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

[Andrei Herasimchuk]

On Nov 11, 2007, at 5:23 AM, Todd Zaki Warfel wrote:

> So, then you don't really mean pixel perfect perfection literally.

I do mean it literally. The prototype behaves in the same way the  
final product does. If that means users can resize windows, change  
font sizes, etc., then the prototype should reflect that.

> You're meaning it figuratively. Or do you? You're kind of  
> contradicting yourself here. If equating pixel perfect to px values  
> in CSS isn't pixel perfect perfection, but rendering pixels exactly  
> like the real product is, then that's a bit of a contradiction.

I'm not sure at all how you arrive at the conclusion. Pixels are  
rendered to the computer screen. Pixel perfect for software products  
refers to the pixels being rendered on the screen in the prototype  
are the same pixels rendered in the final product.

> Perhaps you mean that it should function the same, visually use the  
> same colors, fonts, interactions, etc., but it doesn't exactly have  
> to be pixel perfect?

Maybe we should flip this question as you guys seem to be thinking  
different than I am. What do you think pixel perfect means?

> Either way, if this is how you're defining prototyping, then almost  
> every single prototype that I've ever encountered, even the best  
> ones I've encountered, would not be a prototype, or would be a bad  
> prototype. Things change over time. Between the time a prototype is  
> handed to engineering and the actual launch date, things change.  
> So, by your description, those either aren't valid prototypes, or  
> they are simply bad prototypes. Neither of which I agree with,  
> think is accurate, valid, or realistic.

Then I guess we'll have to disagree.

>> Given the nature of web applications these days, this is very  
>> simple to do. The tools are finally maturing for the desktop  
>> client environment that will make this equally as easy to do  
>> there. As for Flash/Flex or Silverlight types of products, the  
>> prototype code for the visual presentation is often the exact same  
>> that's in the final product, so tat's covered as well.
>
> Um, I sure hope not. That would be a disaster in most cases.

It's happening in web based products already and will happen more as  
Flash based or other RIA type of applications make their ways into  
non-computer related products. And it's far from a disaster. The  
front-end code for prototypes, the stuff that defines the look and  
feel, is easily portable from a prototype to the final product. More  
and more of front end interaction is also become portable.

> Prototype in Flash/Flex/HTML, build in C. Even if you are using the  
> same language to produce the final piece, the prototype is a  
> discovery model. You're going to make mistakes. Make them in the  
> prototype. Once you've learned, recode in production to make it  
> more stable, streamlined.

I don't disagree with this. But again, more and more of the work put  
into the prototype is becoming more and more useful in various  
software products. Desktop clients are indeed still different in this  
regard, but even that is starting to change somewhat.

-- 
Andrei Herasimchuk

Principal, Involution Studios
innovating the digital world

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