[IxDA Discuss] What tools do you use for prototyping?

[Andrei Herasimchuk]

I'm going to try and answer a bunch of questions in one message  
versus spamming multiple answers.


On Nov 6, 2007, at 6:16 PM, Eric Scheid wrote:
> Just for my information, what is that most people dislike Visio so  
> much?

Too many people in our field use Visio as a replacement for  
production level drawing tools, like FreeHand, Fireworks r  
Illustrator. In doing so, they stop themselves from learning the  
skills they need to actually do more design at the production level,  
which in turn are skills that help in dealing with richer prototypes.


On Nov 6, 2007, at 4:25 PM, Mark Schraad wrote:
> Well unless you think I am either  a moron or a hypocrite, then it  
> would stand to reason that I believe this to be point of view, not  
> of fact. So effectively what you have stated here is something  
> along the lines of, "no I'm not, you are". I guess I expect more  
> from someone as experienced and seasoned as you.

I don't think you are either. I was attempting to state that your  
position about my phrasing of "paper is not prototyping" leaves me  
with either basically saying nothing about the topic or having to  
water down my stance to the degree it doesn't contribute anything to  
the discussion. Obviously, I phrased that opinion as equally useful  
as what I was commenting on.


On Nov 6, 2007, at 6:17 PM, Raminder Oberoi wrote:

> Most people miss what Visio can do. Do not think of Visio as a drawing
> tool. Think of it as a drawing language. You can do a lot of great
> stuff with automation. You do not have to use the shapes it gives
> you. You can make your own.

If people used Visio in that manner, it wouldn't bother nearly as  
much. But people do use it a "drawing tool" and that drives me nuts.

Another reason I hate Visio is that it has quickly become the  
PowerPoint of the digital design field. It's methods and approach to  
drawing has corned a lot of people into thinking inappropriately  
about what constitutes good software design. The same sort of  
argument Tufte makes about PowerPoint, in relation to how it changes  
the way people think about how to create and give a presentation.  
Visio is doing the same thing to our field.


On Nov 7, 2007, at 12:14 PM, Christopher Fahey wrote:
> One of the "prototyping" methods used for the original Palm Pilot  
> was balsa wood, the equivalent of PlayDough or lego bricks.

Having built many a scale model using materials like Balsa wood, I  
would have to disagree. Balsa wood is on an order much higher than  
PlayDough or Legos.


On Nov 7, 2007, at 12:14 PM, Christopher Fahey wrote:
> The purpose was to test one critical aspect of the product: The  
> aspect they were prototyping was "how does it feel in the hand" and  
> "how does it fit into a person's various pockets and bags". They  
> built lots of different blocks and tried them all before settling  
> on the deck-of-cards size we all know today as the de-facto PDA  
> standard form factor. The universal consensus today is that Palm  
> completely nailed that form factor question, and I don't doubt that  
> the balsa prototyping made that success happen.

Agreed. However, using wood of any kind and shaping it and getting it  
to be correct to be a scale model of a real product is an order of  
fidelity significantly higher than PlayDough.


On Nov 6, 2007, at 5:42 PM, Miguel Peres wrote:
> uh .. waitaminit .. since when would a *drawing* of a Volkswagen  
> Beetle be
> thought of as representative of the category of things we call "paper
> prototypes"?

They both tend to represent "sketches" of the design of the product.  
And in my view, sketching is a great design tool and design process,  
but it's not the same as prototyping.


On Nov 6, 2007, at 5:42 PM, Miguel Peres wrote:
> If that "real live concept car fully built" was built out of  
> modelers foam,
> wood, and other not-real-car materials, could you not still sit  
> inside it
> and provide all sorts of feedback (sans actually driving across  
> europe, that
> is)? It would even be sufficient to present the instrument panel in  
> the form
> of a colour printout instead of real live electronics - sightlines  
> could be
> tested, comprehension could be tested etc.

Agreed.

On Nov 6, 2007, at 5:42 PM, Miguel Peres wrote:
> The medium of paper is great for prototyping things which appear on  
> a flat
> surface (eg. websites), just as foam core and wood and such do a  
> pretty good
> job of prototyping human-interface interaction possibilities of 3D  
> objects.

This is where we disagree, unless you mean that the "paper" prototype  
is also a pixel perfect representation of the product in various  
stages of the workflow but just printed on paper. But my experience  
has been that people treat paper prototypes as lesser than that, as  
nothing more than crude sketch diagrams. (Which I also use but as a  
design tool, not a prototyping tool.)

Further, if you've done the work of getting pixel precise mockups to  
use for your paper prototypes, you are not very far off from any  
number of means to make that work interactive for the purposes of  
getting feedback in context. In this case, on the computer screen  
itself.


On Nov 6, 2007, at 5:14 PM, Todd Zaki Warfel wrote:

> How would you define a prototype? Would you see prototyping as a  
> design tool, or something else? How does iterative design relate to  
> prototyping?

I define a prototype in the software world as anything up to the  
point it becomes engineering. This means as much actual design work  
that will reflect the real product up to the point it has to be  
engineered at a functional level, like hooking it up to a live  
database or something.

Sorry that sounds so coy, but my experience has been that the  
technology changes so fast, there's no other to define without  
changing my definition every three years.

-- 
Andrei Herasimchuk

Principal, Involution Studios
innovating the digital world

e. andrei at involutionstudios.com
c. +1 408 306 6422