Comments at physical interface

tom spider: US ALWAYS SIMPLE BUT great!! Best Regards from Germany from: Http://www.ver...

tom spider — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 18:31:14 GMT

Comment on Modular kit housing

US ALWAYS SIMPLE BUT great!!
Best Regards from Germany from:
Http://www.verpflichtungserklaerung.info

tom spider: Thanks for sharing some of your thought and design process on this! Greetings...

tom spider — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 18:40:56 GMT

Comment on That design is money!

Thanks for sharing some of your thought and design process on this!
Greetings from Germany, please visit: Http://www.verpflichtungserklaerung.info

Ryan Bell: Thanks for sharing some of your thought and design process on this! And now ...

Ryan Bell — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:48:18 GMT

Comment on That design is money!

Thanks for sharing some of your thought and design process on this!

And now for some armchair quarterbacking:

Chase has a similar concept of “ATM preferences”, but I believe you set them via their online banking website rather than the ATM interface itself. This keeps the ATM simpler and prevents delays if other people are waiting. The drawback, of course, if that if you think of a change you want, you have to remember to go online later and make it.

The “Return Card” button is interesting – it’s a clear “cancel” option that stays in the same place in every screen, and cues you to pull your card out after hitting it. “Return Card – Including All Checks” is strange wording, though. Why isn’t this “Return Card – And All Checks”? Checks are not a type of card, nor part of your card.

Also, I question the general wisdom of ATM hardware that holds your card during an interaction. I’m not sure of the reasoning behind this decision, but I’ve seen too many cards get left in ATMs accidentally, in spite of all the flashing lights and beeping to remind you to remove it. Personally, I much prefer ATMs that simply have you swipe your card to start a transaction.

I agree wholeheartedly with the commenter who said that the main menu screen is still too busy, despite the visual cleanup. I actually like that all possible actions are in one place instead of buried in various submenus, but why isn’t “Get Cash” larger or highlighted somehow, along with “Deposit Checks”, as these are most likely the main things people do at an ATM? Other than the ordering of buttons, and the odd lone “stamp” icon (which sounds like more a reflection of Wells’ money-making priorities than actual user needs), there’s no obvious hierarchy or differentiation among all these options.

(The stamp icon raises an interesting process issue—who are you really designing for? Wells Fargo, or the ATM user? If their interests conflict, which wins?)

I also think your use of icons in the ATM shortcut buttons to denote different receipt preferences is less than ideal. Due to their positioning, the icons look like they describe the transaction as a whole. Combined with the check mark and “red cross-out” visuals, I would at first read the shortcut buttons in the zoomed-in photo as meaning: “Deposit Checks is OK”, “Get $40 Cash is not Allowed (or Failed)” (why?), “Deposit Checks is OK” (again? what’s the difference? it’s the same account…)

I would move these icons to the bottom corner of the button, to denote that they’re a secondary setting (and also that they apply to the *end* of the transaction, the receipt). The tiny dark stripe on the second one for “deposit checks” is also waaaay too subtle – how many users would ever notice that? I guess it indicates the preference to have check images printed on the receipt. There’s plenty of room in those deposit buttons to just write this (“Print copies” / “No copies”)

These are minor gripes, though – I like the design as a whole!

sidney orr: Obviously good aesthetics, but a very poor price-size ratio. I see retail ki...

sidney orr — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 20:35:17 GMT

Comment on Modular kit housing

Obviously good aesthetics, but a very poor price-size ratio. I see retail
kits, ready to move into, assembled on your foundation, for
a rule-of-thumb price of <= $79 sq foot (in calif) ALL_INCLUSIVE
except for the foundation and land of course… and…. if one wishes
even more vanilla materials—but still better designed than many
post WWII tracts that many of grew up in – it is possible to get even
lower sq foot costs…. BTW it should be common-sense that building a foundation, with a few friends, who are experienced, is not rocket-science…. the art lies in finding the land with infrastructure in place…and that may not be hard to do, esp whilst the depression continues…. also, I am seeing many “fixers”—with land—for well
under $100k – in calif no less – for better or worse – that may be even more cost effective….

Manuel Pino: I'd like to thank you for sharing with us this great article. I work in Self ...

Manuel Pino — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 19:06:21 GMT

Comment on That design is money!

I’d like to thank you for sharing with us this great article. I work in Self Service area since many years ago and I never have seen an interface so intuitive and clear. This is the right direction, to be clear and fast. Congratulations Mr. Struppek
Best regards
Manuel Pino