1–10 of 38 posts
Why We Don't Skip Photoshop
jeffcroft.com
All Adobe products gradually became classical bloatware over the past years. One or two minor features, or otherwise just a couple of crappy-buzzword-features and you get a binary twice as bigger as the previous one.
When you realize they are doing that just because they need to improve sales, you feel betrayed. So honestly, today I feel betrayed by Adobe and I'm going to dump Photoshop, Dreamweaver and Acrobat for something else, forever. Amen.
I'm going to skip Photoshop for an entirely different reason. All Adobe products gradually became classical bloatware over the past years. One or two minor features, or otherwise just a couple of crappy-buzzword-features and you get a binary twice as bigger as the previous one. When you realize they are doing that just because they need to improve sales, you feel betrayed. So honestly, today I feel betrayed by Adobe…
I'm going to skip Photoshop for an entirely different reason. All Adobe products gradually became classical bloatware over the past years. One or two minor features, or otherwise just a couple of crappy-buzzword-features and you get a binary twice as bigger as the previous one. When you realize they are doing that just because they need to improve sales, you feel betrayed. So honestly, today I feel betrayed by Adobe…
What will you use instead?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What will you use instead?
There's GIMP, but I don't see a lot of enthusiasm on the Net about it. I think I'll try to find something small and simple that suits preliminary web site modeling and is capable of producing web formats - png, jpeg and gif - out of the slices of the basic graphical model. In fact GIMP may be OK for doing just that.
For the most part, Mr. Croft and 37signals work in too different arenas (as he points out). Bottom line: if you're designing a webpage, its still ok to start in photoshop. If you're designing an app with buttons and forms, start with HTML/CSS.
Between Yahoo's stencils (and some of my own), I can get some clear ideas in play that look like a web page in Photoshop in an hour or two, assuming I don't get tempted by pixel-perfection. This is slower than sketching, but I think just about always causes the audience to consider the prototype more thoroughly, uncovering problems and potential that a sketch usually won't.
Rails is fast, but it's still cheaper to tweak a Photoshop doc with your team looking over your shoulder.
Why I voted this up: because the author suggests that there is not just one correct way to do something. Which is not what 37signals usually suggests.