我们中的一些人只是在UI设计的软方面遇到了困难(尤其是我自己)。“后端编码器”注定只设计业务逻辑和数据层吗?我们是否可以做些什么来重新训练我们的大脑,使其更有效地设计出令人愉悦和有用的演示层?
同事们给我推荐了《网站设计》、《不要让我思考》、《为什么软件很糟糕》等几本书,但我想知道其他人在这方面做了什么来弥补他们的不足?
我们中的一些人只是在UI设计的软方面遇到了困难(尤其是我自己)。“后端编码器”注定只设计业务逻辑和数据层吗?我们是否可以做些什么来重新训练我们的大脑,使其更有效地设计出令人愉悦和有用的演示层?
同事们给我推荐了《网站设计》、《不要让我思考》、《为什么软件很糟糕》等几本书,但我想知道其他人在这方面做了什么来弥补他们的不足?
当前回答
原因有很多。
(1)开发者不能站在用户的角度看问题。这是通常的怀疑:缺乏同理心。但这通常不是真的,因为开发人员并不像人们想象的那样陌生。
(2)另一个更常见的原因是,开发人员太接近自己的东西,在他的东西上呆了这么长时间,没有意识到其他人可能并不那么熟悉他的东西(这是一个比直觉更好的术语)。
(3)还有一个原因是开发人员缺乏技术。
我的最大主张:阅读任何UI,人类交互设计,原型书。例如:设计显而易见的:一种Web应用程序设计的常识方法,不要让我思考:一种Web可用性的常识方法,设计时刻,等等。
他们如何讨论任务流程?他们如何描述决策点?也就是说,在任何用例中,至少有3条路径:成功、失败/异常、替代。
因此,从点A,你可以去A.1, A.2, A.3。 从点A.1,你可以得到A.1.1, A.1.2, A.1.3,等等。
他们如何显示这种向下钻取的任务流程? 他们没有。他们只是掩饰它。
因为即使是UI专家也不具备技术,所以开发者也没有机会。 他认为这在他的头脑中是清楚的。但它甚至在纸上都不清楚,更不用说在软件实现中了。
我必须用我自己的手工制作技术。
其他回答
部分原因在于,UI设计比看起来要难得多,就像编程比设计师看起来要难得多一样。这两个人对完全不同的事情的担忧程度大不相同,而这一点,除了所需的方法和技能明显不同之外,导致他们关注彼此看不见的问题。
I've found that it helps to describe my app and how to use it to someone without any visual tools whatsoever. It helps focus on what is actually necessary and important and feeds back what can be comprehended quickly by another person. I can do this even before I have a line of code, so it's very cheap to do and doesn't require any artistic skills. The other advantage is that verbalizing the app gets parts of my brain working that otherwise would remain dormant while coding and I can start to "see" the app work (or not work) as I talk.
我尽量与设计相关的网站和文本保持联系。我发现Robin Williams的著作《the Non-Designer’s Design book》在这些研究中也很有趣。
我相信设计和可用性是软件工程中非常重要的一部分,我们应该更多地学习这方面的知识,不要再为我们不应该做设计找借口了。
每个人都可以偶尔成为设计师,每个人也都可以成为程序员。
你提到了《别让我思考》这本书。我强烈推荐你阅读这篇文章。
我们是否可以做些什么来重新训练我们的大脑,使其更有效地设计出令人愉悦和有用的演示层?
是的。观察那些试图使用你的软件的用户,不要帮助他们。也被称为可用性测试。
The basic idea of usability testing is that you take someone with a similar background to your target audience, who hasn’t seen your software before and ask them to perform a typical series of tasks. Ideally they should try to speak out loud what they are thinking to give you more insight into their thought processes. You then watch what they do. Critically, you do not assist them, no matter how irresistible the urge. The results can be quite surprising and highly revealing. Usability testing can be very fancy with one way mirrors, video cameras etc, but that really isn’t necessary to get most of the benefits. There is a good description of how to carry out usability tests in Krug’s excellent book Don’t make me think: a common sense guide to web usability. Most of his advice is equally applicable to testing desktop applications.
在进行UI设计时,以下是我始终牢记的一些事情(到目前为止还不是一个完整的列表):
Communicating a model. The UI is a narrative that explains a mental model to the user. This model may be a business object, a set of relationships, what have you. The visual prominence, spatial placement, and workflow ordering all play a part in communicating this model to the user. For example, a certain kind of list vs another implies different things, as well as the relationship of what's in the list to the rest of the model. In general I find it best to make sure only one model is communicated at a time. Programmers frequently try to communicate more than one model, or parts of several, in the same UI space. Consistency. Re-using popular UI metaphors helps a lot. Internal consistency is also very important. Grouping of tasks. Users should not have to move the mouse all the way across the screen to verify or complete a related sequence of commands. Modal dialogs and flyout-menus can be especially bad in this area. Knowing your audience. If your users will be doing the same activities over and over, they will quickly become power users at those tasks and be frustrated by attempts to lower the initial entry barrier. If your users do many different kinds of activities infrequently, it's best to ensure the UI holds their hand the whole time.