|
Not being able to afford a graphic designer, I do all my own UI work. I've found the trick is to keep it simple.
Listening to user-feedback is very important too - they are the ones who are going to use it in anger so it is very important to take their ideas on board.
Of course the best way to figure out if you've got a good UI is to sit and try and use your own program for a couple of days. You'll soon see if you've got a useable UI.
Michael
'Logic, my dear Zoe, merely enables one to be wrong with authority.' - The Doctor: The Wheel in Space
|
|
|
|
|
"I know what I'm doing, and can do it myself!"
*¨¨`)
¸¸.·´ ¸.·*¨¨`)
(¸¸.·* ¸ .·*
¸¸.·*
(¸¸.~~> Joel Holdsworth.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree  , though some of my colleagues might not
|
|
|
|
|
I agree... I chose the second option on the poll, because sometimes we get a graph designer to develop the GUI... however, many times they don't get the point and wander off on less important things. I know that GUI is a very important part of a professional app (since it is what the user sees and interacts with), but it must not get in the way of functionallity.
|
|
|
|
|
Ahhh... but what good is the functionality if the user cannot use it effectively? Also, what may seem less important to you, may be very important to the user.
|
|
|
|
|
Totally... I certanly agree. I allways work from the user up for app design. My point is that just getting a designer does not guarantee that the app will be really user oriented and functional. The designer must be "trained" in app design first (and even some programming) so he/she know how things work inside...
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous wrote:
but what good is the functionality if the user cannot use it effectively?
Please define "effectivly".
A command-line based interface can be extremly effective. And there are a lot of users who want to get the job done while not being annoyed by visual fuss like absurdly skinned buttons.
Who is 'General Failure'? And why is he reading my harddisk?!?
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, I choose option 4.
Jason King
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, another for option 4. Surprised it was missing. First time I have not been able to vote.
Rocky <><
www.GotTheAnswerToSpam.com
|
|
|
|
|
Just because we are programmers doesn't mean we don't do a professional job. The UI may be secondary but it still gets an awful lot of work put into it. I have become really quite good at layout and ease of use (even if I say so myself ). There are always numerous ways the user can do the same thing so they can work how they want to.
So we do not need to bring in outsiders to get it right.
Its right to start with! 
Roger Allen
Sonork 100.10016
Death come early, death come late,
It takes us all, there is no reason.
For every purpose under heaven,
To each a turn, to each a season.
A time to weep and a time to sigh,
A time to laugh and a time to cry,
A time to be born and a time to die.
Dust to dust and ashes to ashes,
And so I end my song.
|
|
|
|
|
The UI is *not* secondary. It is as important, perhaps even more important, than the stuff the user does not see. Just try to sell an app that may do what it was designed to do but is lacking in the UI department to Mac users. You would not stand a chance. Mac users tear applications with poor UI design to shreds, regardless of any other redeeming values of that app. Windows users seem to be more tolerant. I think all developers who design Windows apps should have to do a tour of duty on the Mac OS first to learn about human interface
|
|
|
|
|
A graphic designer is that person who uses Photoshop a lot and is normally hired to make the UI look cool - shaded bitmaps etc.
UI design is about usability, standards, etc. Two completely diffent things.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, but the same doesn't always apply for designing Web applications. Sometimes making an application more usable can be aided by the skills of a graphic artist.
|
|
|
|
|
In most cases the graphic artist make the application more appealing, not more usable.
|
|
|
|
|
...when you're in the narrow but popular scope of Windows end-user application software at any rate. What, you think those buttons are made out of sheet metal?
The UI is for getting input from the user, and presenting output to the user. If you think sans-serif text on a gray background is the be-all/end-all of information presentation, then i wish your days in UI design to be short and painful. Hiring a graphic designer should get you someone who knows how to to convey that information to the user as efficiently as possible, utilizing text style, color, positioning, etc. to achieve these ends. And if you can work some good aesthetics in there too, well... it'll look good on your advertising materials then.
That said, putting rounded purple corners on the borders of everything doesn't necessarily accomplish much. Direct your effort where it's needed.
A servant to formulaic ways.
Shog9
|
|
|
|
|
"If you think sans-serif text on a gray background is the be-all/end-all of information presentation"
The simple fact is that sans-serif text on a gray background is easier to read. Using fancy colour schemes only makes the UI look cool, they don't do anything to improve usablity.
Not that I have anything against a cool looking UI, as long as it doesn't make the UI harder to use.
|
|
|
|
|
Anomonous wrote:
The simple fact is that sans-serif text on a gray background is easier to read.
Bullshit.
How many books do you see with gray paper?
How about data entry terminals? Seems to me they tend to go with [amber|green] serif on black as a rule.
What about billboards, order information during TV informercials, roadsigns?
What about Windows 3.0 / the original MacOS?
Black sans-serif text on gray was someone's idea of a "fancy colour scheme" at one point - dig out some old magazines if you're not old enough to remember, and check out all the columnists gushing over OS/2 and then Windows95's "3D / Etched" look.
There are two points you can honestly make in favor of black+sserif+gray: it is low-contrast, so it doesn't distract you from higher contrast areas of your app (good for menus/sidebars), and it is the default appearance for most Windows apps.
So if you're lazy and only do menus, you just may get away with black+sserif+gray.
A servant to formulaic ways.
Shog9
|
|
|
|
|
Well, depends on the shade of grey. For instance this text box that I'm writing in is fine. Of course a really dark grey would be bad, but also you can see many examples of bad contrast between text and background: just look at the Windows titlebar!
|
|
|
|
|
Quite true. Notice how each version of Windows since 95 has lightened the shade of gray used on most UI elements?
A servant to formulaic ways.
Shog9
|
|
|
|
|
Being a web-dev we naturally do use proper graphic designers for the UI. I assume though that this poll is targeted at Windows apps rather.
Techies do bad mouth design. However a simple personal case for me highlights how important it is; I use FeedDemon rather than Awasu because the UI is so much slicker. It is easier, quicker and more intuitive. It also looks good on a purely asthetic level and I don't care how shallow that is, it helps, it sells. So one more buyer for FeedDemon, one less for Awasu. I would rather use Awasu because the developer is a CPian and he is a nice guy and Awasu is packed with incredible features. But it hurts my eyes to use it.
regards,
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
South Africa
Miszou wrote:
I have read the entire internet. on how boring his day was.
Crikey! ain't life grand?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
