Comments on: Some Thoughts on Adobe Catalyst

By: jwd

jwd — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:40:02 +0000

I just read an interesting thread on a LinkedIn forum for one of the groups I’m involved in (Adobe Flex Developers). There was some speculation regarding something Adobe may or may not have in the works regarding round-tripping between Catalyst and design tools (Photoshop, etc.)… but that’s not what I wanted to point out in this thread.

Here’s the link: http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&discussionID=13218996&gid=65596&trk=EML_anet_qa_ttle-dnhOon0JumNFomgJt7dBpSBA

If you go there, search for Alan Holden’s first comment, I think he nailed some of the thoughts I’ve been having but haven’t been able to articulate. In case you can’t see it, he’s basically saying that in a perfect world software development would follow the waterfall model, and that’s how Catalyst has been designed.

Unfortunately the waterfall model doesn’t apply well to most real world projects, especially because those at the top of the waterfall have nothing to do when the process is below them, so they start doing their job over again. At this point the waterfall is broken, and you need another iteration– which Catalyst doesn’t seem to handle so well.

By: Sean

Sean — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 22:05:59 +0000

Liked your comment on the forums Casey, I think it really sums up what that particular designer thinks of Catalyst, the do-it-all new Flash authoring tool. My vision of catalyst would be to have the designers work in it. It seems tailored for them, and if they aforementioned designer can work in it, I’m going to have to say any designer could work in it. Anyway, they can export it as a flex project, or as a library (which would be the magic way you wouldn’t have to mess with the auto code to much John), and we could use it to actually build the project. But as John mentioned, it completely fails when you try to make the workflow go both ways. I’m hoping they address this issue. Here is a link to a forum post I did (and to what i hope is a more intelligent issue with catalyst) http://forums.adobe.com/thread/571326?tstart=0

By: jwd

jwd — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 04:26:22 +0000

That last use of “interaction designers” in my previous comment should have been surrounded by gigantic air quotes.

By: jwd

jwd — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 04:24:23 +0000

Right. I tried to make it as clear as I could in my post that I hold a very strict distinction between “interaction design” as a concept, and “interaction designers” as a profession.

Maybe it’s just because I’ve never gotten to work with a great UX professional (well Casey, you know exactly what/who I’m talking about). The guys I’ve worked with– far from your vision of a designer who picks up some technical skills– are people who weren’t good enough artists to make a living out of it, and so gave their resume a punch with some new buzzwords.

In other words, if Catalyst becomes a tool for failed graphic artists turned interaction designers– I’m out.

By: casey!

casey! — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 04:17:11 +0000

Oh great, now these U|X guys are getting there own tool ;) Geesh, the lengths designers will go through just avoid learning even the most basic fundamentals of programming Although you don’t see me browsing the the Photoshop isles of Barns and Noble to find what colors best complement “sunset orange” either. Here’s my question: Will this become a disruptive technology? I like your 3 roles of development (maybe we can agree to call it 2.5). So perhaps this means the the middle role can now be filled by a designer who’s slightly technically inclined. Or maybe a developer who’s not afraid to pick up a color wheel. But I’m with you, probably too early to tell.