good/bad link 1

Not interactive/BAD

http://www.themixhead.com/

  • searched for interactive websites
  • “top 10 interactive websites”
  • cool graphics but really not much for user to do

 

 

Interactive/GOOD

http://www.specialdefects.com/v2/

            * you control the actions going on in the website

            * if you click more or move more you can control speed

One Response to “good/bad link 1”

  1. admin says:

    Please split out your good link/bad link into a single good link category and a single bad link category (2 posts). Thanks.

    Your bad link is really interesting, It’s too bad we couldn’t see it in class. It is arguably bad, arguably good (I wouldn’t argue for good, but someone could), but certainly not high in the usability scale. I’m not sure what your bullet point 1 and 2 mean, but I agree with observation #3.

    Here’s what I would emphasize:
    Unclear navigation (the homepage pictographs/symbols for navigation mean nothing to the casual visitor, and make mean something to a particular audience.)
    Interaction for interaction sake is rarely a god idea for usability (we click on a lot things, watch some simple non informative navigation, then move to the next layer of information cluttered by aesthetic novelty)
    Navigation hides itself – flashes, reveals itself, then runs.

    We discussed specialdefects in class. Interesting.

    Good supply here. Two substantive sites with plenty to critique.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.