Re: UKNM: RE: boo's demise/ stock

[Stefan Magdalinski]

benbabyhippo [dot] com

 wrote:

>

> On Tue, May 09, 2000 at 03:26:14PM -0500, Stewart Dean wrote:

> > Functionality doesnt equal usability.

>

> Stewart,

>

> That's not right. If a good has sold out and is not going to be replaced,

a

> shop would not have a poster in the window saying "polo shirts £20

> (hopefully some will arrive sometime)". They would remove the sign and boo

> is merely doing the same.


I think Stewart was talking slightly broader than that. I think the

stock thing we can possibly all agree on, and boo does it well. the rest

of the nav is arse though. I've studied boo a lot, I'm a superb browser,

and I didn't buy anything because I got fed up with trying to find the

buy button.


> > Just because something does something doesnt mean people can use it to

do

> > that task.

> >

> And sometimes you don't have any choice in the matter. (I must remember to

> look but from what I remember it is illegal to advertise items you don't

> intend to restock in some european countries).

>

> > The example given does clearly demonstrate a bad user assumption on the

> > behalf of Boo.

> >

> And displaying items that are out of stock would be a better solution?

> Personally there is nothing more annoying then finding the item you wanted

> is out of stock, expected date in stock unknown.

>

> > Ian that is the heart of your problem and the one thing many people

simply

> > refuse to accept - the people who built boo do not understand usability.

> Get

> > that right and you're there!

> >

> Usability is subjective. What you think is good is not the same as

everyone

> else. Granted Boo's website is not the worlds greatest but I think that

> probably has as much to do with Organic (remember them) as anything else.

>


rubbish. 'What you think is good' is not usability. Usability is

absolutely objective. Usability can be empirically measured. pageviews,

conversion rates, errors, and pathways through your site, can be

counted, measured.


If we were working together, and we had two ideas about how an element

of the navigation should work, I could demonstrate to you exactly which

of the two were better. and it might not be mine, but I'd then KNOW you

were right, and I'd be happy.


An idea I had, I'm not sure if anyone's ever implemented it:


you're an existing site, you've got problem with certain elements of

your navigation, and some ideas about how to fix it. you implement your

three possible solutions, and set unique  user cookies to partition your

user base for a period of time. you leave 85% seeing the original site,

and try each new design out on 5% of the remaining, using the cookie to

ensure that a user only sees one of the alternatives for the entire test

period.


you then analyse your logs, and see which design worked best.


1. you leave 90% out of the test, because you ensure your 5% sample size

is enough to be statistically useful, and these users only see the

design change once.


I don't believe this would work for a two radically different designs,

because you'd upset your users too much by forcing then to change twice.

it also doesn't work if you introduce too many variables in the new

designs. you'll never be able to analyse the data properly.


has anyone ever tried to do this?


stefan


--

/** Stefan Magdalinski, computin

    info: http://www.isness.org/house/boat/sig.txt **/



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 the UK's totally managed affiliate marketing solution.

 ukaffiliates.com >> the net.working

 http://www.ukaffiliates.com /

salesukaffiliates [dot] com (mailto:salesukaffiliates [dot] com)

 telephone: 020 7691 1880 / fax: 020 7691 1881

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  To unsubscribe or change your list settings go to

http://www.chinwag.com/uk-netmarketing or

helpchinwag [dot] com