This document discusses mobile usability and compares it to web usability. It notes that the size, gestures, context of use, and lack of hover effects are different for mobile. While the design process and some principles like visual hierarchy still apply, other principles like navigation may not. It also references two readings that debate Nielsen's mobile usability guidelines and provides resources for learning more about best practices for mobile usability testing and design.

1. Mobile Usability

2. 1. What is different
about mobile?
Students mentioned:
• Size
• Gestures
• Tapping
• No hover effects
• Context of use

3. 2. What does/does not
apply to mobile?
Students mentioned:
• Design process applies
• Some design principles apply (e.g. Gestalt,
visual hierarchy, grids)
• Some design principles may not apply (e.g.
navigation)

4. Debate based on 2
readings
• Nielsen’s guidelines for mobile usability:
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mobile-
vs-full-sites.html
• Josh Clark’s counterpoint: http://
www.netmagazine.com/opinions/nielsen-
wrong-mobile
• Josh Clark on Twitter: @globalmoxie

5. Mobile usability
HARD Web UX:
Philosophy
Process
? Principles

6. Web UX Principles
Multiple column layouts
Persistent navigation
Content vs. links/buttons
Images. Video. Flash.

7. Platform

9. Context

10. Focus:
TransACTION

11. Important:
Planning
Information architecture
Wireframing
Early testing

14. Resources

15. @globalmoxie

16. http://mobithinking.com/best-practices/a-three-step-guide-
usability-mobile-web
http://econsultancy.com/us/blog/6610-seven-enlightening-
mobile-usability-presentations

17. iPad = smartphone???
• Read–tap asymmetry for websites, with content that was large enough
to read but too small to tap. We did see some examples across a few
websites that were designed to work well on tablets, with bigger touchable
areas. For example,Virgin America's reservation page let users touch
anywhere in the entire table cell containing a desired departure, as opposed
to having to touch the much smaller area represented by the radio button
(or even its label).
• Websites worked fairly well in the standard iPad browser as long as
users didn't have complex tasks; focusing on reading and looking at pictures
or video was relatively easy. (If your service requires substantial interaction,
consider an app instead of a site.)
• Touchable areas were too small in many apps, as well as too close
together, increasing the risk of touching the wrong one.
• Accidental activation due to unintended touches again caused trouble,
particularly in apps lacking a Back button.
• Low discoverability, with active areas that didn't look touchable.
• Users disliked typing on the touchscreen and thus avoided the
registration process.
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/ipad.html