It's definitely not ideal to start over again, but at least in our case. Again this might be me, but I don't mind rebuilding them for each tool since it helps get accustomed to the differences or ways each handle a component.kind of learn as I go to an extent. But, I've found that importing into any tool from another usually gives us mixed results and end up scrapping it and building the component directly in the end tool. We design & prototype in Framer, it may just be a personal thing. in the end tools are tools and most of them do roughly the same things so A) use what you're most comfortable with, B) use what your organization pays for, C) do crimes, D) get paid. Team collaboration is also i assume one of the big selling points of figma these days. It's user interface is also absurdly easy to get into the hang of doing the basics and features like autolayout have made my life so simple on so many big projects. I have not had any interaction in figma that i haven't been able to prototype yet- though I'm sure they exist- but in terms of use cases it covers everything i've ever needed a website or app to be able to do. It just felt very bare bones back then- I assume it has also done a lot of updates in those years so who knows now i probably can't really compare them. I've never worked anywhere that wanted to pay for axure so honestly i only know enough from fiddling around on a couple trials over the years. I think when you work that way, your thinking becomes constrained by your tools, though-if Figma can't do advanced interactions, you're less likely to design for them, and less likely to test them. A lot of teams take the 'well, Figma's not very good at interactions, but we'll just use it for everything since you can kind of do everything there, it saves time, and it avoids confusion.' I get it, and I've done that too. Or you've got a hard cut-off during a project where you move from one to the other. As you inevitably go through iterations to content, it means needing to update both, or having strict policies of 'Figma is the go to source for UI, content, etc., and Axure is a reference only for interactions'. It also means that your full interaction is only visible in your lo-fi or mid-fi Axure wireframes, and your hi-fi Figma design needs to reference Axure for interaction. Because there's no decent sharing between the two apps though, that'd mean building wireframes and prototypes in Axure, then starting UI from scratch in Figma. My preference with unlimited time to do everything how I want would be to do interaction design with Axure and use Figma for UI. There's some functionality as part of a special-access beta program to have things like checkboxes interactive, so they're making progress on the interactivity front, but it's still extremely basic and I don't expect the kind of interactivity I'd want to see for years. And for testing interactions like adding text to an input, Figma's got nothing at all. There's some modal window functionality, but it's fairly rudimentary. But on the interactions side, it's basically limited to "click to open a new screen". It's got a lot of features to make UI design a breeze, like autolayouts (not handled in Axure at all) and reusable component libraries (much, much more powerful than Axure's masters). You can absolutely do full fidelity design with it, but it's clunky for that compared to Figma.įigma is amazing for real-time collaboration-I think that's probably the killer feature for most teams. I use and love both (and have frustrations with both).Īxure's bread and butter is interactions-it's got crazy versatility there. And when you test your engaging prototype and watch as all the insights flood out from customers you will feel like you are really learning something. If you can learn Axure, its very empowering. I should also mention I work in IT software which is much more complex than your usual commerce or brochure website design. Throwing a linear prototype into the hands of a user WILL NOT benefit the project.įigma is great for collaboration though and I use it a lot for workshops especially as my team is remote, thats its strength. If you are a UX designer, how are you gathering your insights through testing with Figma? Figma does not allow multiple pathways and complex workflows. UI is a consideration sure, but as a UXer you should be building quick lo-mid fi prototypes that test flow, usability and functionality. Figma feeds into this trope by offering a lot of glittering fluff but nothing solid and robust. The problem you have is the workforce is getting lazier.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |