When it comes to building an experimental rapid prototyping tool, there's more to the story than just diving straight into code. In fact, planning is key – assessing what users are interested in, how we're going to meet their needs, and which technologies to use are all crucial steps in the process. To kick things off for our experimental prototyping project, codenamed napkin, we recently held a brainstorming session to delve into the mind of one of the application's potential users. Our goal was to prototype the prototyper – a succinct way to describe the process.
Assessing the Candidates
As part of this exploration, I focused on five main applications: Balsamiq, Mockingbird, Sencha, Axure, and Illumination Software Creator. To pinpoint what we should include and exclude in our prototyping application, I consolidated each critique into two main points – what about the application is most compelling to use it, and what misstep turns us off the most. By assessing both the positive and negative aspects of each product, my goal was to find out exactly what we should prioritize.
After careful consideration, I arrived at the following decisions:
Balsamiq
The simplicity of Balsamiq's interface stood out as its most compelling feature. With a drag-and-drop interface and minimal options, it's easy to get started without feeling overwhelmed. However, the lack of organization in the toolkit was my main issue – with so many components to choose from, finding what you need can be challenging.
Mockingbird
Mockingbird impressed me with its copy/paste functionality, which allows users to duplicate elements on the page with ease using standard keyboard shortcuts. This small feature makes a big difference, as it integrates seamlessly into the user's workflow. On the downside, I found the grids that can be added to the canvas cannot be extended or moved around – a limitation that may not appeal to all designers.
Sencha
Sencha stood out for its modern-looking and up-to-date components for prototypes, making me want to use it immediately. However, my main qualm was how difficult it is to iterate on designs – deleting a component requires right-clicking, hitting delete, and confirming the action in a pop-up dialog box.
Axure
Axure's export to code feature, which translates mockups to front-end HTML and CSS, sets it apart from its competitors. This allows prototypers to get a head start on development and reflects one of our key goals for napkin – providing a similar export feature. However, I found it disappointing that users can't "run" the prototype without fully exporting the project, making iteration challenging.
Illumination Software Creator
Illumination Software Creator's unique interface, which creates a mind map of application flow instead of providing components to add to a page, was its main positive feature. On the downside, I found it frustrating that there's no clear way to visualize the app's structure or navigate through the different screens.
By assessing these applications and identifying their strengths and weaknesses, we can better understand what features are essential for our prototyping tool and how to prioritize them.