I think you're taking a step backwards here... Now you're forcing your users to submit information one at a time, instead of all with the push of a button.

There are many forms out there that have solved the "incorrect info" problem by merely having the script place some type of red message next to the field. For example, if you type in a username and then click the next field, it will immediately look in the database and see if that username is taken, if it's taken, it will say "This username is already taken" in red text next to the field. This way, the user can then simply go back to the field and modify it.

Same thing for if they enter the second e-mail field (verification) wrong. It will say "validation e-mail doesn't match" or something. Without having the user reload the form and start over.

Some username fields also have a "check availability" button next to the field so a user could easily hit the button to check if the name is available.

I think your method is a bit confusing and also not really necessary considering the alternatives.

A great example of this type of form is the yahoo email signup... it shows both the "availability" button for usernames, as well as red text if you don't type both passwords correctly, etc. (even has a nifty password strength meter to make sure you get a nice password)

Also if the name you want is taken, it even goes so far as to list available suggestions that are close to that name. It even pops a little "i" info tooltip like thing next to the text fields as you select them, to better explain what info they are wanting.

So definitely take a look at something like that

https://edit.yahoo.com/registration?.src=fpctx&.intl=us&.done=http://www.yahoo.com/

I have to agree with the above poster.

There are sufficient methods to do a live update on a registration form so that the user will know instantly if there is a problem (one great example is direct web remoting).

Additionally, your method could prove frustrating when dealing with "taken usernames". E.g. I want to use the nickname "Gester" - click next - already taken - GesterX - click next - already taken - Gesterx1 - click next already taken... now I am beginning to get frustrated becasue I cannot get past stage 3 of the registration form so I simply browse away from the web site.

With the live updates, by taking out the action if clicking "Next" every attempt that frustration is alleviated.

Quote:Original post by NewSoftzzz
It's quite the same, in both cases you have to type in the username and then click something to check the name (in my form you have to mouseclick 'next' or press enter, in yahoo you have to mouseclick another field or press tab')

Yes, it is really the same, but yours seems more annoying, and judging by the fact that the first 4 people to respond to you think so I'd say it's not uncommon for people to think so.

People get used to doing things a certain way when it comes to UI elements, and unless you have a compelling reason to do things differently you should generally stick to what people are used to; it will be familiar, and will feel most comfortable even if an alternative is potentially better.

Your method breaks down the form into a simple 4-step process. Even though a "normal" form would have all the same fields and validation involved, putting it all on one page makes it feel like a 1-step process.


I would suggest putting all the fields on the same page and using client-side and/or AJAX calls to provide inline feedback to the user. Don't forget to re-check anything that has been validated client-side upon submission, as you can't trust the client machine!


Good on you for trying out new things to see if you can improve the user experience -- but please, if the data you collect from test users suggests they prefer the old way, don't hold on to your idea just because you want to prove it right. Do get more people to try it out before you blindly trust us though, as we could well be the only 4 people who would prefer the standard method over yours.

Hope that helps! [smile]

Quote:Original post by NewSoftzzz
The best explanation would be that my original idea is actually working correctly.

That's an explanation, but not neccesarily the best explanation. Did you try your test subjects with both styles of form and ask them to choose a preference, or did you just ask if they liked the form they were using?

Quote:Meaning, it is as easy as it can be. And non technical people like those 4 girls do like it.

As I said above, unless you got your subjects to compare both systems you don't really have a meaningful baseline to conclude your system is as easy as possible; it is easy to use, but not yet neccesarily easiest.

However, if we assume it is easiest for non-technical people we have another question; are your target audience non-technical, or are they more likely to agree with the responses you've had here? I would suggest that people who will play a browser based game are more likely to be technical, but this might not be your target market. [smile]

Quote:so subconsciously you may feel insulted by this oversimple and overeasy form which makes you dislike it?

It my personal case I don't think this is the explanation; rather I'm more comfortable with a standardised single-page system due to familiarity. I'm not insulted by the simplicity, but it is outside my comfort zone, and therefore strikes me as less simple.

Hope that's useful.