- DaveB wrote:
>Where are the statistics behind this? As an informationHell - why not just develop the whole product before testing it? People will REALLY get it then.
>architect/designer/usability person, I find it an interesting argument
>but I am not seeing numbers. Meanwhile if you look at studies like have
>been done for Snyder's book "Paper Prototyping", you understand very
>quickly why detailed wireframes have problems.
I have to agree with Dave on this one (except I find it much quicker to do wireframes and for good reason). From a theoretical perspective, you'd have to design a much more complex, multi-variate test procedure. From a more practical point of view - who's to say that the alluring picture the graphic designer chose to place in the top-left isn't affecting the scannability (and therefore effectiveness of the design) more than the navigation scheme or content?
We use wireframes in an iterative fashion to reduce the number of variables that may confound a test - to get the essential bits (e.g. concept, navigation, content, or specific features) right before going to the expense of developing and testing high-fidelity (graphic or interactive) prototypes. A good analogy to this kind of development could be say, Agile versus Waterfall... ;)
Produxi Pty Ltd
Designing better user experiences
+61 (0)414 55 9996