Research on Product Style of mobile QQ browser on iPad

Project objective:

Provide inputs for the visual design of the Concept Design of the iPad browser, and evaluate the existing three visual drafts

Project

1,Requirement understanding: I want to know what design style is, what kind of user data the designer wants, and what things can help them design

Method: Based on quick interviews with visual designers, N = 12

"If you want to design an iPad browser, what information do you want to get from users"

• What are users' tastes, what are their favorite brands, and what are beautiful for them?
• Where are they using this product? night or day?
• What kind of texture, color, and transparency do they like? Do they have requirements for special skins?
• Why do they like iPad?
• They like Whether buttons are comfortable or look exquisite.
• They thought that the anthropomorphic content designed by the browser should be the same as the QQ Hall, like iBook, or like safari.
• They think the color of the iPad should be heavy or light.
• The iPad browser should be a lively product or a quiet Product
• They like whether functions/information are provided or hidden.
• What is a browser for them?
• What is the most important for them? Is visual design a concern for them? Is it true that visual design does not exist, but what they want?
• ......

As a result, the designer wants three types of information, including user understanding (user's age, gender, scenario, product usage habits, etc.), basic design element preferences (color, material, transparency, button shape, etc.) to provide the design with an "abstract feeling"

In addition, the idea given by each visual designer is only one aspect of the problem. Some people want to know this, some want to know it, but overlay their data, a relatively complete conceptual diagram can be created. Therefore, this fast interview is useful for capturing demands or understanding concepts. For example, when conducting a loss survey, you may want to directly ask the project team members to do some simple interviews and ask them what they think is the cause of user loss. This will help you better see the full view of the problem.

Some people ask why they don't just take the designer of the iPad browser. The real output objects of this report are used for interviews, but ask more designers. The reason is to make up for individual limitations. For example, how do I study the Browser style, how do I do it, how do you do it, And how do the third party do it? I have different ideas. Although you may not always do browser research, however, this does not prevent you from coming up with a solution quickly. Some of them are interconnected. In this way, we can collect different ideas on the same issue and see the multiple perspectives and thoughts behind these ideas. The solution should be better.

If you want to further develop a product, you can also ask other product managers about the same product problem. This is not a problem. Generally, the reason for not doing so is that, on the one hand, it may be to work with products for a long time, and they feel that their needs are easier to grasp, while the requirements of designers are relatively unfamiliar. On the other hand, the demand for products may be more unique. Each product is different, and the visual design between products is more similar. However, I still feel that I can try it based on the product requirements.

2,Solution design and implementation

Methods: Focus Group (the background questionnaire, the PPT for the discussion, and the user preference selection table during the discussion)

In addition to some basic user attribute data and product usage data, designers want more emotional things and get some design inspiration from users, therefore, during the design of the Research Scheme, some metaphysical data is collected, such as the clothing style, consumption class and concept, and the pace of life, what is their emotional experience when using a browser, and what kind of atmosphere the browser visually needs to create for them.

Therefore, based on the data types to be collected

• Telephone interviews are not suitable.
• Online questionnaire data will be cold, but it is not enough. It is suitable for answering simple, direct, and clear questions.
• With deep access, the project cost is relatively high, and the data obtained can be very deep and thick, while the visual style is a subjective preference, which is not as stable as the motivation or demand, it is a problem to know how many samples are needed.
• Card method, which is a good choice, but it will take a long time because of the project cycle and the same as the visit.
• Focal point group (group discussion), which is not necessarily the best method, but its data depth is between deep access and questionnaire. The advantage of this method is that it is highly efficient, and it seems that the input-output ratio is very high. The biggest problem is the stress of group selection on individuals. A person may not easily express his or her own distinctive ideas during group discussions, in particular, this kind of preference research will make the impact more fatal. Therefore, in this use, a large number of scales are used to give users the first choice, shielding other people from the impact.

3,Result output

Users want the browser to have a low sense of presence, so low as to not exist (without affecting the convenience of use), and visually, they want the browser's skin and "water" to be light, transparent, natural, fresh, dynamic, and pleasant.

According to the results of the focus group, users' preferences are highly consistent on some issues. Therefore, the report focuses on refining these results with strong consistency and no inter-group differences, the reason why the user chooses this is also given.

For these reasons, if you re-read the data, the problem is relatively stable, and it is hidden behind every choice. For example, they chose water for materials and light for transparency because they wanted a low sense of presence. They chose gray and T-shirts because they wanted browsers not to affect their webpage reading visually. They express or pin what they want through a variety of choices, and researchers need to piece together and explore the answer with a variety of questions.

In addition, these reasons are relatively stable among users. In terms of a product, what kind of product does the user really want? The reasons behind the product are not as wide as the peacock screen opening, the personalization of preferences is not as strong as expected. I guess more users will be created, and the common "reasons for choice" in the conclusion will also be available, but it may be more plump.

So all this implies another conclusion of the study. If project resources permit, the card method may be more suitable for the targeted Design Style Preferences of such products. This conclusion can be further verified if possible.

Some reports are as follows: