W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2003

re: statistics on usability of accessible websites

From: Matthew Ogston <matthewogston@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 13:14:14 +0000
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <Law15-F4B4LgJUHxUv300006c17@hotmail.com>

An interface that users can use quickly and efficiently will always have 
advantages over interfaces that are slow and cumbersome (but pretty) to use, 
especially to business managers keen to save money and have a quick 'Return 
on Investment'. Business managers, in my experience, generally want to 
save/make money over and above making things look pretty. As long as they 
save/make money and the site looks good, they are normally happy.

That of course is no excuse for things to look bad or ugly. An accessible 
site does not need, in many cases, to look any different from an 
inaccessible one, but that of course depends each site's requirements. A 
good designer can make a 100% accessible site look great, they just need to 
know how to take advantage of the technology available.

Web Applications. The very nature of these beasts are that they must work 
efficiently. For this to happen users must be able to use them quickly and 
cost effectively. If users pause and marvel at how wonderful a website 
looks, then they are not completing the tasks they went to the site to do.

Like Andy said, Google is a great example. It is easy to use, fairly 
accessible, but of course it does its job well, search. It doesn't look 
fantastic, but of course Google was never meant to.

I hope this is of some help?



Hotmail messages direct to your mobile phone http://www.msn.co.uk/mobile
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 2003 09:14:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:23 UTC