1 / 22

Case Study: Audi

Case Study: Audi . 1. Schematics (wireframes) 2. „Jumping Boxes“ 3. Right vs. Left Navigation. Sch e matics. Problem: Traceability. D ocuments separate & independent. Changes & updates inefficient Version control problemati c. Sch e matics. Solution: Adobe GoLive.

Gabriel
Download Presentation

Case Study: Audi

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Case Study: Audi

  2. 1. Schematics (wireframes) • 2. „Jumping Boxes“ • 3. Right vs. Left Navigation

  3. Schematics Problem: Traceability • Documents separate & independent • Changes & updates inefficient • Version control problematic

  4. Schematics Solution: Adobe GoLive Convergence of deliverables • Sitemap and schematics linked 1:1 • Components = modular construction • WebDAV server • concurrent work on schematics • remote access by client • Cross Platform: PC and Mac; HTML

  5. Schematics

  6. Schematics Disadvantages • Site file grew to 30+ mb • Unstable, crashed • Sitemap tool is suboptimal • Didn‘t get team buy-in Overall GoLive met our expectations, but is the wrong tool for the job Underscores need for an IA tool

  7. 1. Schematics (wireframes) • 2. „Jumping Boxes“ • 3. Right vs. Left Navigation

  8. Jumping Boxes Problem: Variable Browser Sizes Users surf with different window sizes • One screen size  Web design • Right navigation must be visible

  9. Jumping Boxes Automated Layout Three page layouts offered – S, M, L from 640x480 to 1024x768 • Fulfilled CI constraints • Brand: “Vorsprung durch Technik”

  10. Jumping Boxes Disadvantages • Technically difficult to implement • Usability problems? • Not needed for all page types A complex solution for a simple problem

  11. 1. Schematics (wireframes) • 2. „Jumping Boxes“ • 3. Right vs. Left Navigation

  12. Right vs. Left Navigation Challenge: Competitive Difference Right navigation = Audi as innovator • Smoother interaction with scrollbar • Greater focus on content • Subjectively accepted by users

  13. Right vs. Left Navigation External Test: www.SirValuse.de 2 prototypes: 1 left & 1 right navigation 64 users: 2 groups • Part 1 – Six tasks were timed • Part 2 - Eye movement analysis • Part 3 - Interviews

  14. Right vs. Left Navigation Part 1 - Hypothesis Time R Significant L 1 2 3 4 5 6 Tasks

  15. Right vs. Left Navigation Part 1 - Results Time No Significance R L 1 2 3 4 5 6 Tasks

  16. Right vs. Left Navigation Part 2 – Eye movement Method: www.MediaAnalyzer.com User rapidly coordinate clicks with where they look • Hypothesis: right navigation > focus on content

  17. Right vs. Left Navigation Results: Stronger focus on content

  18. Right vs. Left Navigation Part 3 – Interview Do you like the right navigation? 7 23 2 :) :| :(

  19. Right vs. Left Navigation Subsequent Usability Test „Normal” methods with 25 participants • Corroborated findings of first test • No difficulties with a right navigation • Positive subjective response • Only 1 commented on right navigation

  20. Right vs. Left Navigation Conclusions • Users are ambidextrous in terms of navigation position • Consistency and learnability • People expect that websites vary • Interaction given by design and layout, not prior expectations (Affordance)

  21. Thank Youjim@razorfish.de

More Related