I'm not sure what all the brouhaha over 37signals' Declaration of Independence from Adobe is all about. They design safe, bare-bones, boxy, Volvo-esque web based applications. Hell if all I had to do was make boxes all day for my own products then I'd drop Bloatshop in a heartbeat.
If your design aesthetic is similar to that of the boys in Chicago—and clients are willing to pay you really good money for the Boxy but They're Good Chique—then I'd certainly heed their advice, otherwise why should any of us care what a box factory says when we're in the landscaping business?
Join the fray by reading through and commenting at the end.
Already coined it. I demand royalties.
Nice to see you work in the Crazy People reference... that Volvo slogan was the funniest thing in that flick.
"Flies buzzing about a horse's ass if you ask me," is what I would say except (knee) jerk comments, crass language and anonymity will get me deleted.
The problem isn't what 37signals says (their formula is obvious enough: 1. challenge established practices 2. profit) but the reception their writing receives. The carpenters come out of the woodwork when a plumber says "I hate hammers." Like their dismissal of a favored tool is a personal affront.
Also, I second Abumbling Bloatoshop and humbly suggest Illacklustrator.
Why do people continually forget that 37signals is no longer a design firm (with clients).
They are a product company. Not a services company.
Photoshop works great when you are in a service business because you can simply send over the design comps quickly.
Whereas in a product company, you are your own client. So it's much more interactive and iterative to build interfaces b/c you determine exactly the direction you want to go.
What's funny, though, is that after that declaration they posted that they are now "looking for a designer who wants to kick our ass and change our game." http://snurl.com/37sneedsadsgnr
Perhaps they've seen the err of their ways?
I read that post and on any other site I'd consider that trolling for hits / alexa ranking or something more nefarious...
That said, it seems like they're trying to express an almost ideological standpoint, declaring some sort of 'moral' high ground with sweeping absolutist rhetoric.
Or at the least, some sort of snobbery.
It actually feels like the same snobbery that erupts whenever there is a web flamewar between hand-coders and users of SDKs, or gaming-PC-modding-enthusiasts and Mac owners.
The idea that visual tools and aesthetics are somehow suspect seems just...Asperger-y to me.
Spot on.
Greg, we'd love to see what you guys could do for us design-wise. But I don't think you're in the one-page redesign business. If you are, get in touch.
@Chris: "Perhaps they've seen the err of their ways?" -- What? We're looking to expand our perspective and design aesthetic. It has nothing to do with Photoshop or no-Photoshop. We're looking to hire another full time designer. I don't care if they use Photoshop or pencils or crayons or sharpies. We're hiring them for they way they do things, not the way we do things.
Chris - I don't think 37signals has seen the err of their ways. My bet is they are responding to the community discussion with some smart product marketing. After generating such a huge buzz with the recent series of posts, said company is aiming to sustain momentum and interest in their offering.
@AJ: rhetoric and snobbery from 37 Signals?? Couldn't be.
> Greg, we'd love to see what you guys could do for us design-wise. But I don't think you're in the one-page redesign business. If you are, get in touch.
We've redesigned pages before. Ning Groups and The Talk Show to name a few.
> ...in a product company, you are your own client. So it's much more interactive and iterative to build interfaces b/c you determine exactly the direction you want to go.
Exactly.
Amen, brother.
Each to their own, I actually think they make a very good case. Design should have nothing to do with software whatsoever really. I don't understand why you would post just to criticise their approach, albeit cryptically.
The shameless art of self-promotion keeps 37 signals in the limelight, and as Francis noted: many people don't make the connection that they're now primarily a product developer.
Lots of things they do apparently work very well for them, but not unnecessarily for others. People do have the right to stand up and say "Hey this works really well for us and we thought you should know that." Design process is a very individual thing at the end of the day. A lot depends on the skills of the people you have around you, and what you're trying to achieve.
If you wanted to produce work like 37sig and could find people of similar talent you're probably not going to do too badly emulating their process. If your people have different skill sets and you produce different kinds of work then maybe not.
Where exactly did they say they are "ditching" Adobe applications?
They said they don't do UI mockups in PS. They just hop into HTML and start creating IU concepts that way. Photoshop is pretty much always runnin on my machine, but I wholeheartedly agree with diving into a UI from an HTML standpoint. I've spent countless hours mocking things in in PS only to have everything drastically changed because functional parameters were changed -- parameters that may have been easier to define had we done semi-functional HTML comps first.
Get some kinks ironed out there then "beautify" with cliche round corners and drop shadows later -- should you decide they are necessary.
And on the subject of boxy designs, I've seen some pretty nice "flat" designs lately.
> but I wholeheartedly agree with diving into a UI from an HTML standpoint.
Who doesn't? Most folks fold designs into HTML/ CSS at some point regardless.
But a graphics tool, of any sort, is *still* a valuable asset. I'm a Gimp-and-Inkscape Man myself but there are a bunch of tools that allow some swinging hot-like-halo-lovin' composition making.
37signals are in one breath suggesting it's just fine to throw the baby out with the bath water, whilst simultaneously whistling the star-spangled-banner - only to then want that baby back care of an "external design influencer" (to coin a phrase).
37signals ideas.. work for 37signals. They make and sell great boxes. If you want to go beyond that, then Illustrator, CS3 and or an Open Source alternative is the go.
I resent that you used Volvo in the same sentence as 37signals. Volvos are no longer boxy.
"37signals are in one breath suggesting it's just fine to throw the baby out with the bath water, whilst simultaneously whistling the star-spangled-banner - only to then want that baby back care of an "external design influencer" (to coin a phrase)."
You seem to be throwing out our entire point with your bath water. We're not saying throw anything out. We use Photoshop when Photoshop makes sense for us. We just simply don't use it to prototype new UI designs. We use HTML/CSS as our tool of choice. That's all the post was about.
We didn't say you shouldn't do anything. We didn't say anyone who doesn't agree with us is wrong. We didn't say our way is the only way. We didn't say Photoshop is useless or worthless. We didn't say we don't think Adobe makes great products. We simply said that when we design UIs for our apps we don't use Photoshop to mock them up.
That is all we said and all we meant. For whatever reason some folks feel the need to inject controversy where there is none. This wasn't a "Declaration of Independence from Adobe," it was just a post about how we design our UIs. Photoshop is always open on my machine and I use it all the time, just not to mock up UI prototypes.
> This wasn't a "Declaration of Independence from Adobe," it was just a post about how we design our UIs.
Pity, I think we could use such a movement. We could bring back the tri-corner hat while we're at it.
Honestly do think people missed the context of the post, when I first read Greg's post and then read 37 Signals, I really didn't feel they were trying to prove any kind of point or make any political statement about Adobe.
I personally also skip a lot of photoshop work when I'm working on a new layout, simply because I like to get the framework done and in place, then model my graphical elements around that.
I do a lot of PSD to web conversions for a marketing company in NYC, they normally work with large corporations and bottom line is the #1 driving force for the product, next to turnaround time.
They expect pixel perfect matches to these PSDs and sometimes being that we're going from an open canvas to the web medium, it's not always possible in all browsers given the timeline/budget of the project. I think in this instance if the framework was laid out in HTML/CSS as the proof to the client, overall design time could be shaved off the top.
I also don't quite get the frustration towards Adobe's products lately...I very recently upgraded to CS3 from PS7 and CS3 is a fantastic product that I've seen a TON of speed enhancements with, I honestly love the product and think it's UI has come a long way as well...am I just too rosy?
Tools, dude.
@37signals: I get that you do what works for you, but after reading your article about Photoshop, I can see that your process could easily fall apart into an iterative nightmare because you're skipping steps in the planning and design stages. And that's fine for simple design tasks (as Greg mentioned, boxes) where you can often jump straight to the build stage, but it doesn't play when you need to do some landscaping.
If you'll forgive my earlier snark, Jason and the other 37signallers, I do think that if the goal of the article was just to say "Hey, you know, we prefer to work this way, but your mileage may vary," titling it "Why We Skip Photoshop" seems more than a little disingenuous.
Sure, it's eye-catching and it gets you more readers. It's good copywriting. We want to know the answer to that question. At the same time, you're saying a lot about yourselves and expressing an opinion about a commonly used tool, if not actually throwing down a gauntlet of sorts.
I think it's a great design exercise for those of us who, like myself, are visual designers first, to think of something from the code up, or at the very least, always to design with code in mind.
Simultaneously, I think it's a great exercise for people who *only* code to try drawing or sketching (even on paper), or even doing flipbooks.
I actually use Apple Keynote from time to time to mock up things like flash fades (which your team popularized); hard to show in a static mockup, but a bit time-intensive to code quickly.
There's still room for a good code-savvy visual prototyping tool, I think....
I couldn't care less about debating design process*, but as this post points out, the reaction is fascinating. It even elicited a post from StopDesign, and I haven't seen dude post since like '04!
On a UI note, the horizontal name/email/website on this comment form is kick-ass.
*I'm a Fireworks fanboy.
JF, I need to chime in here with a word of caution:
"We're looking to hire another full time designer. I don't care if they use Photoshop or pencils or crayons or sharpies. We're hiring them for they way they do things, not the way we do things."
Bringing a great designer to the table certainly can add new perspective to things. However, in my experience, rarely does letting a designer go wild however he or she chooses work for anyone involved. Yes, we are creative people. But will still need direction, we still must understand user needs, and yes we still have to play within the limits of company politics.
In fact, some of my most dissatisfying experiences as a designer have been when a client says, "Do whatever you want, Cameron." Rarely do they actually mean that, and rarely does what I deliver align with what they're expecting.
The post seems to be a pretty obvious reiteration of the fact that using Photoshop for UI mock-ups/Rapid Prototyping can lead to problems.
I would hope that's obvious to most folks building web applications by now.
Photoshop can still have a strong place in the graphic design role of the web application/site, of course.
Well, I think this post shows their post served its purpose.
> ...reaction is fascinating. It even elicited a post from StopDesign, and I haven't seen dude post since like '04!
Yeah I'd say the reaction from the design community was a tad over the top. I can appreciate having a strong opinion but some of the response comes off as being a tad insecure. Save that for when the 37boys start making Your Mom jokes.
John and I probably haven't publicly thanked Greg and the Airbag team enough for the work they did on The Talk Show. This might not be the right place, but the talk of one-page designs and Greg's link in the comments above seemed to opent he door.
Once I have a bit more time, I'll integrate the design into my CMS and you'll get to see more of the nuances and additional touches that are part of the design, but aren't visible just yet.