Net neutrality is bad for the market. What people think they want does not supercede decades of economics.
Regulating ISPs will do irreparable damage to the web, and it could be a decade or more before the average consumer can afford to be a part of a meshnet internet.
Y'all just don't understand the level of manipulation happening. Point at the comcast boogieman (and rightfully so, tbh) as they strip ISPs of their liberties and force a certain business model on them.
I have been somewhat disappointed with my fellow citizens before, and there's always been a certain kinship between Americans, but this is just too far.
Really? I get tons of "files.wordpress.com/obviousspamblog/exact-search-term-you-entered.pdf" garbage PDFs that are just 80 pages of the same text with "CLICK HERE FOR MANUAL ----->>> totallynotmalware.biz.mx.cc.info.site/bulwarkmulgrove".
I consider UI mockups the perfect usage for visual programming environments. Obviously a visual product compliments a visual development interface. However, it's a very narrow realm compared to the rest of the programming universe.
It's the same as saying that drawing a picture is easier for most people than programming a picture, and it doesn't really have to do with the topic of visual programming, but rather visual design.
> I consider UI mockups the perfect usage for visual programming environments.
It can be, though the type of mockup I find more useful for discussion is much lower fidelity than that.
The feedback and discussion around a mockup is related to the fidelity.
Low fidelity, such as whiteboard or large sharpie drawings, will garner feedback that discusses whether this UI even makes sense at all, if there's a different approach, or how feasible it is to present everything this way.
Mid-fidelity, such as digital mockups, will often focus more on the actual layout, text labels and contents.
High-fidelity, such as a working prototype or something done in the actual environment (visual programming environment, or even as working HTML+Javascript+CSS), will often get into a discussion about font sizes and icon choice.
If you build a high-fidelity mockup when you really want to have the low-fidelity discussion you're doing everyone a disservice. Even if your team can see past it and still has the appropriate discussion, it's a waste of time.
For that reason, even when my mockup is basically a small modification to something that exists already, I'll often screenshot it, and then freehand draw (MS Paint style) overtop of it with my modifications, using ugly 2-4px wide lines. I've tried both, but consistently found the feedback is better that way -- even when the target audience is a bunch of developers that should be able to see past it.
Seems like you've done quite a bit of this type of work, I've the exact opposite. I guess it makes sense that the fewer data points the clients are given, the more they focus on the broader picture.
Would you often start with a napkin drawing-esque mockup, and add detail to it while cooperating with the client, or would you sometimes start with a finished HTML+JS+CSS prototype and change things up as they request?
I'm not a graphic designer, so I generally try not to do things that focus on the design -- which means I tend to start on the whiteboard/sharpie/napkin side of things.
That said, some people just can't picture how things look unless you show them how it looks, and in the past I've worked with clients that would think it's literally a joke (and probably fire me when they found out it wasn't) if I come to them with a sharpie drawing.
I think the only times I've gone to a more high-fidelity version up front is when the client/stakeholders had no idea what they really wanted. A "finalized" mockup can start the discussion (even if it turns out to be entirely wrong) and then be used to get into the low-fidelity whiteboard/sharpie mockups. The important thing is to keep the discussion focused on the right thing, and don't stray into fonts/images/icons if you want to talk about the overall structure and what pages even should exist.
