|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: Use something like Balsamiq[^] so that it's obvious that you aren't showing something you'd go to production with.
I still prefer class diagrams and flow diagrams, but that's maybe because I don't have much to do with the UI stuff...
You know the world is going crazy when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, the tallest guy in the NBA is Chinese, the Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is accusing the U.S. of arrogance, Germany doesn't want to go to war, and the three most powerful men in America are named "Bush", "Dick", and "Colon."
|
|
|
|
|
If he's talking about aesthetics, it's got to be UI.
|
|
|
|
|
No, not always.
A mathematical proof can be aesthetically pleasing; as well as a nicely designed algorithm.
Sometimes when a proof of concept is not aesthetically pleasing, it might simply show that you do not have a complete understanding of the concept itself and it shows in the proof of concept; you have to re-iterate on the proof to make it cleaner and more "pleasing".
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
Think I will have to go with that! Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
Who is the target audience? If the idea is a good one who knows who may get to see it. If it requires code to show then a manager may not get it. I agree with Pete - find a more generalised way of expressing ideas.
Peter Wasser
Art is making something out of nothing and selling it.
Frank Zappa
|
|
|
|
|
Just because Function has an appearance, it does not follow that appearance has a function.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
|
|
|
|
|
Never, ever "throw together" some code to prove a concept: some sunshine will sell it, and you will have to maintain it for years... 
This message is manufactured from fully recyclable noughts and ones. To recycle this message, please separate into two tidy piles, and take them to your nearest local recycling centre.
Please note that in some areas noughts are always replaced with zeros by law, and many facilities cannot recycle zeroes - in this case, please bury them in your back garden and water frequently.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: some sunshine will sell it, and you will have to maintain it for years...
Truer words have never been spoken, as a proof of concept designer this is all too true.
The only thing I could add is don't let anyone talk you into using VB6 "...because creating a UI is fast."
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you write
static public void instead of
public static void ?
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe the idea you are trying to promote is still too much a draft and not clear enough as a proof of concept; just re-iterate on the ideas, clear out some of the cobwebs.
Sometimes what seems to be clear to you is not understandable by your audience.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Devil's in the detail.
If you're giving too much detail, they'll think you're the Devil.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Oso Oluwafemi Ebenezer wrote: am I wrong?
Yes.
Another bad attempt at a joke brought to you by djj55
|
|
|
|
|
Oso Oluwafemi Ebenezer wrote: some of my colleagues always point out my design in lacking in aesthetics value! 
I suppose you could always say directly to the person making the comment...
"I will let you clean up the trivial stuff like that yourself."
|
|
|
|
|
|
scare[^]
Old site, but still love it 
|
|
|
|
|
I like the snake game. Reminds me of the old BASIC program with weak graphics. I would tweak the source code. It was one of the first pieces of code I ever worked with.
Fun stuff.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
it is also friday the 13th
so to counter the programmers day we have the Friday rule x 100 (for the 13th)
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
Marble Arch
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
|
|
|
|
|
Under Haverley's Third Rule, you know that it's never on a Friday when the Colonel is wearing Tweed. You were, of course, thinking of Marylebone unless you think that the Didcot Underpass comes into play, which of course means I would have to counter with Mid Hill East.
|
|
|
|
|
Well I had forgotten that obscure rule, (I believe it hasn't been played since the late 1970's, all that controversy about having to expose a little bit of thigh at Kings Cross or something), so I will obviously counter with Embankment!
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
|
|
|
|
|
Ah. Good choice. I see you're playing under the Fotheringay-Phipps variation. In which case, I have no choice but to counter with Neasden.
|
|
|
|
|
As I am carrying a copy of The Daily Telegraph I claim the 'Auld Pretender' clause, 'arrow on the 'ill!
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
|
|
|
|
|
You can only play that if the copy was folded and pressed by Walter The Pygmy from Epping Forest, Osterley.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
