5
edits
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 126: | Line 126: | ||
Your testing methods seem very sensible, and I absolutely applaud your choice of two different prototyping methods. I think your decision to drop the 'grab bar' was sensible, although I can absolutely understand why you added it. I think it's one of those cases where convention (the OS and desktop, in this case) has to rule over a "more correct" solution. | Your testing methods seem very sensible, and I absolutely applaud your choice of two different prototyping methods. I think your decision to drop the 'grab bar' was sensible, although I can absolutely understand why you added it. I think it's one of those cases where convention (the OS and desktop, in this case) has to rule over a "more correct" solution. | ||
===Eric Reiss=== | |||
In practical terms, I think Cennydd and Jim have summarized the issues related to this project very well. That said, I don't think you folks have received enough praise for having done more detailed research at all. I think you DID uncover the key problems and made great strides to improve the process, even though your interview methodology and other background information regarding your research is lacking. | |||
Although I agree with Jim when he says that you take for granted that the reader of your proposal understands various terms and techniques, I generally understood what you meant (although a venture capitalist would probably not). And Cennydd is right in pointing out the scalability issues, which I think may be the most serious drawback; I'd like to see if this system can scale to 500+ bookmarks. | |||
But despite these shortcomings, let me be honest, this was one of the projects I liked best. Well done! |
edits