6 ms·
Plug: I'm building a web-based mockup tool called jMockups [1], which my long term goal is to supplant Photoshop as the high fidelity mockup tool of choice. If
by matt1 16y ago
Plug: I'm building a web-based mockup tool called jMockups [1], which my long term goal is to supplant Photoshop as the high fidelity mockup tool of choice.
If you have qualms with Photoshop and can entertain the possibility of a better tool coming along, I'd really, really, really love to hear your thoughts on jMockups, what I can do to improve it, and how it can become a tool so phenomenal that it wouldn't make sense for you not to switch from Photoshop. Email me at matt@jmockups.com.
[1] http://www.jmockups.com http://www.jmockups.com
PS: New feature you might like: Instantly convert almost any website to a mockup so you can redesign it in minutes: http://www.jmockups.com/websiteconverter http://www.jmockups.com/websiteconverter
- jdp23 16y agoSeems intriguing. How would you compare/contrast with Balsamiq?
- matt1 16y agoBalsamiq is for designing low fidelity mockups (wireframes) whereas jMockups is for designing high fidelity (pixel perfect) mockups. It makes more sense to compare jMockups to Photoshop than Balsamiq. That being said, I can pretty effortlessly pivot from focusing on high fidelity to low fidelity. Right now I'm considering adding a toggle button that lets you switch back and forth, but am not sure if I want to go down that path yet. Do one thing well, right?
- jdp23 16y agoVery clear explanation, and agreed on doing one thing well. It'll be a lot easier to to leadership in the high-fidelity mockup segment, and then use that as a base to expand if it makes business sense.
- selectnull 16y agoI've played with jMockups demo and as a Balsamiq user I can say that one of its best features is "low fidelity", specifically lines that look hand drawn and comic sans font. That combo is what I consider most important in mockups: when you give that to a client, it's very clear that it's not a product, it's a mockup. If you can make that kind of low fidelity, I think you would have very good mockup tool. Of course, seeing what you have right now, I can understand your thinking in pursuing high fidelity route.
- matt1 16y agoThanks for checking it out. Can you elaborate on your last sentence? Of course, seeing what you have right now, I can understand your thinking in pursuing high fidelity route.
- selectnull 16y agoI meant to say I agree with you saying doing one thing well might be a better choice for your product. I liked what I saw in jMockups, I like how it works, and it's pretty fast. But I wouldn't use it as a tool to create mockups that I have to present to a client (that doesn't mean somebody else has the same kinds of clients or same needs as me), for the reasons it looks too real. Like I said, Balsamiq's greatest feature is that mockups look "hand drawn", what you called "low fidelity", one might call it almost childish. You said jMockups and Balsamiq are less comparable than jMockups and Photoshop. I agree. So maybe you shouldn't pivot from focusing on high fidelity to low fidelity but excel in what you already do.
- matt1 16y agoAppreciate it -- thanks :)
- Andrex 16y agoSounds great, just signed up to try it. Two questions: 1. What's with the "j"? Makes it sound like it was written in Java... 2. Any thoughts of turning the website converter bookmarklet into a Chrome extension? Would be cleaner and seem more secure for users.
- matt1 16y ago1. "j" is for JavaScript. Think jQuery. 2. No need -- the bookmarklet is easier to install and works cross browser. I'd bet that most people competent enough to install a Chrome extension can also install a bookmarklet. Also, seem more secure != more secure. Appreciate the feedback. Let me know what else I can do to make it better.
- Andrex 16y agoCould I make it a Chrome extension? :P Could be official or unofficial, I have my bookmark bar hidden so an extension would fit better with my workflow.