I WPF, Therefore I Blend

If you’re a developer doing WPF development, you really need to be using Expression Blend.

Yes, I know the party line on WPF development runs something like this:

  • Every dev team should have at least 1 developer and 1 designer
  • Developers can’t design decent-looking GUIs to save their soul
  • Designers can’t be trusted with code, or anything close to code (excepting XAML)
  • Devs will open a project in Visual Studio and do all of their work there
  • Designers will open the same project in Blend and do all of their work there
  • Devs wear button-up shirts that don’t match their Dockers
  • Designers wear brand-name labels and artsy little berets

I don’t quite buy into the idea of a simple developer/designer separation, with one tool for each of them.  (I also don’t wear Dockers).

It’s absolutely true that Blend makes it easier for a designer to be part of the team and work directly on the product.  The old model was to have the designers do static mockups in Photoshop and then have your devs painstakingly reproduce the images, working in Visual Studio.  The old model sucks.

The new model, having Blend work directly with XAML and even open the same solution file as Visual Studio, is a huge advancement.  Designers get access to all of the flashy photoshoppy features in Blend, which means that they can do their magic and create something that actually looks great.  And devs will instantly get the new GUI layout when they use Visual Studio to open/run the project.

The problem that I have with the designer/developer divide is as follows.  To achieve an excellent user experience takes more than just independently creating form and function and then marrying the two together.  A designer might create GUI screens that are the most beautiful thing on the planet.  And the dev working with him might write the most efficient and elegant code-behind imaginable.  But this isn’t nearly enough to guarantee a great user experience.

User experience is all about user interaction.  Poorly done user interaction will lead to a failed or unused application far more quickly than either an ugly GUI or poorly performing code.

So what exactly is “user interaction”?  In my opinion, it’s everything in the application except for the code and the GUI.  User interaction is all about how the user uses your application to get her work done (or to create what she wants to create).  Does the application make sense to her?  Does using it feel natural?  Allow her to be efficient?  Are features discoverable?  Does the flow of the application match her existing workflow?

The only way to get user interaction correct is to know your user.  This means truly understanding the problem that your users are trying to solve, as well as what knowledge they have about the problem space.

There is an easy four step process to get at this information: 1) talk to the users; 2) prototype; 3) observe them using the prototype; 4) repeat.

There are a whole host of specific strategies to help you in this process, including things like: use cases, user stories, storyboarding, etc.  The literature is full of good processes and techniques for working early and often with users to get both the right set of functionality and a great user experience.

But let’s get back to designers and developers.  The reason that I don’t buy into the clean GUI/code split (or code + markup, if you’re a Petzold fan) is that good user interaction requires both code and markup.  Somebody needs to be responsible for the user interaction model and it should come first, requiring some code and some markup.

If you do buy into the devs-Studio/designers-Blend party line for WPF development, there are two simplistic approaches that you might be tempted to take, both equally bad:

  • Developer codes up all required functionality, puts API on it and designer creates screens that call into the API
  • Designer mocks up screens and then developers create code behind those screens to get desired functionality

The problem behind both approaches is, of course, that no one is focused on how the user is using the application.  The designer is thinking about the user in aesthetic terms and that’s a huge improvement over a battleship grey GUI.  But it’s not nearly enough–not if your goal is to achieve a great user experience.

If someone needs to be responsible for the user experience, it should be the developer.  If you are lucky enough to be working with a designer, the developer is still the team member that drives the entire process.  The designer is likely working in support of the developer, not the other way around.  (Note: I’m talking here about developing rich WPF client software, rather than web-based sites or applications.  With web-based projects, it’s likely the designer that is driving the project).

My vote is for a process that looks something like the following:

  • Developer initiates requirements gathering through user stories and use cases
  • Developer starts sketching up storyboards, with input from designer
  • Developer builds prototype, using both Visual Studio and Blend
  • Team presents prototype to user, walks through use cases, gets feedback, iterates
    • Important to focus here on how the user works w/application, rather than how it looks
  • As pieces of user interaction solidify
    • Designer begins refining those pieces of GUI for aesthetics, branding, etc.
    • Developer begins fleshing out code behind and full functionality
  • Continue iterating/reviewing with user

You might agree with this process, but say that the developer should work exclusively in Visual Studio to generate the prototypes.  Why is it important for them to use Blend for prototyping and iterating with the user?

The simple truth is that Blend is far superior to Visual Studio for doing basic GUI layout.  Using Visual Studio, you can definitely set property values using the property grid or by entering XAML directly.  But the property editors in Blend make it much easier to quickly set properties and tweak controls.

Given that the developer should be doing the GUI prototyping, I think it makes sense for them to use both Blend and Visual Studio, rather than just Visual Studio alone.

The bottom line is this: the choice of using Blend vs. Visual Studio should be based on the task that you are doing, rather than who is doing that task.  Instead of Blend just being a tool for designers and Visual Studio a tool for developers, it’s more true that Blend is a tool for doing GUI design and Visual Studio a tool for writing/debugging code.  Given that I think the developer should be the person responsible for early prototyping of the GUI, they should be using both Blend and Visual Studio during the early phases of a project.

So if you’re a developer just getting into WPF, don’t write off Blend as an artsy-fartsy tool for designers.  Instead, just think of it as a GUI design tool.  Though you may not be great at putting together beautiful user interfaces, it’s definitely your job to create the early GUI prototypes.  You may not be responsible for the design of the GUI, but you should be responsible for designing the GUI.  So if you WPF, you really ought to Blend.  Who knows?  You might like it so much that you start wearing a beret.

Advertisements