ipad Browser design: Design style user Research

Article Description: ipad Mobile phone QQ Browser product style research.

The research project generally takes the product and the interaction as the output object, pays close attention to the study conclusion, emphasizes the rationality and the objective. But this is a visual designer for the output of the research, it more want to complete the "How to let designers feel users" mission, emphasizing the vivid data description, but also it is a projection research case, as a project accumulation and share.

Project Purpose:

Provides input for visual design of ipad browser concept design, and evaluates existing 3 visual drafts

Project procedures

1, the need to understand: Want to know what is called design style, what the designer wants is what kind of user data, what is to help them design

Methods: A quick interview based on visual designer, n=12

"If you make an ipad browser design, what information do you want to get from the user?"

1. The taste of the user, what kind of brand, what is beautiful for them
2. Where do they use this product, to watch it at night or during the day?
3. They like the texture, color, transparency of the skin, they have no need for special skin
4. Why they buy the ipad, do they like the sleek look of the ipad?
5. They like the buttons are comfortable, or they look exquisite.
6. They feel that the design of the browser should be the same as the QQ Hall, or with ibook, or as Safari
7. They think the ipad color should be heavy or light.
8. The ipad browser should be a lively product or a quiet product
9. They like the function/information is spread out, or hide it
10. What is a browser for them
11. Browser What is the most important to them, visual design is their concern, is not the visual design does not exist but they want
12. ......

As a result, the designer wants three types of information, including user understanding (age, sex, scene, product usage, etc.), basic design element preferences (color, material, transparency, button shape, etc.), which gives the design an "abstract sense" of inspiration.

Outside, each visual designer gives the idea is only one side of the problem, some people want to know these, some people want to know, but the superposition of their data, you can spell a relatively complete concept map. Therefore, this kind of quick interview is easy to use when catching demand or doing conceptual understanding. For example, to do the loss of research, you may want to directly find the project team to do a few simple interviews, ask them what they think the cause of user churn, will be better to see the panorama of the problem to help.

Some people ask why not just the designer of the ipad browser, the real output of this report is interviewed, but ask more designers. The reason is to make up for the limitations of the individual. To use the research example, browser style research such a topic, how do I do, how do you do, the third person how to do, each have their own ideas, although you do not necessarily have to do the browser, but this does not prevent you quickly also come up with a plan, some things are interlinked. In this way, we gather all the different ideas about the same problem, and see the perspective and thinking behind these ideas, and the plan should be better.

If you think further, that is not to do a product with research, you can also ask other product managers, face the same product problems, you want to know what. This is not a must. Usually do not do so, on the one hand, may be the development of long-term and products to deal with, feel their needs easier to grasp, and the designer's demand is relatively unfamiliar. On the other hand the demand for products may be more unique, each product is different, and the product of the visual design is relatively more interlinked. But still feel, can try, based on product demand research.

2, program design and implementation

Methods: Focus groups (background questionnaires, guided presentations, and preference-selection scales distributed to users during the discussion process)

Because what the designer wants, in addition to some basic user attribute data and product usage data, more is to want some perceptual things, from feeling the user to get some design inspiration, so the research project design, focus on the collection of some metaphysical data, such as: The user's clothing style, the user's consumption class and consumption concept, The rhythm of their lives, what emotional experience they use the browser, what kind of atmosphere the browser needs to create, and so on.

Therefore, based on the type of data that the research wants to collect, the conventional research methods

Telephone interviews are not appropriate.

Online questionnaires, the data will be cold, but it is not the reason why, more suitable for grasping some simple, direct, clear answer to the question.

Deep visit, the project cost is relatively high, the data can be very deep and thick, and visual style is a subjective preference, it is not the use of motivation or demand so deep so stable, how many samples are appropriate, it will be a problem

Card method, which would be a good choice, but because the project cycle is as long as the deep visit

Focus group (group discussion), it is not necessarily an optimal method, but its data depth between deep visits and questionnaires. The advantage of this method is that it is efficient, it seems that the input-output ratio is very high, and its biggest problem is that the group chooses the pressure on the individual, one may not be easy to express their different ideas in the group discussion, especially the study of this kind of preference, the influence will be more fatal, so in this use, Use a lot of scale to give users a prior choice, shielding other people's influence.

3, the result output

Users hope that the browser's presence is very low, low to not exist (does not affect the use of convenience), and in the visual, they want the browser's skin and "water" thin, transparent, natural, fresh, dynamic, happy mood.

From the results of the focus group, users ' preference choices are consistent on some issues, so the report focuses on refining these consistency and no differences between groups, and gives reasons why users choose to do so.

These reasons, if you look at the data again, are relatively stable among the problems, hidden behind each choice. For example, they choose the water on the material, the most lightweight in the transparency, because they want the product to have a very low sense of existence. They choose to be gray and choose T-shirts because they want the browser to visually not affect their web page reading. They will express or pin what they want through a variety of choices, and researchers need to put together and dig out the answers with all sorts of questions.

In addition, these reasons are relatively stable among users, in terms of a product, the user really want what kind of product appearance, the reason behind it is not like peacock, preference personalization and not as strong as expected, I guess more users, the conclusion of those common "choice reason" is still in, But there may be more fullness.

So all this suggests another conclusion of the study, if the project resources allow, the card method may be more suitable for this kind of product-oriented design style preference research. This conclusion can be verified if there is a chance.

[1] [2] Next page