i never said you couldn't use Visio to do what you described. i've used it that way too. i've also used it to develop enter specifications. however, i eventually ran into limitations as Visio wasn't designed specifically for what i needed it to do. i still use it but not nearly as much as i used and for very specific tasks for which it is well suited to do.
On 11/7/07, Raminder Oberoi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ok... Regarding Visio... I can and have always been able to create > wireframes, flows, interaction states, pretty much any relationship > diagrams. If I didn't have access to a computer/software I would have > to do all that on paper. Nothing wrong with paper, but a tool like > visio is far more efficient when it comes to reusing, editing and > being able to represent concepts nearly. For a guy like me who likes > to use pen and paper but only for personal ideation (cause only I can > understand my hand drawings) visio is a blessing! > > Now regarding Visio 'prototyping' I have in many projects been able to > create clickthrus that have got clients buy in quickly and > effectively, without investing more than a few hours of time and money > (why? Because I already had the wireframe which only needed to be > stringed together) > > For paper vs. Visio/any tool, in practical everyday use, almost all > the time we use printouts, don't we? Regardless of what tool we use > chances are that we do print it on paper. It seems like the sequence > is - mind >> paper/pixel >> paper >> mind >> pixel ..... Repeat > process. Finally we are free to use any medium/tool for creating the > prototype as determined by project goals. > > > • Raminder Oberoi > www.retheory.com > > On Nov 7, 2007, at 6:57 PM, Andrei Herasimchuk < > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > 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. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > c. +1 408 306 6422 > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________ > > *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* > > February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA > > Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ > > > > ________________________________________________________________ > > Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! > > To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe > > List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines > > List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help > ________________________________________________________________ > *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* > February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA > Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ > > ________________________________________________________________ > Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! > To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe > List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines > List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help -- -------------------------------------------------- www.flyingyogi.com -------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________ *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
