Comments on: Tools Should Never Get in the Way of Design http://usabilityworks.org/2008/01/23/tools-should-never-get-in-the-way-of-design/ Making next year's Human-Computer family reunion a lot less uncomfortable. Wed, 03 Dec 2008 20:54:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: adam http://usabilityworks.org/2008/01/23/tools-should-never-get-in-the-way-of-design/#comment-51383 adam Wed, 23 Jan 2008 21:04:49 +0000 http://usabilityworks.org/2008/01/23/tools-should-never-get-in-the-way-of-design/#comment-51383 I'd agree wholeheartedly with chris. Even if you design the entire comp in photoshop, it should still be delivered in a browser. a lot of designers have trouble understanding what will happen to their design when the actual body copy is longer than the lorem ipsum they designed around. the also fail to understand what will happen when a user's browser window is larger (or smaller) than the comp they've designed. If you fully understand how the web works, then feel free to use photoshop. A lot of designers need to see their design's limits before promising their clients something. I’d agree wholeheartedly with chris.

Even if you design the entire comp in photoshop, it should still be delivered in a browser. a lot of designers have trouble understanding what will happen to their design when the actual body copy is longer than the lorem ipsum they designed around. the also fail to understand what will happen when a user’s browser window is larger (or smaller) than the comp they’ve designed.

If you fully understand how the web works, then feel free to use photoshop. A lot of designers need to see their design’s limits before promising their clients something.

]]> By: Matthew Oliphant http://usabilityworks.org/2008/01/23/tools-should-never-get-in-the-way-of-design/#comment-51382 Matthew Oliphant Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:10:53 +0000 http://usabilityworks.org/2008/01/23/tools-should-never-get-in-the-way-of-design/#comment-51382 No it isn't. :) No it isn’t. :)

]]> By: Peter Flaschner http://usabilityworks.org/2008/01/23/tools-should-never-get-in-the-way-of-design/#comment-51381 Peter Flaschner Wed, 23 Jan 2008 17:59:40 +0000 http://usabilityworks.org/2008/01/23/tools-should-never-get-in-the-way-of-design/#comment-51381 It's really hard to debate something when you basically agree. It’s really hard to debate something when you basically agree.

]]> By: Matthew Oliphant http://usabilityworks.org/2008/01/23/tools-should-never-get-in-the-way-of-design/#comment-51380 Matthew Oliphant Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:07:03 +0000 http://usabilityworks.org/2008/01/23/tools-should-never-get-in-the-way-of-design/#comment-51380 I'll attempt to be needlessly clever by saying this: the best way to move forward is to ride the line between intuitive and inventive. Too much on the web is run by trying to be inventive. Worthwhile innovation doesn't leave gobs of people behind; it should push gobs of people forward. However, I do take your meaning. One should also question taking the road of consistency for the sole sake of consistency. I’ll attempt to be needlessly clever by saying this: the best way to move forward is to ride the line between intuitive and inventive.

Too much on the web is run by trying to be inventive. Worthwhile innovation doesn’t leave gobs of people behind; it should push gobs of people forward.

However, I do take your meaning. One should also question taking the road of consistency for the sole sake of consistency.

]]> By: Peter Flaschner http://usabilityworks.org/2008/01/23/tools-should-never-get-in-the-way-of-design/#comment-51379 Peter Flaschner Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:55:10 +0000 http://usabilityworks.org/2008/01/23/tools-should-never-get-in-the-way-of-design/#comment-51379 To add a twist: feasibility is obviously an important consideration (my turn for the duh! statement). But feasibility can also be a cage. Just because something hasn't been done before, or more specifically, just because _I_ haven't done something before does not mean that it isn't a valid solution. Pushing at the bounds of feasibility is how we move forward, right? To add a twist: feasibility is obviously an important consideration (my turn for the duh! statement). But feasibility can also be a cage. Just because something hasn’t been done before, or more specifically, just because _I_ haven’t done something before does not mean that it isn’t a valid solution.

Pushing at the bounds of feasibility is how we move forward, right?

]]>