Related
Changing Career from iPhone application developer to Tester makes me to learn about basic testing.I need to hone my testing skill.what are the ways to improve
I'm testing ~5-10 (small) applications per year so I'm no expert by any means, but this are several things I find quite useful:
Think out of the box. You are familiar with the workflow of the application. You know what your designers thought when implementing
functions. After checking these regular patterns I try to think about
the app completely different and try out new unconventional
workflows.
Try breaking it. Type text where numbers should be, try copying text from the outside into numberfields, tap multiple buttons and
hold them while using one normally. Use your UIElements while turning
the device. Be creative about it - Go apeshit on it! ;-)
"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools." - Douglas Adams
If allowed, hand this application to a 10 year old and see how he
uses it.
Go fast. When jumping between views your eyes will notice small shifted pixels automatically.
When done, check out this awesome tool: UIAutoMonkey (Coming back to that apeshit part ;))
If you are entering in the field of testing, then make sure you follow the below steps/things :
Clear the basic concepts of testing (You can refer the loads of online material for this)
Go for Manual testing first as it will be easy for the first time.
Try to break the things.
Test only when you have clear guidelines. Don't assume anything.
Happy Testing !!
My team is currently working on windows forms project using VB.NET. We are curently focused on functionality and the UI seems to very basic (if you drag and drop from the toolbox to your windows forms)
Is there any recommendations or standards when it comes to UI for windows forms development? I want to ensure that the client gets a great UI.
I appreciate your support.
Yes, it's a simple standard: make sure that you follow the Windows User Experience Interaction Guidelines.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with "simple". In fact, in many cases, simple is good!
Your focus should be on making things easy, intuitive, and conform to user's expectations. Modeling your app after other applications, particularly those included with Windows, is a good way to make sure that you're on the right path.
Breaking new ground is dangerous territory; leave that to the big shops like Microsoft. Even new UI concepts that have panels of user interface/experience experts behind them like the Ribbon are slow to be accepted and even slower to be adopted. This isn't where a small software shop wants to be. There's no advantage in being out on the leading edge here.
The recommendations you'll inevitably get to use third-party controls are well-meaning, but ultimately misplaced. There's nothing wrong with the built-in controls and a lot of reasons to prefer them.
Once you've got a functional UI that conforms to the standard guidelines for your platform, the next step is real-world testing with actual human users who have never worked on any aspect of your application.
If they like it and they find it easy to use, then you know you're on the right path. I've never heard a user complain that something looks "too simple". Google Chrome is a huge hit precisely because it's simple. Remember that you're not designing a web page here. Desktop applications are very different.
In fact, it blows my mind how often questions like this one get asked here. Why do desktop app programmers spend so much time wishing that their app looked "cooler"? These are often the same developers who complained loudly because Visual Studio 2010 switched to WPF, broke a lot of their standard expectations, and got a lot slower, with little noticeable benefit. Sure, it looked cooler (unless you didn't like the color blue), but there was little in the way of functionality that the UI change alone was responsible for. Look at the apps you use every day. Do you really pine for a more whiz-bang UI? Or do you appreciate them and integrate them into your workflow because of how they work—because they conform to your hard-learned expectations of how a standard Windows application should work?
Make your app work like that.
Believe it or not, UI is very important to the end user. Its good you focus on functionality first, but when its done, make sure the user will have a good experience with your system. Make it as easier as you can, keep in mind that every user does not know everything about softwares, dont let him/her make a mistake, the look and feel must be very nice from the user's point of view, its not important to the system but it is to the user.
I use to use third party controls that manage the look and feel (DevExpress) you can try but if you are going to try some third party controls, you will have to do it at beginning of development, because the functionality may change.
I hope it can help you some.
Regards.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I have recently heard about Magic programming language from several sources and didn't recall ever hearing about it before. It was mentioned that it is a programming language from Israel.
I did some googling and couldn't find much information about it. I couldn't find any code examples, and wikipedia didn't have any information on it either.
I think this is the site for it http://www.magicsoftware.com/en/products/?catID=70 though I am not sure, as it mentions uniPaaS instead of magic. However other material on the site indicates that this is the new name for it.
I was interested in learning more about it from it's practitioners, rather than the company. I saw several claims on the internet that it provided really fast application development, similar to claims made by RoR proponents when it came out.
How does it compare to VB?
Is it still a better RAD tool than current .net or mvc frameworks like django, ror ...etc?
How hard is it to learn?
If you can post some sample code it would be most helpful as well.
Could this site be it? Though it links back to the page above.
You're right my friend, Magic is the original name of the "programming language", nowadays is called UniPaaS (Uni Platform as a Service), I use it to develop some business application. Maybe is the fastest way to create an applications(data manipulation), you can create apps in just a few days, but like everything in life has its own drawbacks:
it's very weird so that makes it
difficult to learn.
you do not have all the control of what's happening in the background
and you have to pay a lot for licensing (servers,clients, etc)
If you are interested in learning this, you can download a "free" version of the software that only works with sqlite databases called UniPaaS Jet.
Magic Language is as it’s called today uniPaaS, it used to be Magic than eDeveloper and now uniPaaS as PachinSV menchend before.
uniPaaS is an application platform enabling enterprises, independent software vendors (ISVs) and system integrators (SIs) to more successfully build and deploy business applications.
You can download the free version of uniPaaS Jet here: http://web.magicsoftware.com/unipaas-jet-download,
try it yourself and see how easy it is to use.
Magic technology as you descried is a Magic Software Enterprises tool (uniPaaS), you can find more information on:
official website: www.magicsoftware.com/en/products/?catID=70&pageID=55
uniPaaS Jet developer group on facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/unipaasJet/
Magic developer zone: devnet.magicsoftware.com/en/unipaas
Let me know if you find the information helpful
Bob
As PachinSV explained, there is a RAD once called Magic, then eDeveloper, now UniPaaS. This RAD is dedicated for database applications. Programming in this RAD does not look like anything else I know, you mostly don't write code as with usual languages, but it is nearly impossible to explain just with words. The applications are interpreted, not compiled.
As PachinSV said, when developing, you must follow UniPaaS' way of doing things. This is probably why so many people never manage to use Magic properly: if you thought like Magic before learning about it, then you will adapt to it easily; but if you have a long and successful experience using other database development tools, then often the Magic paradigm will never become natural to you. The learning curve is quite steep, you must learn a lot of things before being able to write a little application.
Previous versions stored the "code" inside a database table. The last version, UniPaas stores the code in xml files. I could send you an example, if PachinSV does not answer you before. But the files are pretty big: the smallest xml file I have in a test app is 4000 bytes, and any application is made of at least 11 files, an empty application is 7600 bytes. You must also understand that developers never use those files (they are undocumented AFAIK), they are only the storage format used internally by UniPaaS. The only way to use them is to set them up as a UniPaaS application.
I'm still an active MAGIC Developer... This is the old name used and its a completely different paradigm like some of you mentioned. I've been developing it from Magic version 8.x to eDeveloper 9.x to 10.x then renamed to UniPAAS.
The newer version is much easier to use and it is still very RAD in the sense that there is little or no code you write... a lot of the common programming tasks like IO, SQL command...etc is handled by the tool and is transparent ( so even less code to write since we use it in almost all types of applications)... Its mostly an Enterprise tool... you wouldnt use it for small application...
You can download the free version to learn the paradigm... but the enterprise licenses are expensive.. you need both the development tool and the runtime license if you want to deploy... so it can be costly for small scale projects...
I enjoy it personally, especially when you have to do quick proof of concepts or a quick data migration or porting onto any db platform and bridging any existing system through a wide range of gateways they provide with the licensed version.. It is up to date with the commonly used web technology out there...like SOAP, RIA ...
It's more popular in Europe... The HQ in the States is in Irvine... we used to have 2 branches in Canada but it closed down in 2001 .... Visit the Magic User Group on Yahoo... Its a very active forum with lots of cool people who will help you out in your quest...
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/magicu-l/
I Programmed with Magic for 6 years and found it to be a amazingly fast tool, easy to understand if you are a competent database programmmer because all operations are really about data manipulation. It is certainly a niche area develop in and because of this jobs are few and far between. As it is interpreted there are really no bugs to make. It will work with many databases/connections simultaneously but there is a big memory and processing hit.
Drawbacks :
Little control over communications between machines and devices
No mobile API as yet
Niche area so few skilled practitioners or companies willing to invest.
Good Points :
You can say you are a Magician; you can impress people with uber fast apps development (really)
It is easy to understand if you don't have a PHD in Maths
zero programming "bugs" can creep in. What you do is what you get.
Developed in The original Magic PC referred to by several of the above folks.
It is exactly this: FAST, FAST, but expensive and rigid in what it will allow you to do. It works on a tick tack toe like matrix. Dropping in commands into the various sections determines when they are run. The middle column is run indefinitely until you break the cycle. It is like a do Until loop. If you have to do an item once you put it into this infinite loop and end it after one cycle.
The first column procedures are run first, ONCE, before the infinite middle column is run. The 3rd column of commands is run after the infinite cycle, once. It is very efficient and logical once you get over the idea of an infinite loop.
Types can be specified and an associated program to present the type. Then everywhere the type is used all the settings automatically kick in. I like especially that one can write the program and 5 months later change the name of a variable and it is carried throughout the program. In fact the program does not use your name for anything. The internal name of any and all variables is hidden to the end user, so of course it is not a problem to change a name. It takes a minute to write an input program for any table. It takes a minute to write an export/import program for all the data files in the database.
Attaching to a type of database like Btrieve or SQL independent of the program itself.
I stopped using the language because they demand more for the runtime engine than I could charge for the programs I wished to run with it. Bill Gates went the opposite direction. VB is superior in control and being able to drop `10 datagridviews onto the same screen, but development is 10 times slower.
It's niche then is PROOF of concept for a program in a big company or conversion, importing, exporting for a development company. It is good for $25k programs that are database heavy and not going mobile.
uniPaaS, Magic PC
I did some Magic work around 1993. It was a DOS based 4GL that came from Israel. Haven't seen it since.
How does it compare to VB?
It doesn't.
Is it still a better RAD tool than current .net or mvc frameworks like django, ror ...etc?
If you mean "is it more Rapid", then yes, otherwise no.
How hard is it to learn?
About as hard as learning MS Access.
Coincidentally, if you want to get an idea of what it is and how it works, I've found that comparing it to MS Access is handy. It works in much the same way from a user's or developer's perspective. Obviously what happens in the background is vastly different, but if you've ever developed a form in design view in Access, Magic will seem very familiar.
Google tells me there's also MAGIC/L. All I could find about it was this blurb:
A procedural language written in
Forth. Originally ran on Z80's under
CP/M and later available for IBM-PCs
and Sun 3s.
The only Magic programming language that I know about is one used by a company called Meditech. It's a proprietary language derived from MUMPS.
The language is truly miserable - here's a sample.
The recent article of steve jobs link
made me think about the future of flash. I'm learning actionscript 3.0 in my studies but is it the right decision still to go for it? I was pretty sure that I will be able to build application in as3 for iphones/ipads in the near future. It seems to me, while I would stay with flash, the market will be polarized by apple and adobe and you will always work double for both clientele, or just lose half of them.
Which decision would you take as a designer, if you were still at university and you intend to become a freelancer?
This question has been around a lot of times. For my opinion on flash's future please look at this answer: Should I Abandon Adobe Flash for HTML5 and <canvas>?
If you are a designer, you will probably actually feel good working with Adobe's Creative Suite, including Flash CS3/CS4/CS5. CS5 will be able to export HTML5 in the near future: http://www.9to5mac.com/Flash-html5-canvas-35409730 . You shouldn't be too worried. OTOH you should consider, that whatever CS5 exports is likely to perform poorer in HTML5, than on flash player.
From my perspective as a developer, I think there is no harm in learning any language, altough ActionScript 3 is relatively boring and easy to grasp. However this makes it a good language to learn programming, including many best practices. The most important things you learn as a programmer transcend languages. The more languages you try to really fully understand and exploit, the better you become by understanding the approaches they promote.
My personal advice to web developers is to have a look at Haxe. It is a much more powerful, elegant and expressive language than ActionScript and it allows you to target many platforms. Enough to build a whole web app on 'classic' platforms with only one language. Haxe's C++ backend allows building native iPhone apps using an SDL based port of the flash player API, although currently it's not very clear whether Apple's policy will allow distribution. Nonetheless it is an open source language with an enthusiastic community, that moves really fast and adapts to changes rapidly (e.g. unlike ActionScript Haxe can leverage flash player 10's alchemy opcodes for fast memory access) making you as a developer independant.
edit: I have personally dropped any plans of targetting the platform until Apple is willing to ease its very restictive policies, since I find this kind of behaviour intollerable. Nonetheless, I think Objective-C is a great and inspiring language, so you may actually wanna have a look at it.
I think that reports of the death of flash have been greatly exaggerated. Flash has always been "the bad guy" - self-proclaimed experts have always loudly declared that Flash sucks and is on its way out, but oddly enough I've never had any trouble finding lots of Flash work. There are things that you can do quickly and easily in Flash that are either much harder or flat-out impossible without it. It's an amazing tool and it's going to be in use at least in some capacity for the foreseeable future.
That said, even if Flash on the web goes the way of the dodo in two years (which won't happen) it's still a valuable tool. It's a wonderful way to learn Object Oriented Programming, and its uses go far beyond shiny websites. You can use something like Flash Builder in Eclipse to get accustomed to working in a code-oriented IDE, you can build AIR apps to deploy across platforms, you will soon be able to publish saleable apps to every major phone including the iPhone, etc. I've been having a lot of fun with it lately getting it to work with Arduino - it's just a hobby project but I'm trying to build a little helicopter that I can control from an AIR app. I'd be curious to see someone do that in HTML5. ;)
Flash is amazingly powerful - your abilities are in many respects limited only by your imagination and willingness to figure out how to make it work. It's really bizarre to read all of this stuff about how (some) browsers can now play (certain types of) video one their own, ergo Flash is Dead. How unimaginative. :)
This is a tough call. Flash is a fairly dominant technology at this point when it comes to media-intensive web sites. Flash is also very popular for delivering mini-games. I do think that Flash video, which is currently also dominant, will gradually be replaced by HTML5 technologies. I'm not so sure that Flash can be replaced easily when it comes to those media-intensive sites. There is a large number of very talented people comfortable with Flash that might be reluctant to adopt other technologies. I would probably hedge my bets and get comfortable with Javascript and other HTML5 technologies.
Apple vs. Adobe controversy reveals two opposite views of mobile computing.
Apple wants that its developers make the best of its devices by excluding middleware. The aim is to deliver the best possible user experience.
Adobe wants that its developers publish their work on as many platforms as possible. The aim is to reach the widest audience.
Nobody knows which view will win in the future. The mobile war is just beginning...
I think it depends on how far into the future you want to look, and what you think is most important. Flash on the desktop will not die for a long time, if ever. If that is good enough, keep going with where you're going. If not using flash on iPhone/iPad is a deal breaker, you only really have two choices - Objective-C or HTML5.
HTML5 is definitely gaining momentum, but it can't be used directly in all browsers yet, and likely for a while. However, in the mobile space, there is pretty excellent support in the major smart phones.
There isn't a single platform/technology/language that can hit everything. If I were going to bet money on the future, though, I would say HTML5 is going to win for the most reach across platforms. And given it is on the rise, I would bet that in the next few years, there will be a lot of demand for good developers in this area, but don't expect the path to be fully paved for you. You'll have to get your hands a little dirty. If you're looking for a decent editor, I use Netbeans, but I also do Java development, so that makes sense for me. Search around, though, and you'll probably find a decent set of tools that work well for you. It is a very active space.
As far as I'm concerned, Actionscript is a pretty good language to learn OOP. Javascript is a bit shit. Eitherway, I would expect you'd learn a certain set of (frontend/2d graphics) skills which will come in handy regardless of the vehicle you'll eventually use to deploy your work.
Personally, I like the flexscript language used by Flash, it's more structured and object oriented than Javascript. Also it has real inheritance, not the prototype based crap, and compiles to bytecode. For the artist, Flash is easier to use in many ways due to the available tools.
I do hope for better integration into browsers. The current flash plugin is clunky and causes crashes for many users, also the plugin system makes it integrate badly into the flow of pages.
With HTML5, I think the browser plugin idiom is dying in general. Everything from video playback to fancy vector animations can be done with just HTML + Javascript. Even a standard for 3D graphics in webpages is on the way (O3D).
Also I wonder how Adobe will cope with the current explosion of platforms/operating sytems/browsers, especially in the mobile realm. At the moment, the Flash support for systems except for Windows on PC isn't much good.
Just as projects like SVGWeb brings SVG capabilities to browsers that don't have native SVG, I would expect that if/when HTML5 gains traction against Flash there will be conversion capabilities from existing Flash to browsers without Flash. In fact, Adobe already has a conversion from Flash to iPhone using Flash Professional CS5. IMHO, there's too much Flash content in the wild for this not to happen eventually, and there are too many people for which Actionscript is their primary (or only) language for some conversion not to happen.
Career-wise, the clear long-term trend is away from Flash, and I agree with Tom that hedging your bets is wise. However, HTML5 is still fairly new, and you might do yourself a disservice to ignore Flash at this point. With conversion technologies, a Flash skillset will likely be usable for at least several years.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 12 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
Human factors design (meeting psychological needs in UI design)
What should a developer know about user interface design, usability and less technical aspects of human computer interaction?
What knowledge of usage scenarios, user behavior patterns and the psychology of user to computer interaction should we embrace to design effective software that helps users solve their problems in a natural and uncomplicated way without building barriers and creating obstacles?
There is much more to design of software than building the architecture, implementing the requirements and creating a nice-looking interface. A beautiful interface may not necessarily be useful and effective, and vice versa, an ugly software utility can become a favorite tool for many users. What at least basic knowledge should a decent developer or designer have to smooth the user experience?
Please focus on one issue per answer, describe a problem, bring examples, how the user experience is impaired and what are the ways to address the situation.
I will start:
PROBLEM: Interfaces with lots of controls and options immediately on one screen can be overwhelming to users. They will have to waste time looking through all of them trying to locate the one option they need. They'll also get distracted in the process, see one more feature, go there to learn about it and maybe read help to see if it can solve their problems, then another one and so on until they are completely lost.
EXAMPLE: As a good example I will cite the Microsoft Word (as well as other Office applications) of pre-2007 version. The sheer amount of menus and options has always scared me. I managed to remember where were the options I needed most often but that's it. Everything extra, I tend to google for things I need to learn where this particular feature is located in the forest of options.
SOLUTION: Hide out all extra options behind a few menus and submenus logically structured for the user to be able to locate them through the process of logical thinking. The 2007 redesign has obviously taken the problem into account by grouping the options into tabs. I found many new options I needed without googling but just by thinking where it could belong and looking there. Not that it has always worked, but the improvement can be felt.
Now, what are your ideas?
Useful and effective interfaces are beautiful. Look at them as a UI designer, not as an art major. :-)
Simplicity; as few choices as can accomplish the needs.
Convention; follow patterns the users are already familiar with.
Observation; watch the users, and smooth the places they have problems.
Gentleness; write human-readable errors. Don't upset the users.
Consistency; do things the same way everywhere in the application. Have one person write all of your text, or write a standard that text must meet.
Learn to listen.
Users will tell what they want but not in the words that you're used to. Socialize, sit down, take your time and listen. Watch them work, ask questions. Bring up some ideas "How would you like...?" and listen to the replies. Don't assume that something would be better for them, ask them. Don't force them down a certain path because it's more simple to code.
Interfaces with lots of controls and
options immediately on one screen can
be overwhelming to users.
GMail has this slogan "Search, don't sort". The same principle can be applied to user interfaces. As you mentioned, users are already doing this themselves by googling for features.
Now the next step is to build support for feature search right into the application. Hit a keyboard shortcut, type a few keywords, and click on the feature you want to use. The IDE Insight feature in the upcoming RAD Studio 2010 does exactly that.
Problem: user interfaces often don't have a 1-to-1 correspondence to the domain model:
There are communication problems
because programmers talk about the
hidden domain model while users talk
about the GUI.
There are maintenance problems
because users are constrained by the
task-based user interface. They regularly need
to ask for "a new screen to do this" even
if the domain model may already
support it.
Solution: the naked objects architectural design pattern. To take this to the extreme you might even generate the GUI automatically from the domain model.
I know the question is a bit old, but I'm surprised to see that no one mentioned Joel Spolsky's excellent article : User Interface Design For Programmers. It's definitely something every developer should read. There are no especially brilliant or original ideas in it, it's mostly common sense, but it did open my eyes on some not so obvious points...
I suggest reading "The Design of Everyday Things" by Donald Norman.
I use to think asthetics were useless until I tried to sell my house. Sturdy foundation, 3 brms, 2 baths, 2 car garage, fenced yard, blah, blah blah - until I got rid of the stink from my 3 dogs nobody would touch it.
The more visually pleasing the app/site is, the more chance it will get used. Now a user will give it a try and determine if it does anything they want. Finally, how usable is it? This is a point when you will probably get more feedback.
Just like the house: get rid of the clutter, clean everything, start with a general color pallette and let the user add the crazy colors if the want them.
If you really want your eyes opened, take a course in Human Factors Engineering.
I have worked at a pharmaceutical company for the past two years and I think that the design of the interface is nearly as important as the functionality. Watching users struggle with old complicated legacy code is the primary reason for re-designing it. Functionality is seldom the primary reason for redeveloping code or replacing it.
Usability studies
Watching people use your code
Extreme programming (Delivering preview code intermittently throughout design process)
Are all essential to delivering code that not only meets the users needs but makes them happy and productive. At the end of the day, programs will only be used if they make you happy and productive.