ux设计_我是一名开发人员，正在过渡到UX设计帮助

ux设计

So you’re a coder who’s being asked to do more “design” or maybe you’re looking to make a full switch to UX. That’s great, and in my opinion, a very good combination of skills. People frequently assume that development is basically logical and design is a creative pursuit. I disagree. Code is extremely creative but often there isn’t enough logic practiced in design disciplines.

因此，您是一个被要求做更多“设计”工作的编码人员，或者您正在寻求完全转换为UX的想法。 很好，我认为这是技能的很好结合。 人们经常认为开发基本上是合乎逻辑的，而设计是一种创造性的追求。 我不同意。 代码极富创造力，但是在设计学科中常常没有实践足够的逻辑。

Instead of being scared of that disparity, you should embrace it. Good (measurable) design is often more a science than an art.

不要害怕这种差异，而应该拥抱它。 好的(可衡量的)设计通常更是一门科学，而不是一门艺术。

So here are a few things to think about when taking the leap!

因此，在进行跳跃时，请考虑以下几点！

关于设计的常见误解 (Common misconceptions about design)

*设计是视觉/美学的 (* Design is visual/aesthetic)

Wrong! SOME of design, specifically the parts that deal with creating interface or branding are aesthetic. However, much like coding, there’s actually a very wide range of specializations often encompassed by terms like UX Design. In addition to visual design, you might create flows, consider information hierarchy, write interface copy, define persona characteristics, build prototypes, establish testing metrics, imagine interactions or conduct user research, none of which require things to be “pretty”. While I’d love a world where everything is aesthetically pleasing, I’d settle for one where everything is well designed.

错误！ 某些设计，特别是涉及创建界面或品牌的零件是美观的。 但是，与编码很像，实际上，UX设计等术语通常包含非常广泛的专业化知识。 除了视觉设计之外，您还可以创建流程，考虑信息层次结构，编写界面副本，定义角色特征，构建原型，建立测试指标，想象交互作用或进行用户研究，而这些都不要求事物“漂亮”。 当我爱一个世界上一切都令人愉悦的世界时，我会选择一个一切都经过精心设计的世界。

Something to think about: One of the best visual designers I know is color blind.

需要考虑的事情：我知道最好的视觉设计师之一是色盲。

*设计是主观的 (* Design is subjective)

Here’s a dirty little secret. As a designer, I despise words such as “like”, “pretty” or “beautiful” when they’re used to describe my work. We’re all consumers of design. It permeates the deepest corners of society. That also means everyone considers themselves qualified to critique the (usually visual) creations of others.

这是一个肮脏的小秘密。 作为设计师，当我用“喜欢”，“漂亮”或“漂亮”来形容我的作品时，我会鄙视它们。 我们都是设计的消费者。 它渗透到社会的最深处。 这也意味着每个人都认为自己有资格批评他人的(通常是视觉的)创作。

The goal isn’t to create works of art to hang on my wall at home. Design is about creating something that solves a problem. This problem might be getting people to buy something. The problem could be smoothing a painful or ineffective process. In some cases, generating engagement (more clicks) might even be the stated problem. Each of the previous cases are fully measurable which is how you know if you’ve created something “good”.

目的不是要创造艺术品挂在我家里的墙上。 设计是关于创造解决问题的东西。 这个问题可能正在促使人们购买东西。 问题可能是使痛苦或无效的过程变得顺利。 在某些情况下，产生参与度(更多点击)甚至可能是陈述的问题。 前面的每种情况都是可以完全测量的，这就是您知道是否创建了“好”东西的方法。

This means it doesn’t matter if your boss’s friend’s neighbor’s dog “likes” pink when your stated audience is pre-teen girls. You’ll have access to lots of “data” which should be used as a rationale for why something’s right even if it’s not subjectively beautiful.

这意味着当您指定的听众是未成年女孩时，老板老板朋友的邻居的狗是否“喜欢”粉红色并不重要。 您将可以访问许多“数据”，这些数据应被用作解释为什么正确的事物即使不是主观上美丽的理由。

Pro tip: I’ve written before about how to “win” a critique. It’s all about providing context and purpose before deciding if a solution is a success.

专家提示：我之前写过有关如何“赢得”批评的文章 。 这是在确定解决方案是否成功之前提供上下文和目的的全部方法。

*设计是一个筒仓，只有拥有标题设计师的人员负责 (* Design is a silo and only those with the title Designer are responsible)

Even though this idea is reinforced by everything from org structure to project pipelines, believing that only designers are responsible for an experience is completely wrong. A user’s experience is based on so many factors. How fast is the database call? Did it accurately store my progress? Why can’t the support team see the same screens I see? As a developer, you spent time finding and fixing a lot of these issues. The only difference is that designers are frequently responsible for exposing these issues up the chain for stakeholders to understand.

即使从组织结构到项目管道的所有内容都强化了这种想法，但认为仅由设计师负责的经验是完全错误的。 用户的体验基于许多因素。 数据库调用有多快？ 它是否准确地存储了我的进度？ 支持团队为什么看不到我看到的相同屏幕？ 作为开发人员，您花费了很多时间来查找和解决许多问题。 唯一的区别是设计师经常负责将这些问题暴露在链上，以使利益相关者理解。

Remember: Sometimes it takes a village to raise a child. Good design is literally everyone’s job.

切记：有时养一个孩子需要一个村庄。 好的设计实际上是每个人的工作。

*您需要原始的艺术才能才能成功 (* You need raw artistic talent to be successful)

Again this is just plain wrong. I would take an emotionally intelligent, empathetic scientist’s designs over those of a person who’s only an astounding illustrator any day. The greatest designers can, first and foremost, place themselves not just in their user’s shoes, but in their emotions and mindset as well. These great designers then invent solutions focused on solving these users’ unique problems.

再次，这是完全错误的。 我会采用情感上聪明，善解人意的科学家的设计，而不是一个每天都只是惊人的插画家的人的设计。 最出色的设计师不仅可以将自己放在用户的鞋子上，而且可以放在他们的情感和思维定式上。 然后，这些出色的设计师发明了专注于解决这些用户独特问题的解决方案。

Think of a designer like a general contractor. Depending on the project, you can collaborate with illustrators, animators, wordsmiths, photographers, storytellers, and many other specialists all with the goal of solving a communication or process problem. Might it be easier if you can do all those things? Sure, but the reality is very very very few individuals are really talented in more than one or two disciplines. After all, that’s why they call them unicorns.

将设计师想像为总承包商。 根据项目的不同，您可以与插画家，动画师，词匠，摄影师，讲故事的人以及许多其他专家合作，以解决沟通或过程问题为目标。 如果您可以做所有这些事情，会更容易吗？ 当然可以，但实际上很少有人真正具有超过一两个学科的才能。 毕竟，这就是为什么他们称它们为独角兽。

Plus, with enough practice, anyone can learn to draw, create mockups in Sketch or animate with Principle. Empathy is a bit harder to teach…

此外，通过足够的练习，任何人都可以学习在Sketch中绘制，创建模型或使用Principle制作动画。 同理心更难教…

Design’s dirty little secret: Almost every project you touch will have some of the branding/visual style pre-defined. This means there’s a style guide with color, fonts and sometimes even icons or photography available at the start.

设计的肮脏小秘密：几乎您触摸的每个项目都会预先定义一些品牌/视觉风格。 这意味着一开始就有样式指南，其中包含颜色，字体，有时甚至还有图标或摄影。

需要牢记的一些陷阱和技巧 (A few gotchas & tips to keep in mind)

As a developer you’ve learned a few things, you’re a bit set in your ways and you rely on your past experience to predict how future interactions will play out. Congratulations. You're a human. That said, transitioning from coding will create a few subconscious biases that you should notice and attempt to restrain.

作为开发人员，您已经学到了一些东西，对自己的方式有所了解，并且依靠过去的经验来预测未来的交互将如何进行。 恭喜你 你是人 也就是说，从编码过渡会产生一些潜意识偏差，您应该注意并尝试克制。

1.轻轻松松优先 (1. Prioritizing easy over good)

I get it. You know how the sausage is made and you don’t want to create more work for yourself or fellow developers. This means its really easy to dumb down your solution to be easier to develop instead of truly solving the problem.

我知道了。 您知道香肠的制作方法，并且不想为自己或其他开发人员创建更多工作。 这意味着将解决方案简化为更易于开发，而不是真正解决问题。

Imagine you need to collect information about when your user would like to plan a trip. Your developer brain says, “I’ll just drop in a date picker and wire it up.” Sure that might work. But in reality, humans struggle to store date relationships in their heads. Your user might want to travel “next Thursday” but not intuitively know the specific date. Worse, a business requirement might require showing blackout dates. Both these instances make a date picker feel clumsy to a user even though it technically solves the problem.

假设您需要收集有关用户何时计划旅行的信息。 您的开发人员大脑说：“我只需要放入一个日期选择器并进行连接即可。” 当然可以。 但是实际上，人类很难将日期关系存储在头脑中。 您的用户可能想“下一个星期四”旅行，但不直观地知道具体日期。 更糟糕的是，业务需求可能要求显示停电日期。 这两个实例都使日期选择器对用户而言显得笨拙，即使它在技术上解决了问题。

Instead, push yourself to find the best solution. Then refine and simplify it to fit into the technical requirements.

相反，请自己寻找最佳解决方案。 然后优化并简化它以适应技术要求。

2.默认为您所知道的 (2. Defaulting to what you know)

This goes hand-in-hand with #1 but it deserves some distinction. When you know how things are commonly made, it's extremely easy to default to a tried and true solution. Yes, you should utilize existing patterns and common structures but don’t let that be your first answer. Instead, ask yourself, is the expected solution actually the best solution or is this an opportunity to innovate?

这与＃1并驾齐驱，但值得一提。 当您知道事物是如何制造的时，将其默认为经过尝试的真实解决方案非常容易。 是的，您应该利用现有的模式和通用结构，但不要让这成为您的第一个答案。 相反，问问自己，预期的解决方案实际上是最佳解决方案，还是这是创新的机会？

Username/password authentication prompts might be the most common component of the modern era but they represent massive usability and efficiency hurdles for most every user. Can I remember my password? Did I use capital letters or zero in place of an “oh”? This is before we even address the security issues authentication is intended to resolve.

用户名/密码认证提示可能是现代最常见的组成部分，但它们代表了大多数用户的巨大可用性和效率障碍。 我可以记住我的密码吗？ 我使用大写字母还是零代替“哦”？ 在此之前，我们甚至没有解决身份验证旨在解决的安全问题。

As a coder, you know better than most the underlying systems of authentication and what they’re intended to accomplish. So do you really need me to create, then access an account just to keep track of my background color? Or maybe you have information available about the user that could automatically “sign” them in…

作为编码人员，您比大多数身份验证底层系统以及它们要完成的目标要了解的多。 那么，您是否真的需要我创建然后访问一个帐户以跟踪我的背景色？ 或者，也许您拥有有关用户的信息，可以自动“登录”他们……

There’s an opportunity here. Your coding background gives you a perspective that few traditionally trained designers can leverage. Know when to invent a new type of wheel.

这里有机会。 您的编码背景为您提供了很少有受过传统培训的设计师可以利用的观点。 知道何时发明新型砂轮。

3.假设大多数人是合乎逻辑的 (3. Assuming most humans are logical)

You’ve spent the last how many years of your life dealing with logic? You excel at chewing gum while holding functions in your head so you can literally see what happens when !someConditionChanged. You’re unique. There I said it. Most humans experience epic struggles with basic logic. In fact, logic is one of the most difficult skills for US high school students to demonstrate proficiency.

您花了生命中的最后几年来处理逻辑吗？ 您擅长于在保持功能的同时咀嚼口香糖，因此您可以从字面上看到！someConditionChanged时会发生什么。 你是独一无二的。 我在那里说了。 大多数人都经历了具有基本逻辑的史诗般的斗争。 实际上，逻辑是美国高中生证明其熟练程度最困难的技能之一。

As a developer turned designer you’ll need to remember not to take a logical flow for granted. It's important to build some flexibility into your flows and be willing to learn from human behavior especially when its different from your expectations.

作为开发人员转为设计师，您需要记住不要将逻辑流程视为理所当然。 重要的是要在您的流程中建立一些灵活性，并愿意从人类行为中学习，尤其是当人类行为与您的期望不同时。

Use your superpower of holding code in your head to visualize the breakpoints in multi-screen processes. This is especially important when it comes to predicting and resolving human errors. Designing for errors will quickly set you apart from other designers.

利用您的超能力将代码保存在脑海中，以可视化方式显示多屏流程中的断点。 在预测和解决人为错误时，这一点尤其重要。 为错误而设计会Swift使您与其他设计师区分开。

4.忘记软化数据/强迫人类计算事物 (4. Forgetting to soften data/forcing humans to calculate things)

Similar to our disabilities around logic, most humans aren’t great with numeric data. Please resist the urge to provide a UTC timestamp and instead tell your user’s that an event happened “a few minutes ago”. Similarly, basic calculations that you’ve likely gotten used to doing in your head aren’t that easy for most users. You should tell people they’re saving 10% off the standard price, that their package will arrive next Tuesday or a 0.02% change in 10,000,000 is actually significant instead of expecting them to figure it out.

与我们在逻辑方面的残疾类似，大多数人对数字数据的了解也不高。 请抵制提供UTC时间戳的冲动，而要告诉您的用户事件是在“几分钟前”发生的。 同样，对于大多数用户而言，您可能已经习惯于脑中进行的基本计算也不那么容易。 您应该告诉人们他们比标准价格节省了10％，他们的包裹将在下周二到货，或者10,000,000的0.02％的变化实际上是重大的，而不是期望他们自己弄清楚。

Again, your background allows you to identify where errors might occur and act as a translator between business goals and technical realities.

同样，您的背景使您能够确定可能发生错误的位置，并充当业务目标和技术现实之间的转换者。

5.加法而不是减法 (5. Adding, not subtracting)

It’s been said that a design is complete once nothing is left that can be removed. Everyone’s been in the position of wanting to add to a solution, but this is an especially large trap for developers. Perhaps you’ve been aching to try building with a specific technology. Maybe one of the new web APIs has been calling your name. It’s possible that your project deals with data that you personally geek out about.

有人说，一旦剩下可以删除的东西，设计就完成了。 每个人都想添加到解决方案中，但这对开发人员来说是一个很大的陷阱。 也许您一直想尝试使用特定技术进行构建。 也许新的Web API之一已经在调用您的名字。 您的项目可能会处理您亲自浏览的数据。

It’s human nature to want to add things simply for the “cool factor” or the cred you’ll receive from your peers. I beg you to restrain from adding details, features or functionality simply because you can. In contrast, strive to simplify your designs. Remove the unnecessary words, steps, containers, lines, tips, animations and so on that don’t fully serve your purpose.

仅出于“酷因素”或您将从同行中获得的信誉而添加事物是人类的天性。 求求您不要仅仅因为可以就限制添加细节，特征或功能。 相反，请努力简化您的设计。 删除不必要的单词，步骤，容器，行，提示，动画等，这些内容并不能完全满足您的目的。

I’m not saying you shouldn’t suggest opportunities that you’re uniquely placed to identify based on your background. I’m simply asking that your suggested inclusions solve a solid use case or goal instead of simply something that would be fun to do.

我并不是说您不应该建议您根据自己的背景来确定身份的独特机会。 我只是问您建议的包含解决方案可以解决可靠的用例或目标，而不是简单地做一些有趣的事情。

You probably can’t start with it, but are you capable of achieving a “Minimum Viable Design”? Just be aware that you’ll only know you’ve reached MVD based on feedback from your users.

您可能无法从它开始，但是您是否有能力实现“最小可行设计”？ 请注意，根据用户的反馈，您只会知道自己已达到MVD。

If you like this, please give it applause or share it with others. If you take issue with something I’ve said, leave a comment or response so we can discuss.

如果喜欢，请给它鼓掌或与他人分享。 如果您对我所说的话有疑问，请发表评论或回复，以便我们进行讨论。

By day, I’m a product strategist consulting on all things digital and a Design Sprint Master. By night I’m a Google Expert, a startup mentor and writing a book about getting started in UX. Follow me on Twitter @howitson

每天，我都是 关于数字化所有事物 的 产品策略师 和Design Sprint Master。 到了晚上，我是 Google专家 ，启动导师并写了一本有关UX入门的书。 在Twitter上关注我 @howitson

翻译自: https://blog.prototypr.io/im-a-developer-transitioning-to-ux-design-help-7d414baf0d86

ux设计