Google User Experience

My interest in this paper is a 4. Basically it looks long and very ugly.

The three main ideas of this paper are to focus on the user, the importance of a design that can affect the world, and the importance of simplicity.

This paper related to our class because it describes Google's design guidelines or heuristics.

How can Google discuss “delighting the eye,” shouldn't this paper also be as beautiful as the other Google products?

My interest in this paper was a 6. It is always interesting to see how our class discussion relate to real-life, so seeing Google's design principles in comparison to “Tog's” and Neilsen's makes sense to me.

The three main ideas of this paper is a tricky question since it was just listing their design principles, but I guess it would be 1) Google designs for a variety of users (useful, engaging, universal) 2)This benefits the user because it is fast, beautiful, simple, and innovative 3) Because they are a corporation they must view the user as a consumer as well taking into account profit and retainment of customers (trustworthy).

This paper relates to our class in that it gives another set of design principles to be compared to both Tog's and Neilsen's. I thought it was interesting to compare the three seeing that Google (perhaps obviously) takes a more commercial approach mentioning things like “profit” and “trustworthy,” which Neilsen and Tog's do not approach. Google also leaves out more obvious principles that the other two include like “consistency.” Actually Google seems to imply the opposite with their principle of innovation, which brings me to my question…

How does Google balance innovation with consistency and standards? We talked about how in beginning user testing that users were waiting for the page to load, which seems like a result of inconsistency.