Anders Ramsay has a great post on why he doesn’t use prototyping tools. His biggest problem with prototyping tools are:
- They’re based on the old, when design should focus on the new.
- They’re technology specific
- They create an illusion of a valid design
I don’t necessarily agree with his second and third points, or feel they’re not as important, but definitely agree with his first point.
At the same time, I think it’s important to keep in mind that most of these prototyping tools aren’t target at people like Anders and me — people who are quite comfortable coding HTML. These tools are typically intended for visual designers (e.g. Fireworks) or product managers (e.g. Visio, Axure). Not to say they don’t have value to others, but I do think they’re beneficial to the audience they’re targeted at.
Either way, if you use one of these tools, I’d recommend starting off on paper first so you’re not “bound” by what the software can(not) do.
I don’t think comfort with coding HTML (and other technologies) has much bearing on this personally. I am quite comfortable with it as I started more technically oriented in the mid ’90s and learned visual and interaction design as I went along since them.
I can code HTML and CSS very quickly but, for me, the advantages of prototyping tools like Axure is increased speed and the need to put a reasonable facsimile of the real interactivity or flow in front of a client sooner rather than later to nail down expectations. I now use Axure for that as it enables me to create much more complex interactivity and user flows than Fireworks ever could. Fireworks has been my main visual Web design tool (for final graphics and layout… but not code) for over 10 years while Axure is a recent addition.
Starting out on paper is indeed a good idea no matter the software tools one uses…
Todd,
I agree with your disagreement about points 2 and 3. If you’re being cautious, using an interactive Visio wireframe can be an effective prototyping tool (post-paper of course).
It’s more about ensuring the creator knows the limitations of the end platform; someone who has a background that is as much technologist as strategist/designer. Which is related to the point, I believe, that you made.
This is one of the reasons I created this
http://www.graffletopia.com/stencils/414
It is a little ‘technology’ specific for my given domain but we’re finding a lot of adoption with developers, especially where concepts are captured in to wikis for wider review before implementation /pauric
@Stéphane, I’d agree that Axure is still useful for those people who are comfortable with HTML/CSS. My point is that Axure is really targeted at non-coders — still useful to those people, but not their primary audience.
@Derek absolutely. In my prototyping book, I’m covering a number of tools, some of them are ones we don’t even use at our company (e.g. Visio, Axure) — it’s the Indian, not the arrow. Of course, each tool has it’s strengths and weaknesses, but regardless of the technology, they’re just a tool.
@pauric great way to create hand drawn looking printable bases for paper prototyping.