|
79% scan: still good?
|
fhub-@cortexte.com
|
Mar 30, 2003 19:13 PST
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_009F_01C2F6E8.A1EB6780
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hello everyone:
Are there any updates of the Jakob Nielsen's rules saying users read 25% slower on screen and that 79% of them scan texts on-line?
We've been referring to these numbers since 1998 or sooner.
Are they still accurate? Any other recent studies?
Wrote to Jakob one week ago but got no response so far.
Thanks,
François Hubert
------=_NextPart_000_009F_01C2F6E8.A1EB6780
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Hello everyone:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Are there any updates of
the Jakob Nielsen's rules saying users read 25% slower on screen and that
79% of them scan texts on-line?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> We've been referring to these
numbers since 1998 or sooner.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Are they still accurate? Any other recent studies?</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Wrote to Jakob one week ago but got no
response so far.</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> Thanks,</DIV></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>François Hubert</FONT></DIV>
</BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_009F_01C2F6E8.A1EB6780--
|
|
 |
|
