I know that this is really a post about usabilility… but I think we have to give Boeing their dues.

My guess is that the engineers at Boeing lit the buttons. But the skinflints at R**nair (Dublin + Boeing connection) wouldn’t pay for them. In the same way they don’t buy pockets for your mags or the hook to hang your jacket.

Usability aside… next time to Dublin check Aerlingus.com. Low fair competition + union legacy = low prices and flag carrier trimmings.

I’m off to try Balsamiq.

I was sat at Euston station and in front of me was a row of people sitting on seats (as you do), behind them was a large map of ‘Travelling from Euston’ only you couldn’t read it because all these people were sat in front of it. Doh!

Especially odd when you’ve got a big empty space on the wall with no seats in front it. Anyway, next time you’re in Euston take a look…… and try and read the map with people sat in front of you (I’m sure they find it off putting with someone staring at the top of their heads too.)

I often come across major usability fails and have a good laugh. One major one is this piece of accounting software I have to support at #thedayjob.

If you accidentally click on the icon, you get the login splash screen. However, you cannot just close this and carry on. You have to log in to the app, wait for it to load all the front page information and then log out and close the app. WTFOMGBBQ!?

Anyway, I fully agree. I’ve seen clients get handed a brand spanking new, standards compliant e-commerse solution that cost them thousands only to paste in information straight from Microsoft Word and think they’re all clever. (Like we would have charged you all that money if it was as easy as copying and pasting, you bloody pleb!)

As an aspiring web designer, I am quickly realizing the process that is UX. I’m building my own site and I find myself frustrated when people don’t navigate the way I do or how I want them too. It’s been very eye-opening, and I’m excited to do more research as I continue to develop my site and sites for future clients.

Thanks for the great read.

Having clients use wireframing/prototyping tools is a good thing because wireframes and prototypes are not end products. They are a means by which to engage in a discussion. One of our mantras is “prototype early, share often.” You want to avoid assumptions and misunderstandings. These tools help you do that.

Whether it be Balsamiq, pen and paper, or our product, ProtoShare, wireframing helps save time and confusion. These new apps allow wireframes to be created quicker than ever. If your client proudly brings you a stack of wireframes, you’ve now got a place to start. If your client is unwilling to budge on any details of their wireframes, or is going to be hurt if you offer your professional opinions, the wireframes are going to be the least of your problems.

You will also have to back up your claims with articles and studies otherwise the discussion will turn into a battle of the egos.

If nothing works “I am a professional web deisgner and you are a professional insurance company/car dealer/ flourist/whateer… and I dont tell you how to insure/sell cars/arrange flowers/whatever…” is a little arrogant way of telling them to let you do your job.

Hence that is a safety feature.

The problem is that clients have requested that they still want to be able to see (hence have been given lights which they have to turn on themselves) – but the clients (passengers) probably don’t understand the safety implications of putting their light on.

I’ve used Balsamiq for several months now and it’s the fastest way I’ve found for presenting a user interface for discussion and revision.

I agree that the product makes it so easy to produce mock-ups that it can result in impractical UI’s in untrained hands. Does this mean we should keep it a secret? Perhaps Balsamiq has presented an opportunity to further democratize the craft application design. I can imagine an extensible Balsamiq, that much like a spell-checker(perhaps more like a grammar checker), could in real-time validate the mockup against an community maintained library of design conventions. The XML format of the .bmml files lend themselves to this time of analysis. With this in place, the UI authors could be educated on the basics, avoid common mistakes, and have the satisfaction of creating something usable. The community development and debate of the design conventions might also help to canonize and evolve the craft.

On a side note, although many might find this a further incursion on the sacred domain of ‘experts’, I’ve always felt that the bmml format also lends itself to translation into forms like html/css, and mxml.

Thanks for the post.

All jokes aside, I think you nailed it when you say “the problem doesn’t lie with the tool – it lies with the way it’s used.”

Sure it might feel awkward to shoot down a client who comes to you with 50 wireframes made with Mockups over the course of 2 days, but to me that’s an opportunity for contributing to the World knowledge on usability! :)

Clearly your client cares about UX, or they wouldn’t have hired you, right? They could have sent the same mockups to some rent-a-coder service, but they didn’t. Like Simon says above, “shoot them down with that parental-mild pedantic tone”…in fact, charge them for a quick lesson on usability, and use their project’s mockups for it! They’ll leave feeling smarter, happy that they contributed to the project and happy that they hired you, don’t you think?

I am also surprised, and I must admit a bit flattered, that this issue only comes up now that Mockups is around. You never got a client coming to you with a notebook full of scribbles before? Is Mockups really more enticing and empowering than pen and paper for the non-initiated? Now that would be powerful! :)

I say set expectations up-front, include an optional “usability training” phase at the early stages of any project, raise your rates because of it and live happily ever after! :)

Let me know if I missed any of your points, I am enjoying this conversation, thank you!

P.S.FYI…I failed twice to post this comment via Firefox 3 on OS X…it just reloads the page with no feedback. Trying Safari now, fingers crossed!

Put price and pride to one side, just for a moment, and ask yourself, is it fit for purpose?

Great blog – sometimes a rant really helps. Or does it…

I’m not a designer. I don’t do wireframes. I’ve never used Balsamiq (except on salads). I won’t hate anyone who does use it.

We all like to try something new and not be an expert at it. At the end of the day it’s how we cope with the criticisms that makes us progress. If every teacher we’ve ever had just patted our back, said “Well done” and stamped a big ‘A’ across the top of our papers, we’d never get anywhere.

I say let them use Balsamiq for all their attempts at glory. Shoot them down with that parental-mild pedantic tone: “That doesn’t look like a man, Jimmy, that’s more like a Blascorrg from Elon VII! And you call that a car?” It can only help them grow! … Jimmy became a fine surrealist painter.

My point? Next time you fly in a Boeing 737-800 at night, take a torch.

Great post, I do completely agree with the point though that just because anyone can create a mock-up or wireframe, etc with software, doesn’t mean they have the skills to create something beautiful or useful!

Everyone pipes up about usability these days, but usually without any backing or studying on it (usually saying, “that’s not how I’D use it). Now we know how typographers felt like with the advent of the computer! We really didn’t think the amateurs would stay out for long, did we?

TV remotes especially sucks on this. Come on, out of this hundred of buttons how many do we actually use? Four, five? REMOVE THE USELESS ONES, PLEASE.