When to Use High Fidelity Wireframes

When I say ‘high fidelity’ for a wireframe, I mean it looks almost the same as the actual interface you are going to publish.  It most likely means there’s no design document (like a Photoshop design) based on the wireframe, and the wireframe is all you need to give to the UI developer.  The wireframe is proportionally accurate in terms of layout, spacing, font size and colours are very close to the actual thing.  Creating such a thing is actually quite easy using modern vector design software (Visio, OmniGraffle, InDesign, etc.).  It should cut a whole design step out of your process and speed up your specification-to-build cycle. However, you should not take this approach unless certain conditions exist:

This is a great approach when the visual design has been nailed down already.  That means there’s a styleguide with design rules and patterns already established and fixed.  Essentially you are dealing with Lego blocks – you have an array of modular features and the wireframe is just to show how you want to stack them together for a particular page or screen.  The best way to know that the modular pieces will fit well together and lay out well on the page is to make them as realistic as possible, and hence the high fidelity approach.  

The scenario when you absolutely should not use this approach is when the design is in flux.  As I’ve stated before, wireframes should never dictate design (nor vice versa). It’s also not the right approach when you’re breaking out of existing capabilities of the user interface, because that’s basically creating new design. This is an important realization if you’ve been in evolution mode for a long time – try to spot early on that you’re not re-using existing features and switch to a concepting and design mode instead.  The high fidelity wireframe is 100% evolution not revolution, and trying to apply it when you need to innovate will end in poor results.

Filed under: creative delivery, information architecture, method, user interface , method, wireframes, information architecture, design, revolution, evolution, lego, concepting, visio, omnigraffle, indesign, high fidelity

Xbox 360 New Interface and Avatars

It seems like a fair time to revisit my previous post about the Xbox 360 digital facelift.

I started off by lamenting the work-in-progress nature of console interfaces these days.  Well generally the new Apple-style interface does seem an improvement over the very confusing ‘blades’ system, and the upgrade process was pleasantly fast and effortless.  Could they have fixed their previous interface without totally redesigning it?  I would say yes, but this isn’t so much about redesign…  

It’s immediately evident that the real objective for Microsoft is about introducing their avatars and opening up their marketing/sales opportunities for downloadable content. Most notably, while there are some usability improvements here, the amount of ads and sales channels are borderline irritating and introduce needless steps between turning on the console and playing a game.

Referring again to my previous post, I was concerned that Cover Flow wouldn’t work for the complexity of the menu options. I think I was half right there.  In addition to left-right navigation of the current menu, which is very pleasant and fits very well, they’ve added an up-down channel selection carousel which is rather less successful.  It’s definitely visually pleasing but I often find myself lost.

Comparing the avatars to the Miis on the Nintendo Wii, I’d say they made some mistakes:

Flexibility – Wii avatars allow for detailed customization (eg, choose exactly how far apart your eyebrows are) whereas the Xbox avatars are quite limited in their flexibility (I doubt we’ll see caricatures of famous people on Xbox)

Optional – Wii avatars are an option in many games and are found under a sub-section of the main menu, whereas Xbox avatars are forced upon you and shown front-and-centre whenever you start the console

Style – Although the Wii avatars have a cartoony cuteness about them, their high level of  simplification allows for a wide range of character styles to be made, whereas the Xbox avatars are firmly set in a cute, family-friendly style

Ulterior motive – there’s no doubt that the Xbox avatars are part of a plan to introduce monetized content (ie, pay for clothing upgrades)

Overall, I’ve no doubt that the target audience they are now aiming at will lap this up. The monetization and downloadable content features are also very impressive, if a little too geared towards Microsoft’s interests than the customer’s enjoyment.  One of the biggest factors in brand affinity is simply the question ‘is it me?’ and while they’ve given a new consumer segment good reasons to say Yes, I suspect there’s a large number of people from the established base who are a little doubtful in their answer now.

PS – I’ll save the usability horrors of the PS3 interface for another day – just so you know I’m not only about Microsoft-bashing

Filed under: 3D, folly, presentation, style, trends, user interface, user-centred , avatars, downloadable content, microsoft, miis, monetization, ui, usability, user experience, user interface, wii, xbox 360