Hall of Fame/Shame

ocls.lib.overdrive.com/33BF6CA3-DCA1-4C07-BD65-2A308502CB20/10/50/en/Default.htm#

While this is the Orange County Library System's website, OCLS uses Overdrive for its digital library. This is a usability analysis of Overdrive, which recently updated its design. It really only ranks lowly on speed, but I think that has a huge effect on user preference.

Speed: Unless the user knows exactly what they want and what it looks like, the search results are not displayed in the most helpful way which really slows the experience down. Most titles are cut off, as well as author names. The cover picture of each result has entire corner covered up which can also block titles and authors. Overdrive has also removed summaries from search results so the patron needs to click back and forth between the results and individual items' pages. There is also a lot of clicking back and forth between the bookshelf of borrowed items and search results if the patron wants more than one item. Although there are ways to reorder search results, there is not a way to skip to other pages if there are more than 7 pages. For example in the former design, if the results were ordered by title, clicking a letter skipped to the results starting with that letter. Not the best, but now the only way to skip pages is to click the highest number showing until the page numbers shift to the page you want. The checkout process also takes multiple steps before finally allowing item downloads. If the patron accidently downloads the wrong format, there is no way to return it except waiting for it to expire, which means a week or multiple weeks of waiting for it to become available again.

Efficiency: It is difficult to make actual mistakes using Overdrive. Even with my last point above, there is a checkpoint where they ask if you are sure that the format is correct. The most likely mistake a patron would make would be thinking an item is the right one before they click to see the item's information.

Learnability: Searching and borrowing items is a process, but it is pretty easy (and technically straight forward) to learn.

Memorability: The process is also not hard to remember.

User Preference: Even with good efficiency, learnability, and memorability, Overdrive's speed in accomplishing tasks is extremely tedious. Giving users the ability to easily browse items is an important and well used function of a library, even a digital one, and Overdrive fails in that respect. I have heard from others that also have problems with Overdrive in Maryland's library system. Unfortunately, with public libraries, users do not have a choice to use another system.

Leann, you are correct, this is definitely a bad website. Aesthetics aside, as soon as it loads up, I can see that a user's speed would definitely be hindered by the cluttered and very clustered arrangement, alternating font colors and sizes (that usually seem to lack justification), and inconsistent punctuation that altogether forces the user to take a very long time trying to decipher what they need to find so that they can complete their task.

Many of the links provided under "Traveler Resources" in the navigation bar on the left of the screen do not seem to work when I click on them, either (I'm curious if they fail to load on other people's computers, as well). "Security Wait Times," for instance, says that the server is not found; if I click on "Track a Flight," Firefox tells me that the it cannot find the file; if I click on "Airport Information," then the Adelman Travel Group's website says that that page cannot be found; and so on and so forth in regards to "State Travel Warnings" and "Airline Phone Numbers." Again, I'm curious if they fail to load on other people's computers, as well--if so, that would definitely be another embarrassing aspect of an already embarrassing website.

Which is precisely why I chose it Aton. BECAUSE it is a site that focuses on its target audience and the story content of the site that the users want above all else. It makes it simple to use, easy to navigate and usable to even new users as you said. And as an added bonus it also makes it easier for you to become a member on the site and even offers an Adblocker feature for users as well, which is also easy to find: which i absolutely LOVED when I started used the site, before I got AdBlocker plus from FireFox

www.collaboratetoimpact.org/blog.html
I would like to nominate this nonprofit, Collaborate to Impact, to the hall of fame.

Speed: It is very easy and fast to find what you want on this site: Home, About Us, Events, Get Involved, Donate, Blog and Contact Us. Each of the sections also features drop down menus for further information.

Efficiency: The pages are very clean and not cluttered with links or too much information. It is easy to navigate each section.

Learnability: This site is very easy to navigate and easy to get around. You don't have to 'learn' how to use this site. As long as you know what you are looking for ie press releases you should be able to find that area very easily.

Memorability: I think this site is highly memorable once you use it once or twice. There really is nothing hidden or complex about this site.

User Preference: I think that this site, especially since it's purpose is to gain people's attention to donate or volunteer, should be more eye-catching. However, I think it shows that the website creators are more interested in holding events than working on their website, but a more catchy website might draw in more bucks for events.

I actually would have liked it there were more graphics and/or color on the site, but overall I liked the elegant design and actually appreciated that there weren't too many links on the whole site.

Hall of Fame--REYNOLDS
When I first clicked on a link in this website, I was ready to disagree with you and tell you that this website should be a part of the Hall of Shame. For example, when I clicked onto the Book link and saw all the books that were listed, I was overwhelmed. However, once I realized that you can sort all the lists that you see by the first letter of the book, I liked the format. People can choose what they like - some people like to go exactly what they are after so they would probably would sort the books (or whatever) by the alphabet, while others could take a more relaxed approach and pick a random book (or whatever) to read about.
Overall, the website was clean, easy to get around and use - I give it two thumbs up

www.netflix.com Hall of Fame

This is a site you can’t really experience without being a member, so I apologize for excluding anyone. Here is how the current homepage looks:

www.dvdactive.com/images/editorial/screenshot/2012/7/netflixmain_original.jpg

I have been using Netflix since I was in 7th grade so I have truly seen the development of their site. Now that streaming has become a major component of their product they have REALLY improved usability. They have worked to simplify and clean up the look and the site has become more intuitive.

I have never experienced any usability problems with the web pages themselves. Lately, they have been working on improving some streaming features, which still needs work. For example, if you are watching an episode of a TV show and that episode ends a transitional screen will appear to give you the option to play the next episode. It is functional, but I’m not really a fun of it. I would like to see a “Play All” feature.

That being said here is rest of my evaluation (1 being the worst and 10 being the best):

I use the term “intuitive” frequently in this evaluation so I’d like to explain what I mean by this. Intuitive means a person doesn’t need to have prior knowledge to make something function, in fact the total knowledge needed is that far off. Operations come naturally, without training. And lastly, the person reaches the total knowledge state without being aware the system was teaching them.

Speed- 7/10 Netflix uses a ton of images and despite this the pages always load within a decent time. It could be quicker, but pages aren’t so slow that I feel frustrated or impatient. Could be better but not a hindrance.

Efficiency- 10/10 There are two main searches a person can do on this site: look for something specific or browse. Both are equally facilitated. Their search engine is great and lately they really improved their browsing features (the rows of images on the home page scroll sideways at whatever speed you want for example).

I feel that their system for categorization is fairly intuitive. Each main category (Comedy) has subcategories (Standup). I have never felt confused by them.

Additionally, dealing with account information and more of the business end is easy and straightforward.


Learnability- 10/10 I don’t have a child nor have I ever seen child try to use Netflix but I feel that a youngster could probably successfully use most of the site. I certainly didn’t have a problem doing so went I was 12 (but again I can’t really speak for a younger person).

Netflix is designed to be intuitive so learning is very easy. Recent changes have drastically altered the site and I had no grievances or issues with learning the new set up. In fact, the new set up didn’t even slow me down.

Memorability- 10/10 I use Netflix most everyday, so memorability is difficult for me to comment from personal experience. However, due to the intuitive set up I am confident most people would have no trouble remembering how to use Netflix (even if they can the setup).

User Preference- 100/10 That 100 is no mistake, Netflix is a business and they really strive to please their streaming audience. In the past, the homepage had a lot more text and smaller images. If you look at it now the main identifier is the cover image. People like visuals, and in the past people browsed for films by cover images (think Blockbuster). The current setup is entirely based on the idea that people prefer images to text when browsing. I also know they take user complaints seriously and are quick to fix problems.

Additionally, Netflix has a “taste profile” that allows you to tailor what Netflix will recommend to you. Talk about user preference.


This evaluation ended up sounding like a sales pitch, but the fact is that I’m really satisfied. Netflix also has a motivator that some of the other sites we have discussed here don’t – they are business and if they have poor usability they lose money.

Holy cow Andrea, www.jamilin.com/ is terrible! It is so cluttered that it is unsettling. It is also hard to get a fix on the purpose of the site. Other than the titles in the navigation, it is confusing. Things also don't print very well from the pages, which doesn't help with usability. I also think the "learnability" is zero. What is there to learn to use? As you said it is mostly text so the opportunities for interaction are very limited.