Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

We also contemplated saving the sketches as the user sketched instead of waiting till the user was done sketching but that approach was more bug-prone and given the time limitations, we opted for the less bug-prone approach of saving when the user clicked the Save button.

*** Need to talk about how we used RFID reader to remove need for typing ***

- the actual board was not functional until the week before GR5 was due. It was missing a crucial connecting cable to allow the smart board to communicate with the computer. After several tens of hours of conversations with Customer Service and three sets of incorrect cables, we finally got the board working. So resolution, fit to big screen don't happen very well.

...

User testing: Testing the prototypes without the SmartBoard made it difficult for us to judge how interaction with the board will differ form interaction on a computer. The environment in which we tested the prototype was also different from the actual environment. Since we briefed users about the project, its purpose and high-level functionality. However, this did not allow us to test the discoverability of the PosterBoard purpose and functionality. Moreover, we were unable to observe how users would interact with the touch interface since heuristic evaluation was done using a mouse and keyboard.

- prototyped features were a good set. More fully prototype. Should have put Prototypes: The set of features we prototyped was good. It would have been beneficial to more fully prototype the functionality. Since the backend was missing, we were unable to provide system status updates and hence this part was not tested. We could also have put the paper prototype on a vertical board and let users interact with it. Prototype at scaleobserved peoples' interaction. It would also have helped to prototype at scale. Using a UI designed for a computer screen on the SmartBoard did not give good results.

- evaluating results of observation: each user test had new people, so each time we found new problems but no feedback on whether the old problems had been fixed

...