4 ms·

Why wireframes can hurt your project

6 points by sgdesign 16y ago

sgdesign 16y ago
Here's the tl/dr version for lazy/busy people: - Wireframes can be a useful tool for people who can’t design and can’t code. - Getting attached to them is a surefire recipe for wasted time and energy. - Wireframes are guidelines, not blueprints. - Ask yourself if your time wouldn’t be put to better use actually coding or designing.
watt 16y ago
The arguments expressed in article actually defeat itself (article is self-contradictory)... 1) Getting attached to wireframes (or any other design concept) would be detrimental (OK... let's agree) 2) Wireframes are ugly (Well... that's actually good, so you wouldn't get attached to them?) 3) It would be better to start designing and coding on the target environment right away... Well wait a minute, don't you get that by doing (3), you will get attached to your first iteration design, and will not realize when it's time to throw it away, and reset/pivot with a new approach?
- sgdesign 16y ago
  Wireframes being ugly is not really a problem. And I happen to think that Balsamiq wireframes are ugly, but wireframes created with other tools (especially sketching) can be quite beautiful. Of course you could get attached to your first photoshop mockup or your first prototype, but my point is that since they are closer to the real deal, it's easier to judge if they'll work or not.
petervandijck 16y ago
Wireframes are boundary objects. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_object http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_object That's the best explanation I've ever found. They're better than pretty designs or actual implementation at getting "different social groups" (think business, dev, design, ...) to create a shared understanding. A developer looks at a wire and sees something different than a businessguy, but they're still looking at the same document, which lets them communicate. They're communication enablers. They should be ugly and they should be throw-away documents.
- sgdesign 16y ago
  That's a very good observation. I agree that they enable communication, but I just think in many cases other tools can be even better at that.
  - petervandijck 16y ago
    Sure. But designs generally are worse tools for communication with business people and devs than wireframes, unless you just want to talk about the design and nothing else.
    - sgdesign 16y ago
      I don't see why they'd be worse tools. If you don't want people to focus on the design aspect at all, use something like a prioritized list of elements. And if you want to talk about design, then try to get as close to the real deal as possible (either with a photoshop mockup or a html prototype). But wireframes exist in a grey zone where people will discuss the placement of a call to action button or menu item, only without the benefit of visual guidelines like colors, contrast, typography, etc.

6 points by sgdesign 16y ago

Here's the tl/dr version for lazy/busy people: - Wireframes can be a useful tool for people who can’t design and can’t code. - Getting attached to them is a surefire recipe for wasted time and energy. - Wireframes are guidelines, not blueprints. - Ask yourself if your time wouldn’t be put to better use actually coding or designing.

watt 16y ago

The arguments expressed in article actually defeat itself (article is self-contradictory)... 1) Getting attached to wireframes (or any other design concept) would be detrimental (OK... let's agree) 2) Wireframes are ugly (Well... that's actually good, so you wouldn't get attached to them?) 3) It would be better to start designing and coding on the target environment right away... Well wait a minute, don't you get that by doing (3), you will get attached to your first iteration design, and will not realize when it's time to throw it away, and reset/pivot with a new approach?

sgdesign 16y ago
Wireframes being ugly is not really a problem. And I happen to think that Balsamiq wireframes are ugly, but wireframes created with other tools (especially sketching) can be quite beautiful. Of course you could get attached to your first photoshop mockup or your first prototype, but my point is that since they are closer to the real deal, it's easier to judge if they'll work or not.

petervandijck 16y ago

Wireframes are boundary objects. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_object http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_object That's the best explanation I've ever found. They're better than pretty designs or actual implementation at getting "different social groups" (think business, dev, design, ...) to create a shared understanding. A developer looks at a wire and sees something different than a businessguy, but they're still looking at the same document, which lets them communicate. They're communication enablers. They should be ugly and they should be throw-away documents.

sgdesign 16y ago
That's a very good observation. I agree that they enable communication, but I just think in many cases other tools can be even better at that.
- petervandijck 16y ago
  Sure. But designs generally are worse tools for communication with business people and devs than wireframes, unless you just want to talk about the design and nothing else.
  - sgdesign 16y ago
    I don't see why they'd be worse tools. If you don't want people to focus on the design aspect at all, use something like a prioritized list of elements. And if you want to talk about design, then try to get as close to the real deal as possible (either with a photoshop mockup or a html prototype). But wireframes exist in a grey zone where people will discuss the placement of a call to action button or menu item, only without the benefit of visual guidelines like colors, contrast, typography, etc.