Heuristic evaluation common to human-computer interaction is a mechanism set in place to be used as a standard measure of interfaces by comparing them to predefined set of principles. Often, this evaluation is carried out during development of software, before it’s finalized and eventually implemented. It’s a test to ensure that whatever is being developed surely complies with the set design principles and standards. It’s mostly the aspects connected to usability that are tested, and more precisely factors affecting the application’s interface. Any kind of disloyalty to heuristics identified during the testing and e valuation process are reported to the concerned software developers, who are, therefore, required to make the specified changes to match the requirements and expectations (Sharp, 456-467).
Not much literature has been explored on the subject of heuristics. However, Jacob Nielsen has been termed the pioneer in these studies, mostly relating to the ten usability heuristics he released, that have been popularly in use to date. He proposes inspection as an accompaniment to the evaluation process in heuristics. However, this has been rarely practiced, following the fact that the instruments to be used for the inspection process have either been rarely available or better worse completely unavailable. This is evident especially in heuristics concerning video games that are also multi-player.
Taking the example of an Android device such as a mobile phone, the device can be used in different and changing environments as concerning fluctuations in lighting and clamor. This is possible since the mobility heuristics, in-built 9in it can allow for such changes, either gradually or suddenly, without having much ado with the efficiency and effectiveness in performance of the device in question (Sharp, 456-467).
There are different levels, or rather categories of usability problems to which heuristics can be applied. One, there are the requirements-independent type that do not necessarily have any impact on the end users of the application and the goals it’s meant to achieve. These are problems that do not hinder clarity in the use of the application and are free of user related issues such as unclear messages and directives. Then secondly, there are the requirements-dependent problems. These have a direct influence on effectiveness of the said application as regards the users and achievement of the specified goals during its development. Its, therefore, of great importance to have different heuristics for solving these diverse issues if the evaluation and inspection processes re to be effective and efficient in ensuring quality and that at least the user requirements are considered and met.
Heuristics play an important role in analyzing, exemplifying and cataloguing the significant usability-related problems in game design and in making out the harshness of each of these factors as concerns the users experience and competence in computer gaming. This also helps in determining the most urgent and pressing issues that may require faster and keen attention, especially when the inspection is done. Reports are compiled showing a record of the encroachments made to the available and known heuristics. These reports are what the software developers use when reviewing their development, before it’s released for sale and use.
In context and association with heuristics, usability is viewed as the measure of how much users can manipulate a system effectively with little help from the support staff and channel its resources towards achieving their unique goals and objectives. This must be accompanied by a sensation of contentment in their ability to use the system and by the results produced.
Different techniques for carrying out evaluation have been proposed, though just a few have been put into practice. For instance, some may only be applied at the very early stages of the design, while others are used at the advanced or post-design stages, incorporating the advanced features of the system. Each of these techniques is known to have unique prerequisites hence applicability to diverse situations (Habgood, 34-36)
Many authors interested in heuristics have proposed so much that can be used as the standard measures, however, it’s evident that the Jacob Nielsen’s heuristics released in 1990 and later redone in 1994 in his book “Usability Engineering” are the most commonly used. Applicability of these heuristics to different platforms can be explained as below (Sharp, 456-467).
This measure requires that the system in question constantly keep the users abreast of what is happening at the background to produce the results. This can be done by the system probing feedback within time intervals convenient to both the user and the system itself.
Visibility in an AMD PC is evident, since it provides the user with feedback when playing a game on its platform. It for instance advices on how the game can be played smoothly, the graphics needed to make this possible and the effectiveness of using a console version of the player in use, giving the specific settings required to make this happen. Taking an example of Half-Life demo on an AMD processor, a standard resolution is realized with the best speed in gaming because of the continued feedback for the required settings (Igoe, 56-58).
Visibility is also honored in Android. The games in the Android tablet, taking an example of Shadow Gun are user friendly, providing guidelines for the users to start off the game. They then continuously tell on the level reached and scores attained, also some notifications on the settings that may require some changes.
Match between system and the real world:
This measure requires of the system to use an easy to understand language, not fro the device but for the user. It requires elimination of complexities, requiring logic and some sense of order in the gaming processions.
AMD processor presents the games in a simple and easy to understand way. The language used in communication and documentation is user-oriented and the design is in a manner that depicts the real world happenings. Some sense of logic is seen in the development of the games and the feedback is built gradually as per the levels attained in the game.
On the same note, Android console presents game happenings as though they were a reality. It makes the user feel touch with the game by its simple and realistic nature. A user playing the Real Football 2012 on Android feels a sense of liveliness and reality in the game, as though they were literally doing it in the field (Sharp, 456-467).
User control and freedom:
It’s a common practice within systems to make it complex for users to exit an application they might have entered unknowingly. This becomes more irritating when the exit process has to involve many procedures just to leave an application they are not interested with. It could be reasonable and friendly if exit controls could be entirely vested on the users at their request (Igoe, 56-58).
Comparing the Intel and AMD gaming platforms, AMD has proven to be a bit unstable especially as regards user control and freedom. The processor takes ages to close a game or even hangs up the whole system. Users, therefore, go through much difficulty in bid to close games they had opened. This also slows down the speed and performance of the system, which may eventually crash (Sheller, 223-225).
Most Android users have been heard complaining on the difficult they experience when exiting games and other applications. This is because the home button does not allow for such exits, forcing them to install the task killer or else the applications are left on a standby mode. This reduces the durability of the device, and especially as concerns the life of its battery. However, Android provides for an easier exit by using the back arrow, which is not known to most of its users (Head, 44-46).
Consistency and standards:
Irrelevance and inconsistency is a major problem incurred in the use of many systems. Users often fail to understand messages probed by the system and most specifically to what they are referring to.
AMD is known for its user friendliness and consistency in the usability standards. This is seen in that the processor speed matches from when the game is opening to the climax, despite engaging the system so much. However, at times this console can prove inconsistent given issues of hanging when the system is overworked.
Android has some inconsistency in a unique way. Concerning reminders on change of settings, Android ignores the reminders presented by the default browser using its in-built pop-ups. Different applications and settings come with different reminders, hence much inconsistency experienced (Igoe, 56-58).
Error prevention:
Error detection and even better than good error messages is a careful design which prevents a problem from occurring in the first place. The system should prevent, detect and correct errors when the rest have failed.
In AMD, the chipsets are interconnected with kernel modules that are used for handling errors related to the hardware. The major focus is the errors that affect the memory although the non-memory errors are also dealt with.
Android, on the on the other hand applies the ARQ systems for error detection and recovery. This is an efficient method for detecting and managing errors since it applies to both online and offline errors (Sheller, 223-225).
Recognition rather than recall:
In focusing to consider recognition as opposed to recall, the memory load should be minimized as much as possible by making the resources to be used visible and readily available. Making the frequently used variables global to be seen by all applications is also important in ensuring easy retrieval (Sheller, 223-225).
AMD tablet has much recall than recognition. The relevance of the results prompted over the total available is seemingly higher than the recognition realized. On the same note Android has much of recall as compared to precision and recognition. However, its ability to use the cloud services is evidence of its recognition levels.
Flexibility and efficiency of use:
Flexibility and efficiency as regards usability calls for the application to allow ease of use by both the experienced and less experienced users. AMD is known to be much simpler for manipulation by the people using it, whether experienced or not. Contrary to this, Android users experience lots of difficulties in manipulating their applications, given the complex nature of the devices.
Aesthetic and minimalist design:
System feedback or dialogues with the users should not be too wordy or containing irrelevant or information that is not of great significance to the users. Any unwanted information just serves to reduce the system performance since it takes up a notable amount of memory space.
Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors:
As discussed above, error detection involves the console or tablet notifying the user on the probability or existence of an error. The system then provides for mechanisms of recovery from such errors. How AMD and Android do this s already covered above (Head, 44-46).
Help and documentation:
given the rise in computer ethics and crime, most application developers tend to be opposed to the documentation issue. Its however advantageous to provide documentation for ease of manipulation by the end users. AMD has little documentation but offers tutorials and manuals that the users use as guidelines to using its applications.
Android games also come with user manuals that tell on how the application works, giving guidelines on the shortcut keys and tutorials that educate more on the graphics and supporting software that may need to be installed (Habgood, 33-34).
Works Cited
Habgood, Jacob, Nana Nielsen, and Martin Rijks. The game maker's companion game development : the journey continues. Berkeley, Calif.: Apress ;, 2010. Print.
Head, Alison J.. Design wise: a guide for evaluating the interface design of information resources. Medford, NJ: Information Today, 1999. Print.
Igoe, Tom. Making things talk: practical methods for connecting physical objects. Beijing: O'Reilly, 2007. Print.
Kuniavsky, Mike. Observing the user experience: a practitioner's guide to user research. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 2003. Print.
Sharp, Helen, Yvonne Rogers, and Jenny Preece. Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley, 2007. Print.
Sheller, Mimi, and John Urry. Mobile technologies of the city. London: Routledge, 2006. Print.
