The beta release for the new mormon.org was released this weekend. Have a look.
We started the revamp several months ago. This is a great example of using a high fidelity functional prototype to understand what we were building up front, thereby decreasing development time.
The key new features include video testimonies from actual converts of the Church and an online chat where people who are interested in the Church can chat with members to learn more about the Gospel. We've been pilot testing the chat feature for several months and have already seen several people join.
I love the design of the new site! It has a great layout and I think that it's really important to use a common denominator video watching tool similar to YouTube because of the diversity of the viewing audience, so I think that was an excellent choice. It's simple and very effective.
ReplyDeleteI have a few things that I think might improve the user experience though: When I finish watching the question video, I click on the text expecting to get an answer video, but instead I get a bunch of text. I feel like of the change in format discourages people from reading what is there (I didn't bother). I really wanted to see a video of their answers, and then have text surrounding or easily accessible for when I want to learn more.
With the videos at the bottom there is an action, whether getting a Book of Mormon, a video, or something else, and I didn't have any reason to click on them because I don't know how that answers my question as to "why I am here on earth?" A short reason would be helpful for me.
The site also seemed to run a little slow here on my mom's computer, which I believe to be a rather run of the mill machine (AMD 3000+, 512 RAM, and Firefox 2.0.3)
The site looks really great though, and I think with a few small changes it will really pull many people in.
Maybe it is just me, but I don't like the width of the window. I have to scroll left & right in order to see the entire webpage. Scrolling down (or up) is fine, but I just hate sites that expect me to have some mega-high resolution.
ReplyDeleteJoel-
ReplyDeleteWhat will you do with the old mormon.org once the new one[beta] is live?
[Joel: It will either go away or will be archived.]
What kind of impact are anti-Mormons making on the chat line? Are you being overrun?
ReplyDelete[Joel: Not bad, really. Most people are considerate.]
I agree with, Mike. My browser is 900px wide and requires horizontal scrolling.
ReplyDeleteRegarding site width... hasn't 1024 x 768 become the supported standard? It seems as though a number of large sites have recently stopped supporting 800 x 600. IMO, a smaller page width wouldn't have created the same rich experience. It pleases me that the church is at the front of the pack rather than following up at the rear. Well done!
ReplyDeleteAdam,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the feedback. Your comments are spot on. We on the team are addressing the "answer videos" in a couple of ways:
1. The answer videos are contained in the upper right of the body of text but are not obvious enough. We are changing the design of the small video box to look more like an actionable item than just an image.
2. The answer videos will also be brought forward into the carousel to give more substance and testimony earlier in the user experience.
As we approach the live launch we are collecting, analyzing, and acting on the feedback that we can accomplish and that seems appropriate to change. Thanks again for the great feedback. We hope to move the work forward with this new site and offer opportunities to people around the globe to learn more about Christ and his Gospel.
Mike and Kim,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the feedback. We are making some minor adjustments to the width and height to make sure that no horizontal scrolling takes place when the user's resolution is set to 1024px x 768px. Also, we are taking some vertical dimension out of the home page and the video carousel page to assure that the important interface elements are above the fold. Still, depending on the users browser bars settings, and start bar depth it will change the dimension of viewable space. Thanks again for the great feedback.
I just tried again, and again I was getting severe lag. The responses from the missionary were delayed significantly. I asked him this time if he was a fast typist and he said yes. That definitely need to be fixed. I'm on cable modem, so I don't think it would have been any bottleneck on my end.
ReplyDeleteBut once the bugs get ironed out, I think it will be an AWESOME missionary tool. I am so excited about this! I'm going to tell everyone I know to check it out.
OK, while I had seen the chat feature, I hadn't looked closely to see you can email a question. Sorry for my ignorance....
ReplyDeleteHm. Looking more closely, that still seems like more a feedback-for-the-site kind of link rather than a you-can-ask-a-question-about-the-Church kind of link. Wouldn't it be good to separate those out, so you have a technical feedback link and a doctrinal/investigative link. That would be easier to manage, no?
ReplyDelete[Joel: Yes, slightly easier to manage. But more complicated for the user. We tried to be very simple with this web site.]
Another benefit of voice chat could be that companions could approach a discussion together. I think there is power in two witnesses and two people working together, keeping that "two by two" principle that is so important in missionary work.
ReplyDeleteSorry for the many comments...just have been mulling over some of these things for a while....
[Joel: Don't apologize! I appreciate the feedback, Michelle!]
For that matter, companions could be a feature in text chat, as well. It could put you into a chatroom with a missionary companionship, whether of full-time or at-home missionaries. I think there is a large segment of especially younger people, though, who would feel very comfortable text-chatting one-on-one with a single member or missionary, who would feel less comfortable with voice chat or with a companionship in a two-on-one situation. Young people are very comfortable with instant messaging, and there is a feeling of security with the distance and anonymity that will coax people into taking the next step. A phone call is much more of a commitment to make than just an online text chat.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the fear of chat transcripts should be anything to keep us from spreading the gospel in whatever way is most effective to each investigator. After all, almost all missionary discussions are actually edifying and uplifting and by the spirit. The more those get out, the better! =)
There's an online tutoring company called tutor.com who handle this sort of situation really well. Tutors connect one-on-one with students over the internet. Each tutor has a mentor, who reviews the tutor's chat logs week by week for a few weeks, then monthly thereafter. (They pick random chat logs to review from the month.) The mentors give their tutors feedback on how tough situations can best be handled, and specific areas they need to work on. I think online missionaries could be handled the same way, with training, guidelines, and then a mentoring system. It would be an awesome calling! I so want to be the one who sets up this program and gets it started. =) Maybe I'll do that when I retire and serve a full time mission.
OK, I have one more piece of feedback. The home page feels a little dramatic/emotion-focused to me, with the questions fading in and out and the like. Rather than having the videos as the focus (which are good, but limited in the scope of what they can communicate, and also limited, I think, in audience they will appeal to), I would personally rather see more informational content immediately (an outline, maybe, like what shows up if you click on "Basic Beliefs"?), with the option to click on video answers to questions (because they are good ones). Here's my concern: I think especially given the media attention we are getting at an increasing rate, we might want to appeal to a larger audience -- not just assuming that people are "searching" for something doctrinally or spiritually (about restored truth or the purpose of life, etc.) but may be simply looking for more straightforward information about the Church. (Especially on the internet, I think you will get a lot of people wanting information for their brains first, and then they might want more for their hearts.)
ReplyDeleteI wonder if and even worry that someone might be turned off by what could feel like a play on emotions when instead they are looking for simple and direct information.
In addition, I also think that we might need a little more info on some of the harder questions, like polygamy and other things that are getting attention. I'd love to see a search feature that leads investigators to find more good and correct information about things that are often distorted by the press and enemies of the Church, or even about people who are simply misinformed.
If such an approach were taken, we also would have the burden of finding a balance between giving enough information to answer their questions while still steering people toward the doctrine and seeking spiritual truth (not just intellectual information). (All the information in the world about our history won't help someone find the truth. But if we help remove barriers of misunderstanding, we might help them be more willing to listen to the core message of the gospel.)
I was running our dial-up benchmarks on our BYU websites this morning and I ran the same test on beta.mormon.org and lds.org. I was using AOL, Windows 2000, and I had a true 50.6 kbps connection.
ReplyDeleteI am always a little disappointed with the performance of our pages; I am especially disappointed that we are making it difficult for our dial-up friends to access our sites and learn more about the Gospel. Are these sites designed only for those blessed with high speed Internet?
My numbers on lds.org showed that it was 26 seconds until I started to see elements loading in the window and it was a total of 85 seconds until the page finished loading. Beta.mormon.org didn’t show elements until 53 seconds had passed and the page didn’t completely load until 80 seconds had passed.
In our last user connectivity audit in Continuing Education we had 60% of our customers still using a dialup connection. I believe we reflect more the rule than the exception. I am curious to see why we are building pages that require more and more bandwidth? Is our customer base shifting to indicate that trend?
Honestly, the site is beautiful, reverent, and the flash is incredible. But in building such large site did we alienate our less fortunate users and make it impossible for them to access this information?
My two cents
Kevin
Correction: In our last user connectivity audit in Continuing Education we actually had 20% of our unique customers still using a dialup connection. Sorry about that, I incorrectly referenced that number.
ReplyDeleteKevin
In addition, I also think that we might need a little more info on some of the harder questions, like polygamy and other things that are getting attention.
ReplyDeleteI just wanted to add that this is a new thought for me. I am usually one who doesn't want to distract from our core message, and especially from the Savior and our focus on Him. I want the world to know HE is the reason the Church exists and HE is the focus of everything we believe in. I'm just lately thinking that perhaps there are people who would be more willing to listen if they had some of the "classic misunderstandings" addressed...removing some questions and concerns. But then again, perhaps I have it all backwards and we should just keep pressing forward with our core messages. As such, I think that Mario had some good ideas earlier in the comments section about being sure we really, really communicate that Christ is the center, and everything else that we believe in is there to point us and bring us to Him.
Thank you for being willing to listen. I hope that in giving feedback I don't come across as overly critical. Like people have said, there are some neat features like the video that add such a wonderful personal touch (and maybe I have that backwards too....personal touch first then more info?) I dunno. This is why you are the expert working on all of this and we're just out here throwing out ideas. :)
[Joel: Always willing to listen. We appreciate your feedback.]
Congradualtions; you guys have done a great job there. It probably shouldn't be beta anymore.
ReplyDelete[Joel: It's released now. Thank you!]
I agree with Michelle about addressing polygamy and other difficult subjects. There is so much anti-Mormon sentiment on the web. We really need an open, honest, faithful place to point.
ReplyDelete