Therefore, for the Web, usability is a necessary condition for survival.” (Nielsen, 2010). Five basic criteria were selected from a number of criteria provided by other comparable websites for this purpose. Each criterion was compared or correlated with other criteria used by other websites. If parameters of a criterion were found encompassing with the other sites’ criteria on a more broad range, then this was taken as a major criterion. Each criterion was applied while doing actual access and navigation of the given sites.
The five chosen and listed criteria for this purpose were: a) aesthetic page design; b) organization and functionality; c) content coverage and accuracy; d) effectiveness and relevance and finally, e) client satisfaction. Given these criteria, the three cited websites were assessed accordingly indicating their areas with low or high usability and the corresponding recommendations how to improve their usability, if found low. The succeeding process of evaluation was also based on first hand experience on actual navigation, exploration and access of the given sites. It is expected that with this exercise, this study can provide an initial assessment whether these sites have high or low usability and if low, what are the best recommendations to improve their usability.
(Benbunan-Fich, 2001) defined the concept of usability as “how well and how easily a user, without formal training, can interact with an information system of a website” (Wang, J. and Senecal, S. 2007). Succeeding discussion delves on brief descriptions of each selected criterion and how each was related to the evaluation. As the user opens the website, his visuals land first with its homepage and the first that are stimulated is his aesthetic senses. The first criterion relates to the impact of the aesthetic page design. The strength of the visual design usually adds value to the users’ aesthetic