Peter-Paul Koch, writing on the QuirksBlog, shares the results of a usability test comparing 10 different phones. What's most interesting is that the user in question might be considered the 'average' user rather than a tech-influencer (as is typical in online media). Consequently many of the observations offer insight into what matters in the real world compared to rarefied atmosphere of the 'media bubble'. Read on for more.
Read on in the full article.
Whilst I don't disagree with the results, the narrative was full of shyte. If it takes 4 days to discover if a phone is wi-fi capable when I can do it via google in 10 seconds, then the writer is totally incompetent.
I presume the author was trying to simulate a showroom environment, whereby a good impression on the customer who walks in is the key to securing a sale.
A phone test unit must simply work right at the show room. If a prospective customer can't find the feature within a few minutes of the phone in his hand, the feature does not exist, period. The test unit with default apps should never crash as well.
The phone manufacturers know that this determines a closed sale or a fail. Anticipate user behaviour and expectations, and fulfill them right at the show room.
No manufacturer expects the customer to "google" or "do his own homework" in order to secure a sale. The company will pay for this with poor sales figures. Any marketing exec who actually proposes this should and will be fired.
It was the guy running the test who took 4 days to find out about WiFi, not the test subject.
In the vast majority of phone showrooms in the UK at least, the phones are non-functioning dummies. If you want to see a working phone you have to get the staff to find one for you. Then they can turn into sales people and it all becomes tedious.
If I want to try out a phone I find a friend who has got one and borrow it.
Wow, must have been a hard task to find an idiot who prefers messing around with a stylus to simply using fingers...