The peer team used two different methods.
An expert evaluation considering the areas:
User group, "the feeling", interaction and overarching structure, primary/secondary functions, design/composition, help/support and presentation sketches.
Heuristic Evaluation, using Nielsens Rules of Thumb as heuristics.
The report is a list of key points they noted for relevant items while running through each process.
- Obvious to see it value and usefullness for the primary (tourist) persona.
- Weaker case for the secondary (daily traveller) persona. No proof that it lacks value for this persona, but we should present more evidence of value if we want it to be convincing.
- Plain solution. Easy to understand.
- Fulfills a need.
- The user will stay as long as they need the information or stay interested. There is no obvious goal, rather an optional information screen.
- (Hard to quantify the benifits in an objective way.)
- Very clear what the interface offers.
- Consider adding info about the boat's properties; like accessability, restrooms, size etc.
- Plain and clear.
- Just a secondary feature listing the real-time timetable, since there is a real-time table at the wharfs already.
- Design. Lots of options to consider and experiment with: Zoom level, fixed or changing zoom, 2D/3D, different view directions, picture-in-picture with multiple zooms or views.
- Is the location really the best one? Looks good in the presentation, but will it compete with seats or reduce number of people who can stand in the area when crowded? Visibility when several people are on the boat?
- Nice design. Blends well with the environment.
- No need for help functions or instructions.
- The lo-fi prototype looks great. Provides good info how it is intended to look.