3 ms·
In our UI class we were taught that if it is a prototype, that it should look like a prototype. The concern was that if you over-do the UI to make it seem in
by zaidf 19y ago
In our UI class we were taught that if it is a prototype, that it should look like a prototype.
The concern was that if you over-do the UI to make it seem in between a prototype and a finished product, then you are confusing yourself and others judging the design whether to take this as a finished product or a prototype.
That makes sense. If I want a critique of my application's layout, then giving colors to buttons isn't a good idea since I just want feedback on the layout. The colors are just a distraction.
- euccastro 19y agoIt's not about looking 'bad' vs 'good', but finished vs unfinished. You're mixing two related but different things: managing expectations in order to prevent disappointment, and accurately conveying the maturity of a project in order to get suitable feedback. Unfortunately, the article starts as if it was just about the first aspect. In zaidf's example, the button colors not only are a distraction; they actively inhibit criticism to the layout. Unconsciously, the 'cost' of criticising the fundamental design features (layout) has raised, since changing these implies having to rethink many of the details designed on top of them (color of the buttons, or whether you'll be using buttons at all). Someone with design experience will be less shy about asking you to do big reworks. Design professors are all too happy about this. But most people will block criticism in a direct correspondence of the rework it would involve. In big companies, that may be a conscious political decision. In startups, it may be an unconscious bias due to social factors.