I ran Excel VLOOKUP against all of the files GSC Coverage lists, versus all of the files GSC mobile usability says are mobile friendly. About 30% of the pages listed in Coverage are not included in the Mobile Usability list. However, when I run them through GSC’s URL inspection, it says that these missing pages are mobile friendly.
Is this something I should be concerned about? Will this impact what URLs are visible to mobile searches?
I am working on the development of online user testing and usability platform to help web and UX designers, UX researchers and Front end testers. We are looking for feedback from web designers that is why I am posting here. If you tried it out and gave us some opinions you would be very helpful. Please register HERE .
We will also activate full access for 30 days free if you email what mail you used to register at so you can improve your…
Looking for feedback to improve user testing and usability platform
Currently, I am working on a university website redesign project. The complication is that they used a lot of image carousels or sliders on their existing website. For example, in the banner, 10 events/programs images are running inside the carousel and some have a hyperlink to a dedicated page.
I am planning to remove the carousel with a hero image and move the other image to events and programs gallery since too many messages will miss the important thing. And the chances of conversation are below 1%. How could I convince the client diplomatically? Because they are crazy to see carousels to show different department images in the home page banner even after I tried to convince them that they are conversion killers.
My team and I have developed a prototype of an augmented reality mobile application for teaching primary school students human anatomy.
We are going to do a usability testing and evaluation with the primary school students using FUN toolkit, and we are also going to conduct an expert review using heuristic evaluation and cognitive walkthrough.
Furthermore, we also want the teachers to test the app, and to evaluate the usability in the context of their students’ usage. However, the teachers are neither usability experts nor end-users so what is the most appropriate method for them regarding usability testing, survey design etc?
We’re building a web application based on Material UI. Throughout the app there are select components, which behave like shown in the example below: The default label informs about the functionality of the select and when a value is selected, this label shrinks and moves up, so that it is still shown above the selected value.
We use those components mainly for standard “organizational” bulk operations, such as
group etc. Therefore, no value is selected by default, the default label is shown and the user should know what the control is there for.
However, we also have a settings page (and forms), where there are already set values, like
language. This leaves the select in the state where that informational default label has already shrinked to its smaller size (and would always stay that way, since a language can’t be unselected).
Because of this, I’d like to change the select component here, so that the label isn’t shown at all and instead introduce another easy-to-read label that is placed above, like shown on the picture below.
I feel like this would be a good approach in terms of usability, making the controls easier to recognize and thus helping the user change their settings. (Imagine a multitude of settings and looking for a specific one to change).
However, it also introduces inconsistencies, since there would be two kinds of select throughout the application.
I’d like to know whether those kinds of incosistencies are acceptable for the sake of better usability. Do the benefits outweigh the possibility of irritating the user? Maybe you could provide any related research or real life examples of similar inconsistencies for the sake of usability. Maybe there’s even a way to quantify those “pains vs gains”?
Any input is greatly appreciated!
We had a pilot test of usability testing. We only planned to do tests on desktop pc because that’s what we think is the main device with the our user group.
After the pilot we had a feedback conversation with our teacher. One of the suggestions he made was that we should add some tasks that are done with the mobile device.
I disagreed immediately but couldn’t come up with any good explanation why this is a bad thing. My opinion was not taken seriously because teacher is ‘the pro’. Now I would like to know if this really is a standard testing method to have multiple devices in the same testing?
For me it slunds like finding issues here and there and not focusing anything. So you most likely find more issues but wouldn’t it be more important to find the ‘famous 80 % of the problems’ with one device? In my opinion the experience with the first device affects to the use of second device because the system being tested is only a part of a website.
In our case we cannot have more participants.
What if your device gets locked down for a long while because you cannot remember the password? Well, that used to be a rare case.. because people used to use their device’s passwords to access them frequently and the chances this would happen depends on how long they don’t use that device. (Cause part of the capability of remembering things could depend on how frequent you use that thing, retrieve it, or think of it.. but what happens when you don’t retrieve that information for a while? )
Many devices are now switching to biometrics authentication (both mobiles and laptops), and this authentication is only used to unlock the screen, not for decrypting the disk after rebooting for many valid reasons.
However, I was concerned with the fact that using the password less frequently (because people reboot their systems less frequently) and relying on biometric authentication for being easy & fast, can increase the chances of the user forgetting his password, which makes it a big difficult challenge when the system forces a reboot for an update, or suddenly shutdown for battery shortage (which usually occurs in the middle of your work 🙂 ), and you end up wasting so much valuable time trying to remember the password, and if you’re lucky, you will figure out what password you used. If not… am not sure what’s gonna happen, you’ll have to take a very long route to recover it, cause it ain’t as simple as “Forgot password? Send reset email”
What I am saying is, is it true that relying on biometrics increases the likelihood of forgetting an essential-hard-to-recover password?
If yes, how can we minimize that? Is it by supporting better techniques to recover password ?
Or is the actual problem resides in remembering passwords? And users must be aware of the fact that they should use a password that they are almost sure they would never forget?
Kindly I need practical training on conducting a usability test, I’m already having a certificate on usability testing from Interaction Design Foundation, but I need to apply it in a real case.
Does UX Stack Exchange community know this kind of training, courses or personal coaching to help me in making qualitative & quantitive reports, making users scenarios, analyzing findings… etc, so I can have it in a practical way?
I’ve instaled Ubuntu 19.04 from scratch after an issue with my old ubuntu installation.
I’ve found that now it uses Gnome instead of Unity. I like gnome, but I have a couple od important usability issues that I assume are easily configurable, and I just don’t know how to.
- The full name of each file used to appear in Desktop icons, and if it were too long, when I clicked on the icon the full name would appear, even in long names.
Not now, as you can see:
Besides that, as you can see in the image attached, if I click on an image, the preview won’t appear either.
When doing anything in dektop before, like deleting a icon or moving it, I could easily press CTRL + Z and it would undo the action. How may I do that now?
I tried to search for these issues instead of asking, but I’ve not found anything that actually got them sorted.
Please note that I’ve installed Gnome Tweaks.
This is my first post here, and what I am searching for have not been found yet, I must be very innovate, joke aside. I have gotten a mission at my current company from the C-level to test through all of the components and patterns of our design system. This is everything from input components, badges, tables, cards, panels etc. Our design system is structured based on atomic design.
I am however not familiar with testing on specific components alone, I have always done it through scenarios and cases where we have whole layouts with components that will support our users in their work. Is there any way of performing smaller usability tests without specific cases?
Here’s what I was thinking:
- I could test each component against certain criterias.
- I could perform the 5-second test (identify how it is being percieved after 5 seconds)
- The break-it-method, where users and test paricipants try to find errors and problems in the functionality and usability
- Test participants will compare our components one by one with those of material design or lightning
- Evaluate the components through CBUQ (Component-Based Usability Questionnaire)
- Have small tasks for each component to see how easy they are to use and navigate, e.g. Task1 – enter data, Task2 – remove entered data, Task3 – Navigate using keyboard etc.
Are any of these ideas good? Are there any others? Please help! Any input in valuable! 🙂