Hello, ello, llo, lo, o,
>>
>> Jurre van Bergen:
>> SI 622 ... would like to ... perform a series of usability evaluations
>> and give you
>> detailed, actionable feedback on the usability of your [chosen]
>> product.
>> [...]
>>
This is a Masters program in the US so the cost is high and the
backgrounds vary wildly and not in a good way (most don't have any
experience of relevance); tread lightly.
However, with that said, it would be sweet to see both in some way :)
>
> sajolida:
> If it makes sense to have them work on the *redesign* of a system (and
> not only on an evaluation), then we could have them working on:
>
> - The whole network connection process ("Tor and network progress bar",
> "Persistent Tor state", "Persistent Tor configuration", the draft from
> Lunar, etc.)
>
This is all the same (parts to a whole); and I have been mapping this
out for a little while.
>
> - "Explain better what Tails is"
>
This is good though I think they could do something more fun since they
have to select ours over others'.
However, given that an evaluation like this (depending on the applied
resources) can run about ₦10,000,000.00 [0], I propose having them do
just that, evaluate Tails.
Send 'em 1.7 :)
We can extract a lot of cool stuff from their education and apply to our
own testing/evaluation/development process by reverse engineering their
report.
Wordlife,
Spencer
[0]:
http://www.nngroup.com/consulting/design-review-ia-analysis/
