Usability Testing and UX

[CoffeeAddict]

I simply ask 2 things:

1) Hire someone who knows UX.  Do not continue to design EA UI by your internal developers.  EA is a pain in the ass many times trying to figure out the quirky places you guys put functions and how you even design some of the menus, screens, etc.

2) Get a clue about what usability is and what true usability testing is and give a d a m n and do it.  Usability testing is not your internal VP testing the app or developers.  It's actively holding usability trials, having your customers actually beta test but more than that...come into your shop and actually do usability testing...thus your customers giving you feedback on the points that suck and you changing it to work.

I don't know why you seem to design a UI by developers that is used by developers.  Developers can't design.  Customers today expect 1 & 2.  And EA is missing the boat on this completely.  If you don't listen to me that's fine but reap the problems later.

Perfect example of the screwed up crap I have to worry about with EA:

http://www.sparxsystems.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1273629646/0

who designs something like this where you have 3 levels of font changes whereas the toolbar overrides all others.  Whose brilliant design decision was this?

[skiwi]

I'd like to understand conceptually what is the difference between a content menu (RMB click) on an object in diagram, the object in the project browser, and the menu toolbar.

The classic example of this is the oft raised question of "How do I copy a diagram".
Naive users might expect to find it under Edit on the menu tookbar, since traditionally that is where you find cut, copy paste.
Those somewhat more discerning might expect to find it under Diagram on the menu toolbar, and indeed they do find Copy Image, but not what they are looking for.
A fortunate few actually find it on the context menu for the object in the project browser.
Each of these context menus is different, but the rationale behind these differences escapes me.

[CoffeeAddict]

One of the major usability issues with EA is that they seperate really the same functionality often into several places (menu items, context menus, toolbar options, etc.).  So you're left with a half ass baked approach to performing an operation half time because you find some of the features related to the certain operation you want to perform in one place and then the finish up of that process in another.

Again, a prime example of this is formatting objects (formatting the default appearance on a control type) and then formatting stuff that is layered below that...for example the extra layer of formatting that is available when you double click for example the note itself.  And you even see only half the options there (no ability to control font size, etc.) at that lower level.

It's just way, way unorganized.  There is no commonality or flow here.

[skiwi]

Then you'll love this
http://www.sparxsystems.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1249856897

[CoffeeAddict]

yep, this is exactly my complaint.  WTF is up with Sparx?  I heard they never listen to their customers.  So why the hell should I switch from Visio when I have trouble just changing font in EA?

At least Microsoft can get something as simple as fonts consistent and easy.

I'm getting really sick of EA's twirks...and just inconsistent and in some cases dup or just bad design.

[CoffeeAddict]

So....I have the power either to influence my boss to switch to EA from Visio or not.  He's open to EA for our team.  However, with the inconsistent and sometimes just awful experiences I've had...even though EA is more powerful and in some cases easier...the bad outweighs the good and wastes my time.  I would rather use Visio and just get simple flowcharts done if all I'm going to use this is for ERDs and Flowcharting.

Really disappointed with EA's lack of usability testing and acknowledging customer feedback.  Unreal especially intoday's world where usability is finally becoming demanded by customers.

[skiwi]

The reason we persevere is because Visio is just diagrams, although admittedly it does have some reverse engineering, etc.

OTOH EA is a modelling tool, with a repository, with all the advantages that come with that.
I agree it would be better if Sparx slowed down a bit on the innovation, and sorted the basics out, basics of usability, UI, and a congruent operational experience, better diagramming, and (my own bête noire) the ability to easily produce quality professional looking documents, that come up time and time again in these forums.

[KP]

CoffeeAddict, I've checked with our support team and they have never received a single support request, feature request or bug report from you. This is a user forum, and posting on here is not the same as contacting Sparx directly. Please contact us using the official form. Thanks.

[skiwi]

This is a good point. I have found Sparx to be very responsive to investigating both bugs, change requests, and new feature suggestions.

So too is this community to discussing issues and proposals prior to formally submitting them to Sparx.
Substantial community support and discussion in the forums indicates to Sparx the importance to EA users of bug fixes and proposed issues, as does support requests for the same issue from a number of registered users.