2.744
Human-use Analysis Reviews
Home > Assignments > Human-use analysis results > Reviews for Haluk Akay

Haluk Akay
moss piglets
[review]

 Analysis RatingsPresentation Ratings
Average Rating
 
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3:
Reviewer 4:
1-marginal     2-ok    3-good     4-very good    5-outstanding

Quality and thoroughness of human-use analysis and improvement suggestions

Reviewer 1:

I was not able to see the image on the User Experience page. I also found it hard to follow the flowchart. Perhaps it could have been accompanied by pictures? Or perhaps a series of images showing how someone uses a mouse?

I found it helpful that there were quotes from people who use computer mice.

I think more types of mice could have been evaluated. For example, comparing mechanical mice with optical mice with laser mice and wireless mice. Especially since one of the quoted people mentioned that the responsiveness of the mouse depends on the surface. Maybe mechanical mice need a harder surface than laser mice? Who knows?

Also, what about the price points of these types of mice?

It was helpful that Haluk brought up carpal tunnel syndrome, as it affects many computer users. The solution was interesting, to include a gel bath, which might help alleviate carpal tunnel syndrome.

Haluk brought up a good point about pivoting at the wrist in Option A as compared to Option B where the pivot is done more from the elbow.

return to top of page


Reviewer 2:

Overall, the analysis is well structured into individual components, and is holistic in that it considers intended use, direct user feedback, and creative solutions for improvement. The introduction in particular sets a compelling tone for why one should analyze the user experience with a computer mouse to begin with, and the user quotes are rich.

One key area for improvement is a more consistent focus on one area of analysis (or more clear delineation of several focus areas). Under User Experience, the focus appears to be on the eye-hand feedback loop of using a mouse. Since this is the first content page after the intro, it seems that this feedback will be the core of the analysis (and is a very good topic). However, the next page discusses the execution of complex commands more so than it does feedback. Then, under Drawbacks, there is some focus again on feedback (though that word is not actually used, losing the bridge from the beginning), and there is also some new focus on ergonomics that was not mentioned in the prior sections. The Solution largely focuses on the ergonomics element, with some lip service back to performance. This flow was challenging to follow. Setting up a framework of focus areas upfront and referring to it on each page would significantly help make the analysis more cohesive.

Another area to think about is drawing more insight from user interviews and connecting quotes directly to groupings of customer needs. In the present analysis, user quotes are listed only in the Drawbacks section, seeming to suggest that users can only have negative things to say. Instead, it would be helpful to take a broad and objective perspective, listen to individual users, and draw out the voice of the customer. This could help tease out the discrepancies between intended design and actual experience.

return to top of page


Reviewer 3:

Great job on the human use analysis of the mouse. You gave insightful research into the background of the mouse and specific problems of the current design. I thought your analysis of the advantages and drawbacks were good and that they reflected a lot of what the people you interviewed said. I thought your user experience could be a bit more thorough. Pictures of someone using the mouse and maybe how people have to lift their hand up and interact with their computer would help a lot to visualize what a more complete experience. I liked how you included solutions that have already been thought of and why they don't work. Your solution was very thorough, but it was a bit confusing to understand. Perhaps a picture with a hand on top of the house to show how someone might use your new design would give greater clarity to your solution. Other than that, nice job!

return to top of page


Reviewer 4:

For something as widely used as the mouse, I think it might be nice to get a bit more in-depth on the research side and understand a bit more about current mouse design. Although I think I disagree with some of the claims about mouse concavity and vertical mouse advantages, these were two standout insights about mice, it would be awesome to have a couple more of these insights or dive a bit deeper into the biomechanics of mouse preferences for people. You raise very interesting points about mouse size and getting user feedback is great, but it might be nice to expand upon the drawbacks mentioned by others. You picked a very ambitious user experience because of how common it is, and I think if you can dig a little deeper on some of the key issues you've presented, it would be great!

return to top of page



Clarity and presentation of human-use experience analysis

Reviewer 1:

I think it was fitting that the color scheme was black and green as it reminds me of old school computer screens with code.

I found it interesting that the menu was justified on the right...perhaps as an analogy to using the computer mouse on the right for right-handed folks?

I appreciate the effort that went into generating a Solidworks CAD model, and I understood that part of the new design was made up of wood.

I would have justified the names of the quoted people to the right instead of the left. It would have been easier to read.

return to top of page


Reviewer 2:

The website is simple but overall well-design. It's very easy to navigate with the menu locked in the upper right. Color contrast is strong. Use of exclusively bold font feels a little clunky. Bold should instead be used to suggest contrast and/or emphasis.

Use of images is very helpful in illustrating human use (e.g., image of hand cupped over mouse), and the sketches of the potential Solution fit the narrative in an easy-to-digest manner. Note that an image at the bottom of the User Experience page does not load - this should be investigated.

return to top of page


Reviewer 3:

Your website was simple and easy to understand. You have a nice menu section where I could select which part of the analysis I wanted to see. A small aesthetic detail, but changing the menu section to a menu bar can give your website a nicer look as well as utilize space more efficiently. I liked your color choice with the text, it fit in nicely with the feel of a computer mouse. For your solution section, a picture of a hand on top of your newly designed mouse would give more clarity into how the mouse is actually meant to be used.

return to top of page


Reviewer 4:

Your clarity of presentation is great overall! The light font on the black background is very striking and the sans-serif is easy to read. It may have been the settings on my computer, but it might be nice to have a bit of a larger font, especially in the human-use flow chart. It might also be nice to have the links to other sections be more pronounced. At first I wasn't exactly sure where to navigate. For your images, it might be nice to add captions (especially to the UI setting image) and for images that blend in more with your background, consider creating a border or white background image to make them stand out. The hand drawings were awesome-- consider making them bigger to show off! Also consider making the lines of text wider, they seem a little skinny somehow. Overall very clear presentation!

return to top of page