Adobe Fireworks for wire framing

14 Sep 2009 - 6:56am
4 years ago
30 replies
9848 reads
Shelly Cawood
2009

Recently I have been getting increasingly frustrated by the
limitations of Omnigraffle and the complexity and bugs of using
Visio, not to mention having to switching between operating systems
to use Visio when i am a mac user.

So I am very interested in the increase in talk of people using
Fireworks for wire framing, what i read about it makes perfect sense
with the ability to share layers across specific pages, making
symbols to reuse across the document, so a footer for example can be
a symbol, you edit the symbol and the footers across the sites pages
will update, not to mention master pages that seem to work rather
well. Put simply, I really like what I read about wire framing in
Fireworks.

Has anyone any experiences of using fireworks, and does anyone know
how it compares to the likes of Omnigraffle/Visio for wire framing

Comments

14 Sep 2009 - 7:28am
Mike Higgins
2009

This doesn't answer your question directly, but have you tried
SketchFlow? It has all the features you mention for Fireworks, plus
has the ability to show the experience (interactivity) side if
needed. Its a little bit of a learning curve and PC-only so you'd
have to use parallels if you're on a Mac like me.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

14 Sep 2009 - 7:53am
Todd Warfel
2003

Fireworks makes a great all around design tool for anything digital
(e.g. websites, webapps, mobile apps). One of the great things about
is that you can do lo-fi (like OmniGraffle and Visio) and you can do
hi-fi (like Photoshop), which makes it a great round trip tool.

It ships with a number of GUI libraries for MacOS, Windows, and the
web. You can create new libraries, share libraries, share layers like
headers across pages and more.

It has real page navigation, similar to OG and unlike Visio (tabs?
seriously?). It's also highly scriptable as long as you know
JavaScript.

And it's a fantastic prototyping tool. In fact, I wrote a whole
chapter on Fireworks as a prototyping tool
http://tinyurl.com/prototypingbook/

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

14 Sep 2009 - 7:54am
benry
2008

I love Fireworks for wireframing, but it does have some limitations:

- single Master Page can be created only
- a lack of stencil options
- no macros

Some pros:

- ability to export files quickly to PDF, HTML, JPEGS, etc and create
quick functional prototypes
- pixel based sizing means you are wireframing within an actual space
allotment -- Visio tends to be print dimensions, not screen
dimensions.

Another Abobe approach of course would be to use InDesign and try the
EightShapes Unify approach.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

14 Sep 2009 - 8:03am
Eugenio Grigolon
2009

Hey Shelly, how are you?
I think we're in the same boat. I've also tried Omnigraffle and
Visio (currently working with it because it is a business
requirement) and I'm still no happy with both.

I watched some videos in Adobe's web site talking about wireframing
and rapid prototyping with Fireworks. Check this one that I like very
much:
http://tv.adobe.com/watch/digital-design/creating-interactive-prototypes/

Now, I'm still trying to find a tool that is quite easy and fast to
work with wireframes. Beside those apps, I'm also trying
Illustrator, but it quite annoying for me.

I don't know if you job includes prototyping as well, but I'm know
you're aware of Axure and there is a pretty new and cool app called
Just In Mind (http://justindmind.com), give it a try.

I hope that is helpful for you.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

14 Sep 2009 - 9:42am
Alan James Salmoni
2008

I use Fireworks all the time for wireframing. I like it because it
goes from quick and dirty low level prototyping through to hi-fi
camera ready versions.

I would suggest downloading Adobe's free trial and trying it out
yourself along with some reference material such as Todd's above.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

14 Sep 2009 - 9:55am
benry
2008

Hi Josh,

By "stencil limitations" I meant the lack of pre-made stencils
available. OmniGraffle has GraffleTopia. There is little similar for
Fireworks. Not that it is hard to create your own.

Scott Baldwin
.................................
Sent from my iPhone

On 2009-09-14, at 7:15 AM, Joshua Porter <bokardo at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Scott,
>
> I'm curious to know what you mean by stencil limitations...
>
> Cheers
>
> Josh
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 14, 2009, at 5:54 AM, Scott Baldwin <lists at benry.net> wrote:
>
>> I love Fireworks for wireframing, but it does have some limitations:
>>
>> - single Master Page can be created only
>> - a lack of stencil options
>> - no macros
>>
>> Some pros:
>>
>> - ability to export files quickly to PDF, HTML, JPEGS, etc and create
>> quick functional prototypes
>> - pixel based sizing means you are wireframing within an actual space
>> allotment -- Visio tends to be print dimensions, not screen
>> dimensions.
>>
>> Another Abobe approach of course would be to use InDesign and try the
>> EightShapes Unify approach.
>>
>>
>> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>> Posted from the new ixda.org
>> http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
>> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
>> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
>> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
>> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

14 Sep 2009 - 12:00pm
Anonymous

I have been playing with this:
http://unify.eightshapes.com/
http://unify.eightshapes.com/general/quickstart-on-prototyping-with-wireframes/

I have been having fun this morning wishing I was here:
http://ideaconference.org/2009/Program/#day-0

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

14 Sep 2009 - 1:22pm
Peter Baird
2005

Hi everyone, great conversation going here.

I thought I'd chime in as an Adobe Employee who uses Fireworks on a daily basis to design user interfaces. While I'm not a part of the Fireworks product group, I use the software daily to wireframe user interfaces for other products, and could not evangelize strongly enough for the benefits of Fireworks as a huge time saver.

So, a couple responses to some of the thread, and a couple other comments.

Multiple Master Pages:

You should look into the function of "shared layers" across pages. It achieves the same desire, but I think even more powerfully. You can put the stuff you would have put in another master page in a unique layer, and share that layer across all your pages (or even more importantly, just some of your pages). The advantages are A) you can target only the pages you want the layers shared across B) you can mix and match multiple layers shared across a bunch of pages.

Stencil Options:

I guess it depends on what you're wireframing for, but in the "Common Library" with Fireworks, there is a complete component set for the MacOS User interface, Windows UI, HTML components, Flex Components, and there are even 3rd Party Libraries out there for iPhone UI components. Better yet they are all 9-slice enabled so they scale beautifully pixel perfect.

Macros:

I'm sure I'm less familiar with the use case referred to Macros, but for what it's worth, Fireworks does include commands. It does takes some savvy to go beyond simply saving past steps as a command.

Other great aspects of Fireworks for Wireframing:

- Rapid Prototype Development: Simply define hit targets and link them to the page they should go to and export as an interactive PDF.

- As mentioned Pixel perfect... that's my biggest gripe with users who use non-pixel based tools for wireframing... it gets to implementation and none of the stuff fits on the screen like the designer thought it would because no thought for pixel specs had been taken into account. If everyone would just with a 900x600 rectangle (for Web-based UIs) and make sure it all fits in that space... and no font-sizes smaller than 11pt. If it doesn't fit... you're doing something wrong. :-)

Also, I'll say that as Fireworks User not connected in any way to the Fireworks Product Group other than as a beta user like any other, the Fireworks team does a great job at listening to customer feedback, and there's a lot of cool stuff planned, in development for CS5, and while I obviously can't comment on any of it, I'm sure you'll be pleased when it is public.

14 Sep 2009 - 9:23am
Brooke Dunagan CUA
2009

I have actually used Fireworks, Illustrator, Photoshop, Visio, iRise
and Axure for wireframing.

There are pros and cons to each of them, but I did like using
Fireworks better than most. Though you don't have a library of
stencils to choose from, I usually created a set of objects and just
pasted and adjusted then on the layers I needed. As you can guess,
once you create a set, you really don't have to recreate them.

Then if you're having to show interaction and flow, you can just
dummy the pages up with hot spots and throw it into Dreamweaver for a
fast click-through.

Good luck!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

14 Sep 2009 - 1:37pm
Vance Vagell
2009

I use both Visio and Fireworks, but for wireframes I prefer Fireworks
hands-down.

The advanced alignment guides and reuse tools (e.g., symbols) are
fantastic, and you can't beat its key competency: bitmap and vector
graphics seamlessly editable in the same tool. Depending on your
project's needs and your artistry, graphic cuts from Fireworks may
even be production-quality. Also, I haven't run into a serious bug
in Fireworks yet, which I can't say for Visio.

I wear many hats, and use Visio for engineering designs, but I always
set it aside for Fireworks when working on UIs.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

14 Sep 2009 - 9:10am
milind sonavane
2009

Hi,

I had gone through couple of sites & rich internet apps for quick &
easy prototyping. I found them intuitive, easy. Apps (Balsamiq
Napkee) are working for me. You can check links for details

http://mockupstogo.net/
http://www.balsamiq.com/products/mockups
http://www.napkee.com/

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

14 Sep 2009 - 8:17am
wlmeurer
2009

I use Fireworks all the time for wireframing and prototyping. We have
a single product that we created/rework features for, so we've
created some reusable stencils (or symbols as Fireworks call them)
for our most-common design elements.

Fireworks has a lot of great stencils for higher fidelity
prototyping, including OS GUI elements like Todd mentioned above, but
for lower-fi you'll have to create some of those yourself. But it's
really simple to create those.

The tricky part (and I use Fireworks CS3 on OSX, so maybe Adobe fixed
some of this in CS4) is, especially when using Javascript to extend
symbols, sometimes Fireworks crashes and doesn't tell you why.
Here's a blog post I wrote on the subject:
http://development.mumboe.com/?p=43.

My suggestion, if you have the Creative Suite, is to use Adobe
Version Cue and Bridge to manage the files so you can version and
check in regularly, just in case of a crash.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

14 Sep 2009 - 2:59pm
hilary b
2009

Hi there, my first ever IxDA post, how very exciting!
I use both fireworks and visio to wireframe. The flexibity in
fireworks makes it my first choice, the ablity to do low or hi
fidelity is useful (depending on the audience) and lots of other
reasons that have been covered by others. However no one has
mentioned the ability to create AIR apps from fireworks files, and I
have found this a big plus when doing early usablity testing or
customer engagement.
Basic protoyping in visio isnt as straightforward.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

15 Sep 2009 - 4:51pm
Anonymous

I used Fireworks for all my design work: prototypes, screenshots,
wireframes.

* Fireworks give you ultimate flexibility as you can consider it as
Photoshop Illustrator in 1 package.
* It is pixel based sizing as someone pointed out. Hence, it is great
for any design work for screen-based: Web, desktop, mobile-phone
screens.

The biggest problem I have with Fireworks is the lack of stencils,
though there are some shipped with the software but they are not
enough.

For interactive prototypes, I prefer to export to Flash and go from
there.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

16 Sep 2009 - 8:58am
Anonymous

Well I must say I am now really going to go out and try using
Fireworks with all this support for it for wireframing. Just a quick
question because I really have not used it so this comes out of pure
ignorance and not argumentative, but why would I use it over using
Photoshop or InDesign? I am trying to get into this aspect of the
industry after being a web designer and web developer for years so
now that I know how to design and code, I want to hone my skills in
UX/IA so I am just trying to learn as much as I can. Thanks. :)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

16 Sep 2009 - 9:53am
Thomas Petersen
2008

Brian

Over Photoshop because it has pages and states, because it\s faster
and is made for interface design and web design. Because you can make
components with it and output them either to flash or html.

Because it's intutive and gives you all those nifty tools you need
that make sense.

Over InDesign because it's pixel precise and gives you a better idea
of how much you can actually squeeze in plus all of the above
mentioned reason.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

16 Sep 2009 - 10:52am
Shelly Cawood
2009

currently after having a good at fireworks, my major issue is the
quality of what it exports, its quite bad, exporting from omnigraffle
or visio exports a vector file which prints well

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

16 Sep 2009 - 12:27pm
Mike Dunn
2008

Try 'save as' and select illustrator- presto, it's vector.
If you were using the export option it would definitely come out low-res, as
Fireworks is designed to be a web graphics tool

On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 3:52 AM, Shelly Cawood <shelly at lamity.org> wrote:

> currently after having a good at fireworks, my major issue is the
> quality of what it exports, its quite bad, exporting from omnigraffle
> or visio exports a vector file which prints well
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> Posted from the new ixda.org
> http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

16 Sep 2009 - 2:59pm
Marc Truitt
2008

Fireworks is nice for wireframes and hi-res mockups. I have
experienced some problems with Fireworks CS4 for example when
exporting to interactive PDF large files would hang. Fireworks also
allows only one master-page to be set; there are many times when
I%u2019m building a hi-res mockup to test usability that I would like
multiple master-pages. As an example one master-page for the top
level sites another master-page for the sub-sites would be nice.
I%u2019m actually looking into building individual elements in
Fireworks and then move them into InDesign, because InDesign supports
multiple master pages. I can then create hotspots/buttons inside
InDesign and use them for navigating, that allows me to create an
interactive mockup. I%u2019m happy with the results so far, InDesign
seems more stable. But I still go back to
Fireworks/Photoshop/Illustrator (whatever works best) to build the
basic elements.

Marc Truitt

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

16 Sep 2009 - 3:38pm
Adam Korman
2004

On Sep 16, 2009, at 6:58 AM, Brian wrote:

> why would I use [Fireworks] over using Photoshop or InDesign?

This is how I think about where Fireworks fits relative to other Adobe
apps:
- InDesign is great for creating documents
- Photoshop is great for working with bitmap images
- Illustrator is great for working with vectors for print
- Fireworks is great for working with vectors to create bitmap images
for the screen

They all do other (and often overlapping things), but that's a very
high-level view. Another way to look at it is that over time Photoshop
has added vector tools, while vector and bitmap tools have been in
Fireworks' DNA from day one. A few of the things that I find make
Fireworks great for wireframing:

1. Pages, states and layers. You can share layers across states and
states across pages. And you can show or hide shared layers/states in
different states/pages. Not sure if this makes sense in the abstract,
but it's really handy and probably the main reason I use Fireworks.
2. Styles. Update a style and you can easily update all objects with
the same style.
3. Symbols. Create a symbol then drop pointers to it wherever you need
it. When you edit the symbol, all the instances get updated. Symbols
be very simple (a button with 9-slice guides that allow you to smartly
resize it for any one instance), or they can be very sophisticated (a
button with a normal, highlight and default state and variable text
for the label).

There are lots of other little (and big) things, but these three stand
out for me as particularly helpful for wireframing (and creating final
art, too).

-Adam

16 Sep 2009 - 5:24pm
Thomas Bonney
2009

I've been using Fireworks since version 2 and certainly it's been an
indispensable tool for creating quick-sketch wireframes that can
easily be evolved into high-fidelity/final design comps. As others
have pointed out, combining shared layers with symbols in CS4 allows
for a great deal of flexibility in creating numerous designs for
various page types.

But file management can be a challenge. I've found FW's ability to
manage various pages within one document to be a bit kludgy for
complex projects involving numerous screens or web pages. I've also
run into problems when I need to present more than just a wireframe -
FW creates great comps but it's not the best tool to use for adding
textual documentation, specifications or instructions. When that
situation arises, I output the file as a jpg/png and included it into
a tool better suited for documentation, such as OmniGraffle or
InDesign. EightShapes is really on a roll with Unify, I'll be seeing
how easily I can integrate FW into that workflow. There's a lot of
strength for following a typical 'desktop publication' workflow
when creating UI specifications.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

16 Sep 2009 - 11:57pm
Michael Jones
2006

Illustrator still rules for concepting and sketching. Fireworks for
proper wireframing, making lots of similar screens, and production
graphics.

For those of you about to commit to Fireworks for daily use, I would
recommend downloading the Fireworks Auto-Save thingy here:

http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/marketplace/index.cfm?event=marketplace.offering&offeringid=10210&marketplaceid=1

This side program is a complete hack, but can bail you out from the
crashfest that is Fireworks CS4.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

18 Sep 2009 - 12:12pm
Peter Baird
2005

Responding to Marc who says "I have experienced some problems with Fireworks CS4 for example when exporting to interactive PDF large files would hang"

That's due to the "Enable Text Selection" option. Make sure deselect that option when exporting as a PDF and it will be a very snappy export. What's going on there is that when "Enable Text Selection" option is included, it has go through each page, identify the text on the page, and re-render the text as invisible PDF text that can be selected. But, I haven't found much need for needing that text to be selectable, and it does, as you say, really slow down the export process and makes the app hang, and worse, it bloats the file size of the PDF considerably.

Another word of advice when exporting to PDF, use ZIP compression, because A) The default JPEG compression looks like crap when it comes to wireframes B) The filesize will actually be smaller with ZIP on wireframes c) and the resulting image will be pixel perfect, because the ZIP compression is 32Bit... no loss of colors, JPEG blurriness or anything.

18 Sep 2009 - 2:32pm
Gilberto Medrano
2008

I have been using Fireworks since 1998. I tried other tools like PS and
Illustrator, and got away from tools like Visio or Omnigrafle long time ago
because they don't fit that well on the way I am used to work. Some reasons
why I keep using FW today:

*- Collaboration.* Most of your design process can be captured in a single
file. I do off-the-track concept explorations and spikes in secondary
files, but keep the approved concepts in one file to keep track of the
design evolution from scanned sketches/screenboarding to wireframes to
finalized production mockups. It is a great deal of help to have
interaction designers and visual designers working out of a single file

*- Lots of flexibility. * Since I do both interaction and visual design, I
designed my FW stencil up-to-scale so that I can detach the FW symbols from
the library when starting on visual design on a different FW Page and use
that as a reusable starting point for graphic design, integration that saves
me a lot of time

*- Abstraction Management.* (Adam mentioned this already) FW has a built-in
definition of views in different levels of abstraction or scope: Pages (a
new level), States (formerly Frames), and Layers, which allows to easily
organize your work into overall workflow, in-screen operations/states, and
visual design.

*- Holistic, Simplified Management of Design History. * Due to the ability
to handle many design artifacts in a single file You can use a versioning
system to document your design decision-making process so that your source
file becomes till some extend a live-document. You can read the versioning
logs to see a summary of the evolution and when changes were made, and of
course you can roll back to an specific state of your design if you need to;
so nothing is going to the trash.

*- Rapid Prototyping and Testing. * Sometimes I want to test different
interaction concepts for a apparently complex interaction in a relatively
early stage of design and in a fast way. You can use the Preview view to
run a quick, spike-like usability test through a clickable prototype, or you
can export it to HTML as somebody else already mentioned.

*- Efficiency. * Other graphic design tools seem to be too layer-centric in
my opinion. I don't leverage that much on layers when working on a quick,
dirty concept. FW creates a layer for each new object and groups them as I
wish, I don't need to manually create new layers and name them (however, I
do use layers a lot while working on the visual design later on).

Since I expect a lot of changes during this part of the process it is nice
not to have to worry about organizing and renaming elements that I may get
rid of completely after a design review/test, plus, I reuse a lot of the
stencil elements from the Symbol Library. To be fair, I don't use other
tools heavily for a long while so probably my perception of this is dated

Still, I go back to PS when needing advanced filters for image manipulation;
and to Illustrator when tracing a complex hand-made illustration (and for
some of its printing capabilities which FW seems to lack of). And I am sure
lots of people can replicate most of the techniques I mentioned above in any
of these tools.

I just found a way to get what I need out of FW, and it fits greatly within
my own design style and process (so far). And I enjoy a lot working with
that tool.

Hope this helps.

Gilberto

On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Michael Jones <mjones at themethodnine.com>wrote:

> Illustrator still rules for concepting and sketching. Fireworks for
> proper wireframing, making lots of similar screens, and production
> graphics.
>
> For those of you about to commit to Fireworks for daily use, I would
> recommend downloading the Fireworks Auto-Save thingy here:
>
>
> http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/marketplace/index.cfm?event=marketplace.offering&offeringid=10210&marketplaceid=1
>
> This side program is a complete hack, but can bail you out from the
> crashfest that is Fireworks CS4.
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> Posted from the new ixda.org
> http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

18 Sep 2009 - 5:23pm
cjwillet
2009

if youre looking for a good alternative to
fireworks/visio/omnigraffle, check out balsamiq. it has a decent
template list, quick file save as .png, easily resize
windows/components, change text and allows you to link buttons,
links, whatever to show the flow of each page to page.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

19 Sep 2009 - 9:24am
Gavin Sutherland
2009

Like someone else here, this is my first post (although I've been an
interested reader for a while), so hello!

Glad to see such support for Fireworks for wireframing. I've been
using it for many years now for such purposes and for me anyway,
there is no alternative for rapid development right through to hi-fi
output.

It's handling of layers is for me much more intuitive than other
comparable software, and the use symbols and custom library allow for
easy wireframe and prototype development.

Coding and build aside, apart from a dip into Photoshop or
Illustrator for photographic / illustrative purposes, I use fireworks
as a round trip program - particularly with the support for .png in
modern browsers today.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

21 Sep 2009 - 4:55am
Tino Truppel
2009

pidoco is fully browser-based and a real alternative to locally
installed softwares such as the Adobe Suite. Collaboration features
as well as export to html, svg, and soon MS word export is possible.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

21 Sep 2009 - 9:03am
.pauric
2006

Tools are important, the right tool enables the craftsperson to create
a quality end product for their given domain.

If you're creating artifacts or interactions that will go in to
production then that is one thing. Also, if your core strength is
visual design then you need to consider hifi tools. That said, I
would argue that a significant proportion of us are simply
communicating.... Communicating various concepts for review or
testing, communicating solutions to constraints. Pushing teams to
achieve goals that are outside of the box. Selling ideas.

To that end, the right tool for the job is the one which best enables
the flow from your imagination & experience to the chosen medium of
presentation. While it will be the tool you are most familiar with
it will generally also be the most simple tool if you follow Occam's
Razor.

I think we put pressure on ourselves to produce detailed & complex
mockups. Its a measure of effort & skill. Quite often a lofi mockup
is all that is needed to get a point across, sometimes the only way
your audience will see the wood for the trees. Details at the concept
stage are noise in your message.

Complex & powerful tools like Fireworks require a great deal of
investment in time to become so intuitive as to be transparent in
your workflow, and, it is often the case you needed nothing more than
pencil & paper.

Its not what you communicate your ideas with that will ensure good
design, its simply how well & clearly you communicate that elicits
good feedback. If you're wrestling with a complex and unstable app
to simply draw boxes & arrows - you're not designing optimally.

So, if you're struggling with your current tool and looking for an
alternative remember that people will always pimp their choice of
tool, a good craftsman never blames his tools (I'm looking at you,
visio user(o;) and power comes from simplicity.

To illustrate the point, with nothing more than some sand this woman
was able to move her audience to tears....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=518XP8prwZo

/pauric

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

21 Sep 2009 - 9:54am
Anonymous

re: To illustrate the point, with nothing more than some sand this
woman was able to move her audience to tears....

As a composer & sound designer, I'd be remiss not to interject:
"...nothing more than some sand [and a lot of music, voice-over and
sound design] this woman was able to move her audience..."

Cool stuff though!

Brandon E. B. Ward
brandonebward at gmail.com
UI • UX • Ix Design
Flex • Flash Development
Portfolio: http://www.uxd.me
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brandonebward
VisualCV: http://www.visualcv.com/brandonebward

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance
accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders,
give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new
problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight
efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
- Robert A. Heinlein

21 Sep 2009 - 10:37am
.pauric
2006

Point taken Brandon and in the same vein... one wouldnt present a
concept or lofi mockup without verbally expressing the expected user
interaction or back-end mechanics.

As Michael just tweeted: Buxton: "There is no such thing as a low
fidelity or high fidelity prototype--only the right or wrong
prototype."
http://twitter.com/konigi

Understanding your audience is more important than the number of
features used to create your mockup.

/pauric

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=45590

Syndicate content Get the feed