Recently I was asked to quickly summarize why EightShapes usually chooses Adobe InDesign as our baseline tool for creating user experience documentation (in particularly, sophisticated systems for wireframes and annotated deliverables). I should have a set series of slides on the topic. But I don’t.

Admittedly, InDesign’s learning curve for getting started exceeds most if not all other popular design tools. But with that investment to learn the tool comes a power to modularly create and collaborate on design solutions and documentation.

Usually, the choice of InDesign over Visio (or Fireworks or Illustrator or Omnigraffle) for a wireframing system boils down to points like:

  • InDesign is cross platform (Windows & Mac). If you want everyone to play, including vendors with unpredictable platforms and/or a nagging disdain for Windows, then Visio AND Omnigraffle are quickly dismissed.
  • InDesign is by far the most modular, with snippets, object libraries, and capabilities to dynamically link files to one another. Visio is on the other end of the scale, with but the use of stencils in narrow ways to control instances within a single document. Visio documents are where screen visualizations (in this case, wireframes) are embedded with no opportunity to reuse within (such as a wireflow) or across (such as multiple deliverables per project) documents.
  • InDesign’s  style power (rather, distinct style types for paragraphs, characters, objects, tables, table cells) includes such a deep array of customization, inheritance, and typographic control that vastly exceeds any other tool for creating wireframes and managing a system based on a formed, mature visual system. Sure, it’s wireframes, and they aren’t meant to be pixel perfect. However, systematic wireframes should reflect the established visual conventions of structure and behavior that typography and basic object styles can imply.
  • InDesign is for creating annotated documents. While both Visio and Omnigraffle also support a page model for publication, Illustrator and Fireworks are solely dedicated to creating screen visualizations, not associated annotations that can be detailed, versioned, and so on. Additionally, InDesign’s embedded features for document variables, rapid TOC creation, and application of standard layouts enables designers to more rapidly produce more polished documents.
  • InDesign supports more powerful grids, vector-based drawing tools, and layer organization than non-Adobe Creative Suite products, with a similar goal to that of typography: implying the standard visual conventions for laying out different page chunks.
  • InDesign empowers collaboration across resources not limited to UI/Information Architects/Interaction Designers, but also content strategists (via threading InCopy with InDesign), visual designers (with InDesign’s fully featured placement and control of Photoshop layers and layer comps), and others. InDesign is a publishing platform built on collaboration. Visio and Omnigraffle are made for a single person to own and publish a document in isolation.

The big theme is that InDesign provides the only software tool on the market today by which you can unify delivery of user experience documentation across a range of disciplines. The result? Increased collaboration between designers, governance across designers, and credibility of the design organization outwardly to other groups. Otherwise, it’s every designer for themselves.


COMMENTS / 4 COMMENTS

Most discussions about tools can be solved by simply having the parties involved use them for a relatively short amount of time. When I read your posts, though, it seems like there’s a much larger investment than giving InDesign a quick spin or two.

It’s probably 50% InDesign that makes it work for you guys, and 50% the framework you’ve built for yourselves to use InDesign most effectively.

That’s the product I’d like to take for a spin ;)

M. Jackson Wilkinson added these pithy words on Feb 09 09 at 11:23 am

Even if there’s no need for collaboration with other designers, architects, or others, going with InDesign still seems like a smart choice for reasons 2, 3, 4, and 5.

I’ll give it a spin. Though I’d like to hear about solo designers that use InDesign like this.

Thanks, good list of benefits!

Jason Robb added these pithy words on Mar 11 09 at 10:39 am

I’ve just started designing websites for local businesses and I was using Fireworks to create prototypes. I like some of the program’s functionality, but the program itself is riddled with bugs and runs very slowly on my new MacBook. So I’ve been looking for alternatives, and after a lot of reading, I think I’m convinced by your argument. I’m even further persuaded because I’m very familiar with InDesign, coming from a background in print. I just downloaded Unify and I’m very excited to give the system a go!

Stewart McCoy added these pithy words on Dec 19 09 at 6:41 pm

Speaking about cost –If you\’re buying InDesign, you are most likely getting some type of CS suite — which means Illustrator is bundled.

Sooo…

I absolutely agree with you on the power if InDesign — with one exception. We actually prefer to use Illustrator to create our wires. There is so much more control over the visual look and appeal of wireframes created in Illustrator. You can still have modules/components placed in the Illustrator file in much the same way you are currently placing them in InDesign. Further more, with Illustrator, we are not constricted by page length. If the page is long — and needs to be to show all the elements (like a shopping category page for instance) then we have space to actually show that.

Once the pages are designed — we place that Illustrator page in InDesign for specifications, case studies, etc.

Dara added these pithy words on May 13 11 at 6:13 am

SPEAK / ADD YOUR COMMENT
Comments are moderated.

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Return to Top

Why InDesign?