> I would suggest that it has been through eye-tracking research > that this instance has been highlighted, e.g. Enquiro's discovery > of Google Search's "Golden Triangle," where users ignored ads along > the right scroll bar of the screen (in order to ignore that area of > the page users had to see it first). Though, more important were > the areas of the page that users didn't ignore, supported not only > by heat-mapped impressions, but gaze patterns and click-throughs.
And observation and discussion with the user. Which is a lot cheaper.
> If there is another technology that can do this please share?
Hah! *This* technology can't even do this. There are three or four
possible interpretations to eye tracking data that can take any
analysis into completely different directions. Every eye tracker
should have a sticker saying "Just add meaning."
As the Rock Man said, "You see what you want to see and you hear what
you want to hear." (I'll send a UI12 Conference CD to the first
person who can correctly identify *that* reference. Google is
cheating. :) )
It's all based on interpretation. The "Enquiro Discovery" wasn't a
discovery at all -- it was something many of us already had known
through our work without the use of eye tracking. At best, eye
tracking just confirms what we already know.
Look, you can use whatever tools you want. Hell, use a Magic 8-Ball
 for all I care. (Can you say, "Outlook not so good"?) If you get
mileage from it, go for it. If it improves your design, all the best
I'm still avoiding eye tracking for diagnosing problems with designs
because I find it to be practically useless. And I'm recommending our
clients do the same.
p.s. I'm seriously considering putting a "23 Web Site Design Tips
Learned from the Magic 8-Ball" post together.