I expected a thought-provoking read, but instead I get the impression that the author doesn't really understand prototyping, or the design process in general. M

I expected a thought-provoking read, but instead I get the impression that the author doesn't really understand prototyping, or the design process in general. Maybe the end has some brilliant revelation that makes it all worthwhile - I wouldn't know because I stopped reading about a third of the way through. A couple specific gripes: * That hammer analogy is just awful. A paper representation of a hammer loses all functionality of a hammer. A paper representation of a website loses very little. Also, which would be worse - to draw a hammer for someone and have them say "why does the claw not have a space in the middle for a nail?" or to have them say that after you've spent a month creating your prototype? * "According to studies by J.Nielsen, users don’t scroll... None-the-less, users scroll more than ever..." ...and so clearly Nielsen doesn't know anything. Except he has long since stated that his original scrolling findings are not nearly as true any more. Times changed and users started scrolling. Anyone repeating that trope is just out of date. Anyone like, say, this post.