team: beta testers lanna thai restaurant company profile new thai restaurant (opening in 1 to 2...

Team: Beta Testers

Lanna Thai Restaurant

• Company Profile• New Thai Restaurant (Opening in 1 to 2 months)

• Opening in the Mission Bay/Pacific Beach area of SD

• Client desires a clean and professional website that will

also appeal to the appetites of trendy beach residents

Team: Beta Testers

Competitive Analysis Websites

Kafe Yen – Chosen because it’s a trendy Thai-Fusion restaurant in Pacific Beach

Rambutan Thai – Chosen because the client suggested this was his favorite

Rama Thai – Chosen because Rama is (arguably) the best Thai restaurant in San Diego

Chive – Chosen to have a non-Thai perspective of what a great restaurant website can aspire to be

Hanaoka – Chosen because it has a different design than the other 4 and is also in Pacific Beach

Team: Beta Testers

Functionality (1/3) Overall Positives

Each website provided the basics; address, phone, hours.This main function of any restaurant website is to provide these basics.

addressphone

hours

Team: Beta Testers

Functionality (2/3) Overall Negatives

There was very little advanced functionality such as onlineReservations or online to-go orders.

Chive was the only website that allowedmaking e-reservations, but this wasdone via email and not through the website.

Team: Beta Testers

Functionality (3/3) Exceptionally Good/Bad

Good Bad

Hanaoka has a great 360 degree virtual tour!

Kafe Yen links to MapQuest rather than providing a map on their website. This opens in a separate window making navigation difficult.

Team: Beta Testers

Content (1/3) Overall Positives

Every website provided a menu in some form or another.

This leads to the conclusion that a menu is essential content.

Team: Beta Testers

Content (2/3) Overall Negatives

Some websites included unrelated content, such as links to purchase clothing.

It just doesn’t seem right to purchase clothing from a restaurant website.

Team: Beta Testers

Content (3/3) Exceptionally Good/Bad

Good Bad

Rama included information about awards.

Pictures of the food are an important part of a restaurant’s website. Rama has none!

This is the only picture

on Rama’s website!!

Team: Beta Testers

Site Architecture (1/3) Overall Positives

There was an distinct pattern in the types of divisions of content of all the websites.

Menu (5)

Team: Beta Testers

Site Architecture (1/3) Overall Positives

There was an distinct pattern in the types of divisions of content of all the websites.

Contact (4)

Team: Beta Testers

Site Architecture (1/3) Overall Positives

There was an distinct pattern in the types of divisions of content of all the websites.

Map/Dirrections (4)

Team: Beta Testers

Site Architecture (2/3) Overall Negatives

Some category headings were obscure

??? ??? ???

Team: Beta Testers

Site Architecture (2/3) Overall Negatives

Some category headings were obscure

menu! ??? ???

Team: Beta Testers

Site Architecture (2/3) Overall Negatives

Some category headings were obscure

menu! Catering ???

Team: Beta Testers

Site Architecture (2/3) Overall Negatives

Some category headings were obscure

menu! CateringEmployment!?

Team: Beta Testers

Site Architecture (3/3) Exceptionally Good/Bad

Good Bad

Rambutan covers the bases well providing a good division of pages without going overboard.

Kafe Yen has little in the way of architecture. The site has only 2 pages.

Team: Beta Testers

Navigation (1/3) Overall Positives

The navigation bar is always the same and never moves around.

All of the restaurants’ websites have consistent main navigation bars.

Team: Beta Testers

Navigation (2/3) Overall Negatives

Secondary navigation however is not consistent leading to confusion.

Secondary navigation links appeared all over the page making it seem unorganized.

Team: Beta Testers

Navigation (3/3) Exceptionally Good/Bad

Good Bad

On Rambutan’s menu there are quick-links to specific types of food allowing you to quickly find what you’re most interested in.

Rama has a horrible design for scrolling through their menu and awards. The user must continuously click to scroll (no click and hold possible).

Click, click, click, click, click, click, click…

Team: Beta Testers

Design (1/5) Overall Positives

1) Use of Flash added a lot to the websites that used it.

Animated background Animated navigation

Team: Beta Testers

Design (2/5) Overall Positives

2) Short pages so that all of one page fits on the screen together eliminating the need to scroll.

All of one page fits into one screen. If additional room is needed then simply create a new page specific to that category.

Team: Beta Testers

Design (3/5) Overall Positives

3) Great pictures make your mouth water and give you an idea about the style of the restaurant!

Effective food photography!

Clear view of the restaurant’s style.

Team: Beta Testers

Design (4/5) Overall Negatives

Poor choices in text color resulted in many cases of unreadable text due to the text’s color being very close to the background color.

What does that say?!

Team: Beta Testers

Design (5/5) Exceptionally Good/Bad

Good Bad

Chive has a very artistic design and great color scheme.

Pink? Need we say more.

Team: Beta Testers

Conclusion From these 5 websites we have found a few

“must haves” as well as a few pitfalls to avoid.

Must Haves Pitfalls to Avoid

• Basic info (phone, address, etc)

• Menu

• Smart architecture

• Consistent navigation

• Short pages

• Great mouthwatering images

• Don’t limit functionality

• Have clearly defined categories

• Don’t make users work

• Poor color schemes

Team: Beta Testers

Questions?