Designers often use prototypes as a way of saving money when it comes to designing a website for a client. The prototype allows the client to view where each element will appear on the page and what it does. In addition all hyper-links can be clicked on and it will take the client to the page the link has been allocated. This allows clients to iron out any mistakes or design issues before the website is made. The earlier the issue is spotted the more costs are saved, not only in money but also in time and effort.
Low fidelity prototypes can be produce by pencil and paper or by a computer and a piece of software. This then leaves the people to think that low fidelity prototypes are the best option. Simply because it saves a lot of time, money, effort and the problem can be spotted sooner. However high fidelity prototypes give the client an idea of exactly how the website will look and interact with users. High fidelity prototypes are only ever made by a computer and software. This is because it is the only way, the client may view how the links navigate to different pages. Due to these reasons high fidelity prototypes are produced, because of this is seen as more professional.
As a result low fidelity prototypes are needed to produce quick designs to convey to the client an understanding of their requirements has been met. Also the designer is not limited by the software of a computer, if the designer does not know how to fully use it, because with pencil and paper there are no limitations. Not only this, it allows designers to have a solid foundation on which they can build higher fidelity prototypes. Moreover high fidelity prototypes are needed to convey a more professional approach of the design phase. Also most importantly, convey to the client exactly what will be implemented as the final product, now that all the improvements from previous prototypes have been made. As well as being able to carry out remote testing on the website, to highlight any outstanding or major issues. For example images not being shown, due to a file path being incorrect or new filters blocking the path.
Upon reflection I feel this week I have been able to really connect with the material and understand the information being given to me. However to improve I feel I need to add my own material and use it to support my writing. In addition I should also be trying to actively participate within the blogging community. Also I feel I could make my blogs more concise and integrate more specialist terminology.
Cites for this blog:
Malamed, C. 2013. Realistic Graphics and Learning: What’s most effective?: The eLearning Coach. [online] Available at: http://theelearningcoach.com/media/graphics/realistic-graphics-and-learning/ [Accessed: 6 Dec 2013].
Smorgasbord-design.blogspot.co.uk. 2013. smorgasbord-design : usability. [online] Available at: http://smorgasbord-design.blogspot.co.uk/ [Accessed: 6 Dec 2013].
Still, B. and Morris, J. 2010. The Blank-Page Technique: Reinvigorating Paper Prototyping in Usability Testing. Professional Communication, IEEE Transactions on, 53 (2), pp. 144-157. Available from: doi: 10.1109/TPC.2010.2046100 [Accessed: 6 Dec 2013].
Walker, M., Takayama, L. and Landay, J. 2013. High-Fidelity or Low-Fidelity, Paper or Computer? Choosing Attributes when Testing Web Prototypes. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 46 (5), pp. 661-665. Available from: doi: 10.1177/154193120204600513 [Accessed: 6 Dec 2013].
Wireframetool.com. 2013. Wireframe Review Series: What Makes a Wireframe Good or Bad, Part 4 | Wireframe Tool – Wireframe Tools. [online] Available at: http://www.wireframetool.com/wireframe-review-series-what-makes-a-wireframe-good-or-bad-part-4 [Accessed: 6 Dec 2013].