<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Low-Fidelity or High-Fidelity Prototypes for Software?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gui-design-prototyping.com/gui-design-studio/low-fidelity-or-high-fidelity-prototypes-for-software/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gui-design-prototyping.com/gui-design-studio/low-fidelity-or-high-fidelity-prototypes-for-software/</link>
	<description>News and events from Caretta Software about GUI Design Studio and software prototyping</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 16:48:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Turtle</title>
		<link>http://gui-design-prototyping.com/gui-design-studio/low-fidelity-or-high-fidelity-prototypes-for-software/comment-page-1/#comment-14</link>
		<dc:creator>Turtle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2006 12:53:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gui-design-prototyping.com/gui-design-studio/low-fidelity-or-high-fidelity-prototypes-for-software/#comment-14</guid>
		<description>Doug

Thanks very much for sharing your experiences. I like your &quot;movie set&quot; analogy.

Hindesight is a wonderful thing. You never really know how a customer is going to react to a prototype until you show it to them! But you&#039;ll be able to try a different approach with them next time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Doug</p>
<p>Thanks very much for sharing your experiences. I like your &#8220;movie set&#8221; analogy.</p>
<p>Hindesight is a wonderful thing. You never really know how a customer is going to react to a prototype until you show it to them! But you&#8217;ll be able to try a different approach with them next time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doug</title>
		<link>http://gui-design-prototyping.com/gui-design-studio/low-fidelity-or-high-fidelity-prototypes-for-software/comment-page-1/#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2006 20:22:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gui-design-prototyping.com/gui-design-studio/low-fidelity-or-high-fidelity-prototypes-for-software/#comment-13</guid>
		<description>I would say most of our (internal) customers appreciate a &quot;high-fidelity&quot; prototype and once they see that any functionality beyond rudimentary navigation is just not there, they understand the prototype is--as I like to say--like those fake movie sets where you only see the front of the building and there is nothing behind it.

However, there was one experience where I might have liked using the &quot;outline&quot; to appear lo-fi, because the customer got fixated on an early prototype and made it harder to make large, necessary changes to the design later. Perhaps the &quot;lo-fi&quot; feel would have better communicated the transient and iterative nature of the design process...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would say most of our (internal) customers appreciate a &#8220;high-fidelity&#8221; prototype and once they see that any functionality beyond rudimentary navigation is just not there, they understand the prototype is&#8211;as I like to say&#8211;like those fake movie sets where you only see the front of the building and there is nothing behind it.</p>
<p>However, there was one experience where I might have liked using the &#8220;outline&#8221; to appear lo-fi, because the customer got fixated on an early prototype and made it harder to make large, necessary changes to the design later. Perhaps the &#8220;lo-fi&#8221; feel would have better communicated the transient and iterative nature of the design process&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Turtle</title>
		<link>http://gui-design-prototyping.com/gui-design-studio/low-fidelity-or-high-fidelity-prototypes-for-software/comment-page-1/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>Turtle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Oct 2006 12:26:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gui-design-prototyping.com/gui-design-studio/low-fidelity-or-high-fidelity-prototypes-for-software/#comment-12</guid>
		<description>Hi Rahul

Thanks for commenting and sharing your experiences.

The low/high-fidelity transitions in GUI Design Studio can work either way of course! But there&#039;s no advantage to working in &quot;Outline&quot; mode unless it frees your creativity, for example, by making you less obsessive about perfect control placement and more inclined to just slap them on as fast as possible in roughly the right place.

I&#039;m guessing you use pencil and paper for your low-fidelity prototypes (correct me if I&#039;m wrong) and we also do this at the early conceptual stages of a design.

However, we also find ourselves moving more towards using GUI Design Studio for that too now. There&#039;s a simple example of a wireframe mockup in our new User Manual but we find it quick and easy to create concept layouts using simple boxes and text.

Being electronic designs, they&#039;re easier to duplicate, re-arrange and distribute than paper sketches. We also like the ability to add navigation to bring even these simple wireframes to life. It really helps with conceptual visualisation.

We&#039;d love to hear some more experiences from you all and where you&#039;ve found advantages and disadvantages of using different prototyping methods.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Rahul</p>
<p>Thanks for commenting and sharing your experiences.</p>
<p>The low/high-fidelity transitions in GUI Design Studio can work either way of course! But there&#8217;s no advantage to working in &#8220;Outline&#8221; mode unless it frees your creativity, for example, by making you less obsessive about perfect control placement and more inclined to just slap them on as fast as possible in roughly the right place.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m guessing you use pencil and paper for your low-fidelity prototypes (correct me if I&#8217;m wrong) and we also do this at the early conceptual stages of a design.</p>
<p>However, we also find ourselves moving more towards using GUI Design Studio for that too now. There&#8217;s a simple example of a wireframe mockup in our new User Manual but we find it quick and easy to create concept layouts using simple boxes and text.</p>
<p>Being electronic designs, they&#8217;re easier to duplicate, re-arrange and distribute than paper sketches. We also like the ability to add navigation to bring even these simple wireframes to life. It really helps with conceptual visualisation.</p>
<p>We&#8217;d love to hear some more experiences from you all and where you&#8217;ve found advantages and disadvantages of using different prototyping methods.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rahul Verma</title>
		<link>http://gui-design-prototyping.com/gui-design-studio/low-fidelity-or-high-fidelity-prototypes-for-software/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Rahul Verma</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Oct 2006 14:26:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gui-design-prototyping.com/gui-design-studio/low-fidelity-or-high-fidelity-prototypes-for-software/#comment-10</guid>
		<description>I totaly agree with what has been said here, I like the way your software converts the high fidelity to low fidelity designs, but this means we have to spend time in creating the high fidelity one&#039;s first before converting them. We do low fidelity because early stages of product inception requires concepts which iterate frequently. The statements made in the above topic are very valid and true and I have experienced similar situations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I totaly agree with what has been said here, I like the way your software converts the high fidelity to low fidelity designs, but this means we have to spend time in creating the high fidelity one&#8217;s first before converting them. We do low fidelity because early stages of product inception requires concepts which iterate frequently. The statements made in the above topic are very valid and true and I have experienced similar situations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

