SOP in four languages and four colors.
And, from a user end it is always hard to get product design changed in a true user centric way. Once a product is launched, in most cases, there is no room for user centricity and agility to adapt to it any longer. Quality in UX is then only measured in terms of units sold or generated revenue.
In the example given above, a very nice SOP, written by a very pragmatic and customer focusing person, will prevent the manufacturer of the coffee machine from going out of business due to poor UX. What a success!
No comments:
Post a Comment