Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Figure 6 shows the "settle dispute" pop-up menu. In this pop-up menu, there is a "new amount" field that is defaulted to $0.00. This default has been chosen to make it easy for users to accept disputes (clearing the debt). This type of menu also makes it easy for the two users to agree on a new amount of the debt if they choose so. if the new amount is set to $0.00, the debt will be automatically deleted on both of the user's accounts.

Design #2


Upon logging in, the user will be greeted by the Home Page.  At the top, there is a bar with the PennyPincher logo and three menu buttons to be displayed on all pages.  A the home page specifically (which can be accessed by clicking on the PennyPincher logo at the top), the user will see a quick overview of the current “what is owed” status from the most recent closed transaction period.  Reds (as taken from the term ‘in the red’) shows what the user owes other people, whereas Greens (for ‘in the money’ where green symbolizes as such) shows what other people owe the user.  The Reds and Greens can be expanded and contracted as needed and will show the transactions under each with additional granularity.  Image Modified
Clicking on the transaction button will lead to a page where new transactions can be added.  In this example, Eunice would like to add a transaction where she paid for dinner for a group of friends (with Adam W and Madeline J).  Although she would have been fine to split the bill evenly, Madeline insisted that she pay a larger portion since she ordered a more exotic dish and have Adam and Eunice split the difference.  After selecting the people involved in the transaction, specifying custom payments, and adding a quick description, Eunice posts the transaction. 
Clicking on the summary button will load a new page that shows a list of compiled transactions.  This can be filtered by transaction period, and further by date posted, by counterparty (who the transaction was with), by amount, by transaction type, etc.  Clicking on the information icon will lead to a transactions description page.  Image Added

With the transactions description page, details about the transaction are shown.  Eunice sees that this transaction is faulty and decides to dispute it by clicking on the Dispute button.  This leads to a new page that where she can add a quick memo/message about the dispute before submission.  When the dispute is posted, the counterparty (Matt M in this case) will be notified for settlement.

Dimensions of Usability

PROS

Learnability: This design is similar to many existing applications on the market.  There is a clearly defined menu bar at the top for easy navigation to feature pages; the summary page lists transactions in similar style to some online banking mobile-based displays. 

Efficiency:  A common action that users will encounter will be to add a new transaction.   The current design places the add transaction button to the top left of the screen for easy navigation on every page!

Safety:  When there are faulty transactions, users have the ability to post a dispute for mistaken transactions.  (Although not shown here in this design, the original poster of a transaction should have the ability to cancel it).  

CONS

Learnability: While there are many features here that are commonly found in some well-known applications, it may be unclear what a transaction implies (as in, who is allowed to make a transaction and type of transaction).  Since our implementation involves only one-way directional transaction relation, this may be difficult to learn or understand for users.  

Safety:  Ease of tracking, settling, and following-up with disputes is currently unknown.  This design provides an option to "settle" a dispute, such that the transaction will be effectively canceled.  However it is a bit uncertain how to handle the case that a dispute is settled by an agreement on a new transaction amount.

*Complex transactions:  *Consider the case where at a dinner, a group of 4 decide to evenly split a $100 dinner bill.  However, some people are short on cash while others have extra on hand.  So one person pays $50, another $40, and two of them $5 each.  If in the end this should be equaled out such that all pay only $25 for the dinner, how would that happen?  The solution to this is currently unknown.